CNN: Bernie Sanders told Elizabeth Warren in private 2018 meeting that a woman can't win, Bernie denies(Update: NYT & Buzzfeed Confirming)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Inuhanyou

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,777
New Jersey
Or Bernie has real issues. We don't know what's true right now.
We dont. But its extremely likely that whatever was said was intentionally misconstrued as there is no real value or actual real sense in him saying such a thing when Warren could just outright turn on him at any time over it. Which reeks of staffers playing the political game at a time when she is lagging in the polls.

But thats literally just personal opinion of mine and obviously doesnt represent anything based in reality or fact just yet
 
Oct 26, 2017
10,706
The pushback you've received is due to a combination of a few inflammatory choices of words/phrasing and the inaccurate claims you made about relevance. It's not even so much about you personally (as I said, I don't care or expect you to structure your free time based on my suggestions), but if someone reading/listening sees someone claim that they don't want to read leftist thought just like they don't want to read religious literature and because it's fringe, and the response was "yeah fair call you're not missing much it's basically a minor thing, it's more of a personal philosophy really,", it'd be dishonest and self-defeating.

All the best with your studies.
Leftist ideology (again in terms of like, the dismantling of capitalism which is the defining aspect of leftist discussion these days for obvious reasons) isn't relevant in 99% of the discussions regarding US politics on most topics. It's more relevant on ERA because of the leftist population, but the actual aspects of policy in the US is inherently capitalist for obvious reasons. That's why it's "fringe", because the actual US political population isn't at all leftist and leftists have nearly no influence in US politics. What influence they do have in the Democratic party can be primarily described as Dem-Soc who are 100% talking about capitalist systems in their policies. Now I'm not really sure I would call a Dem-Soc "leftist" by the usual definitions talked about on ERA, because by most definitions I agree with many aspects of Dem-Soc and if I said I was a leftist I would probably have a mob of people bludgeoning me to death with hardcovers editions of various books on the topic.

You can also argue that a portion of Dem-Soc are just using that label as a means for spreading leftist ideology to "prime" the topic of actual leftism within the party, but that doesn't really fit the polls on the topic, at least from what I've seen.

Now the obvious caveat is mainly with healthcare debate and M4A, but again in terms of "leftist" I don't really consider that to be like, actual marxism? I would say it's far more on the Dem-Soc scale of things because single payer can still involve private coverage for service (and it does with nations who have it like Canada iirc)
 
Last edited:

aeolist

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,191
she has no reason to remain quiet. if it's a lie she's letting a friend of hers get smeared in the national press while doing nothing to clear his name, if it's true the media has been primed to run with it.

two people in the room, one says it didn't happen. speak up liz.
 

BADMAN

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
2,363
You really see it that way? I think this story plays into tropes that Bernie is divisive and damages him more than anyone else.
I think you're right if he makes it to the general. In the primary though? It makes Warren's team look desperate. It certainly doesn't uplift Warren as a candidate.
 

Brock Reiher

Member
Oct 25, 2017
36,215
If Warren wasn't planning on leaking this herself, and it was the work of a rogue staffer, I don't want to think about the kind of cabinet positions she would make if she was elected.
 

Surfinn

Member
Oct 25, 2017
24,338
USA
I think it's doing neither campaign favors, the longer Warren withholds a response, especially since Sanders is claiming it's a lie. Silence is a bad look.
 

N. Tyranno

Member
Nov 6, 2017
2,603
So we’re choosing to believe a man completely before the woman herself has said her side of it, and also accusing her of cowardice and manipulation. And we’re doing this after multiple issues regarding him endorsing or hiring people with less that reputable views or history, no questions asked.

I don’t need to tell you all what this sounds like. But hey, he said the opposite in front of cameras, so that must mean he’d do the same in private, to a political rival.
 

Seeya

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,724
I smelled this shift coming pretty recently. The biggest red flag was her directly commenting on Sanders going out to "trash" her with the volunteer memo incident. The entire tone of her campaign has just become so suddenly weird with respect to her and Sanders's treatment of one another.

If this is how her campaign is choosing to deal with declining numbers, then I'm even more disappointed than I thought I'd be. I guess I'd like to believe that some particularly awful beltway advisor got the ear of a decision-making part of her campaign, but given other recent developments, I don't even know anymore.
Yeah this just fucking sucks. Warren and Sanders have been playing musical chairs for my preferred pick and... when she used the words ‘trash’ and invoked the perception of 2016... fuck. The only people who stand to win from this are shit heels like Biden and Pete.
 

Encephalon

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,533
Japan
As an economic system capitalism relies on an exploited underclass and stratifying them. This is especially the case for racism as white supremacy functions to dehumanize minorities and rob them of their agency for capital - slave trade etc. Most leftists wouldn’t tell you abolishing capitalism would create an equal, free minded society overnight, but capitalism looms over minority groups and denies them equal treatment because it requires a deprived underclass to function, and that underclass is predominately made of minorities.
So I agree with the sentiment that Capitalism exacerbates these issues, but I'm wary of people who want to set "identity" aside, because there are people who want to take on the billionaires and corporations, but wish BLM would shut up already. Also, "a rising tide lifts all boats."
 

Brock Reiher

Member
Oct 25, 2017
36,215
So we’re choosing to believe a man completely before the woman herself has said her side of it, and also accusing her of cowardice and manipulation. And we’re doing this after multiple issues regarding him endorsing or hiring people with less that reputable views or history, no questions asked.

I don’t need to tell you all what this sounds like. But hey, he said the opposite in front of cameras, so that must mean he’d do the same in private, to a political rival.
No, you're making snide jokes assuming that the man is lying before the woman has said her side of the story.
 

GiantBreadbug

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,645
Or Bernie has real issues. We don't know what's true right now.
thank goodness in the end we'll get proof that either

a) Bernie is a virulent sexist and has been this entire time, stealthily hiding his utter contempt for female politicians while also being one of the best, most visible, and most consistent US political allies for minorities and the disenfranchised in recent memory

or

b) Warren's campaign is stocked with political-rot-fed gadflies who thought her flagging support would be resuscitated by distorting and fabricating absurd stories behind the safety of Being Undisclosed

we just don't know
 

aeolist

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,191
Are you under the impression that a candidate personally hires thousands of their workers and volunteers?
anyone that she described this private meeting to in any detail was probably a direct hire. they would be at the top level of the campaign.

unless you think she's been dropping this bombshell left and right on random volunteers and it never reached the press until just before iowa?
 
Oct 28, 2017
899
I'll take King's tweet the same I did with the initial story, with doubt.

If Bernie said this, shame. If Warren is making a political play, shame.

Warren does need to say something about this though...whatever that may be.
That’s how I intended it to be taken...the only reason that I posted it is because if it were true, it would explain why Warren’s team have been so slow to release an official statement. It’d be reaaaaaally shitty and hard to talk around.

All of the other explanations given on why she would remain silent this long don’t make sense to me. It’s possible her team is just incompetent and thinks she is somehow winning by staying silent but I don’t see it.
 

Ionic

Member
Oct 31, 2017
1,807
Maybe open up a freaking history book my dude?
The poster is saying that it's obvious from specifically Bernie's history that he would say a woman couldn't become president. I'm interested in what the poster believes Bernie has said or done to indicate this. Not the fact that US history is generally a sexist nightmare.
 

Encephalon

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,533
Japan
Imperialism and economic plundering is a facet of capitalist worldview..so kind of yeah its a huge part of it. Bragging about getting people off of welfare by cutting welfare roles for millions of black people in inner cities ect.
I feel like I both agree with this and see it from a different angle.

Welfare in the US is a social issue first, not second.
 

Seattle6418

Member
Oct 25, 2017
324
Brasília Brazil
It is absolutely ridiculous that Warren’s campaign hasn’t issued an official statement on this.
Its outrageous, specially since she was quick to jump on another fake story about volunteers yesterday.

More outrageous is to see the usual suspects that usually are quick to jump on sanders and anyone on his staff absolutely silent on this fake story and also yesterday's BS about bernie supporters trashing warren when canvassing for him.

You might as well have posted a Jacob Wohl tweet.
It's fair game, considering it started as a fabricated story using anonymous sources. If CNN can make up a story, a regular staffer can debunk the same story. I don't know why CNN would get more credibility in this story compared to a bernie supporter.
 
Oct 26, 2017
10,706
The most "likely" reality is;

Sanders and Warren were having a discussion on running in 2020, the topic of Warren's gender and the difficulty of being a women and running for office came up and Sanders worded it in a way that dug at Warren or insulted her, or at worst was dismissive of her chances while still respecting she is "fit" for office.

It's why Warren told staffers about it right after it happened because it got to her and she was annoyed that he would present it that way, and now that she's down in the polls she fed it to some people to write about in the media because it was actually a thing she was miffed on.
 
Oct 26, 2017
10,706
Its outrageous, specially since she was quick to jump on another fake story about volunteers yesterday.

More outrageous is to see the usual suspects that usually are quick to jump on sanders and anyone on his staff absolutely silent on this fake story and also yesterday's BS about bernie supporters trashing warren when canvassing for him.



It's fair game, considering it started as a fabricated story using anonymous sources. If CNN can make up a story, a regular staffer can debunk the same story. I don't know why CNN would get more credibility in this story compared to a bernie supporter.
On what claims do you know it's fabricated? You know how hard it is to have a "fake" story with four independent sources?
 
Nov 14, 2017
1,232
Leftist ideology (again in terms of like, the dismantling of capitalism which is the defining aspect of leftist discussion these days for obvious reasons) isn't relevant in 99% of the discussions regarding US politics on most topics. It's more relevant on ERA because of the leftist population, but the actual aspects of policy in the US is inherently capitalist for obvious reasons. That's why it's "fringe", because the actual US political population isn't at all leftist and leftists have nearly no influence in US politics. What influence they do have in the Democratic party can be primarily described as Dem-Soc who are 100% talking about capitalist systems in their policies. Now I'm not really sure I would call a Dem-Soc "leftist" by the usual definitions talked about on ERA, because by most definitions I agree with many aspects of Dem-Soc and if I said I was a leftist I would probably have a mob of people bludgeoning me to death with hardcovers editions of various books on the topic.

You can also argue that a portion of Dem-Soc are just using that label as a means for spreading leftist ideology to "prime" the topic of actual leftism within the party, but that doesn't really fit the polls on the topic, at least from what I've seen.
Ok? Once again, the primary motivation behind the production and advocacy of most leftist thought isn't to advance an understanding of leftist movements. If someone in a public forum states that it's irrelevant, those who believe it is essential to understanding our world are going to argue otherwise.
 

mugwhump

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,243
Yeah considering Bernie's past statements and how nonsensical it would be to say a woman can't win after hillary got millions more votes in 2016, I'm guessing there's some telephone going on here, where Warren maybe paraphrased a (possibly questionable, but probably not as idiotic as this) statement from Bernie to one of her staffers, who either willfully or accidentally misinterpreted it.
 

GiantBreadbug

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,645
what degree of irony do I need to level up to in order to believe that Sanders both:

1) famously encouraged Warren to run in 2016 against Clinton as a rebuke to her blatant deck-stacking in the primaries

and

2) discouraged Warren (apparently to the point of mockery or insult) from running in 2020 because he changed his mind and decided that women can't be president
 

Mekanos

Member
Oct 17, 2018
15,567
So I agree with the sentiment that Capitalism exacerbates these issues, but I'm wary of people who want to set "identity" aside, because there are people who want to take on the billionaires and corporations, but wish BLM would shut up already. Also, "a rising tide lifts all boats."
The difference between leftist and conservative critique of identity politics is pretty well documented, it was talked about earlier in this thread by some other posters. While there are definitely leftists that talk down to the problems of minorities, black radicals in history were largely Marxist, anarchist, socialist, communist, etc. The state killed most of them and their figureheads were either demonized or whitewashed of their radical tendencies.

Here’s a good video about it since I’m short on time, it also critiques white leftists on ignoring black issues, take a look when you can:

 

splash wave

Member
Oct 25, 2017
667
Bay Area, CA
The fact that Warren's team hasn't commented makes this whole thing really, really stick. They're going to be coy about it so there's no outright lie, but they want people to believe that he did in fact say it.
 
Oct 26, 2017
10,706
I'm kinda shocked so many people are trying to hard to ignore the likely reality that an old man probably said some diet-sexism shit to a women and didn't think much of it.

It's not like Sanders is immune to saying some really not cool shit when asked about topics lol
 

Mercury Fred

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,289
Got a link to this history?
Again, I think this current story is probably a game of telephone gone out of control, but it tracks.




 

lmcfigs

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
8,422
I missed that NYT actually reached out to Warren's campaign and got "no comment" as a response.


.... why?
I think it speaks to the general confrontational approach Warren has been taking towards Sanders.
I'm kinda shocked so many people are trying to hard to ignore the likely reality that an old man probably said some diet-sexism shit to a women and didn't think much of it.

It's not like Sanders is immune to saying some really not cool shit when asked about topics lol
it'd be more believable if Bernie and Warren didn't know each other. Maybe if he hadn't asked her to run in 2016.
 
Oct 27, 2017
462
User Banned (1 week): conspiratorial rhetoric, history of similar behavior
The most "likely" reality is;

Sanders and Warren were having a discussion on running in 2020, the topic of Warren's gender and the difficulty of being a women and running for office came up and Sanders worded it in a way that dug at Warren or insulted her, or at worst was dismissive of her chances while still respecting she is "fit" for office.

It's why Warren told staffers about it right after it happened because it got to her and she was annoyed that he would present it that way, and now that she's down in the polls she fed it to some people to write about in the media because it was actually a thing she was miffed on.
The most likely reality is that one of the Hillary staffers now working for her ran this plan by her as a plausibly deniable way to "upset" Sanders for the debate and to plant in the mind of the public that Sanders is Supreme Misogyny Chairman of vermont.
 
Oct 26, 2017
8,991
Again, I think this current story is probably a game of telephone gone out of control, but it tracks.




.

agreed, There's what appears to be, 3rd party actors acting maliciously attempting to sow discord and divide specifically at Bernie and Warren.

--

I'll add, we are entering peak "narrative and propaganda season" so think twice, read twice, and always take a step back.
 
Oct 26, 2017
10,706
I think it speaks to the general confrontational approach Warren has been taking towards Sanders.

it'd be more believable if Bernie and Warren didn't know each other. Maybe if he hadn't asked her to run in 2016.
It's actually more believable that fact they did know each other, less guard when you're around friends and you say more truthful things when on topics.
 

jviggy43

Member
Oct 28, 2017
16,667
So we’re choosing to believe a man completely before the woman herself has said her side of it, and also accusing her of cowardice and manipulation. And we’re doing this after multiple issues regarding him endorsing or hiring people with less that reputable views or history, no questions asked.

I don’t need to tell you all what this sounds like. But hey, he said the opposite in front of cameras, so that must mean he’d do the same in private, to a political rival.
First off we dont know the gender of any source so its weird to draw lines if gender here when warren herself still hasnt aaid anything regarding this.

Second, accusing her campaign of being cowardly and manipulation isnt saying she herself is either of those things (although both would be fair given she has yet to comment on the matter and has had ample time to do so).

If we want to talk about a history of supporting bad people we should probably also mention warren was a republican twenty years ago.

You dont need to tell us what it sounds like because this was a weak attempt on your part to try and act like the discourse here was sexist in nature and as such would have been properly called as such had you actually made that argument.
 

Seattle6418

Member
Oct 25, 2017
324
Brasília Brazil
On what claims do you know it's fabricated? You know how hard it is to have a "fake" story with four independent sources?
None of the annonymous sources were in the room, theres no tape or video of the exchange and the alledged offender denied.

This is pretty much how you make a standard fabricated story.

Theres literally zero fact checking and they just decided to print it anyway.
 

Lord of Ostia

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
16,566
So we’re choosing to believe a man completely before the woman herself has said her side of it, and also accusing her of cowardice and manipulation. And we’re doing this after multiple issues regarding him endorsing or hiring people with less that reputable views or history, no questions asked.

I don’t need to tell you all what this sounds like. But hey, he said the opposite in front of cameras, so that must mean he’d do the same in private, to a political rival.
This is fair, I really want to see what she says. I don't think she would make this up, so if she says it happened, I believe her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.