Bernie Bros: Same Old Trolls, Brand New Name?


Which goes to show you that liberal progressives do not have an elevated sense of decorum, propriety, and compassion - the same things they chastise Republicans for not having.
"A few anonymous idiots act like assholes on the Internet." Thanks for the newsflash, Beebs.
I was nodding my head in agreement until this line:

"I haven't seen people treat Obama supporters like this"
@1 - good try, but there is a reason the ugliness radiating from the Republican base is reflected so strongly in the leading candidates, while Bernie is close to being the complete opposite of these a-holes. Among democrats these kinds of jerks are loud and vocal, but very much a minority. Not so much on the right. You'd have to search a bit to find these guys at a Bernie rally, but you wouldn't be able to find anything BUT these guys at a trump rally.

But I do feel for you. False equivalencies are the last bastion of apologists for the right.
Ever consider they are the same "paid infiltrators" who put out pro-Bernie memes on Facebook? They are angling for him to be the nominee; Republican establishment thinks he will be easier to beat.
You know the old saying
"Penis is as Penis does."
That there are misogynists among progressive men is unsurprising. Disappointing but unsurprising.
They are everywhere after all.
I met some of these people in person at the Democratic caucuses in 2008. Rush Limbaugh told his dittoheads to pretend to be Democrats and go and support Clinton because he thought she'd be the easiest Democrat to beat. Now the same creeps are trying to make Sanders look bad. Anybody with the balls to spoof a caucus in person would have no qualms about creating 1,000 fake twitter accounts and vomiting hate to sow discord.
We had Deaniacs in '04, Obots in '08, and now Sandernistas in '16 ... noobs with no perspective, with no respect for differences of opinion, with no sense of decency in civil engagement ... with only the faith that somehow they are the improbably annointed ones on a mission from god.

It's a recurrent plague, but it's rarely fatal. Symptoms for most of the public include headache, ear ache, indigestion, lethargy. Active carriers may exhibit high fever, agitation, and intensely disordered dream states ... but these affected individuals tend to benefit from enhanced immunity in subsequent outbreaks.
Any evidence that Repubs trying to infiltrate?
@7: disputable. various polls are putting each in the lead. Sanders will take NH, probably. it won't be until SuperTuesday that we'll know. I don't care; I'll take either over Cruz.

I prefer the term "Sandernistas", and I don't think they're Conservative trolls. The vitriol against Clinton is positively Naderite right now. Even around here. "Monstrous laugh" and "Romulan" stand out in the memory.

I personally think she'll kick ass as POTUS. She has no delusions of Bipartisanship, and the balance of the SCOTUS is in play.

Sanders is focused on domestic issues, which is great, but the job of POTUS is >50% international affairs. The General is going to focus on National Security, because Republicans are a bunch of pants-wetters, and Cruz won't be able to outduel a SoS on that issue.

Look at me, being a "Defeatist".
@6: You know Lissa, there a dash (1/4 teaspoon perhaps), of hypocracy in your comment. It's the 'old saying'.
Great journalism. Find a few random idiots from the Web to impugn all Sanders supporters.

Never mind the candidate's actual record and history. We know the real reason people are not supporting Hilary "No We Can't" Clinton is because they're misogynists.

Any evidence these are Sanders supporters?

It's interesting how these accusations have come out the same time as Clinton surrogates (including her daughter) are attacking Sanders' health care policies and his other positions in wildly misleading fashion. You know, Sanders wants to take your health insurance, Sanders is like a Communist, etc. Of course, while we know which Clinton surrogates have made these comments, there are no Sanders supporters named in the accusations the BBC reports, just Clinton supporters who say they've been attacked by them.

It's identical to what Clinton did in her 2008 campaign. Her surrogates (including former President Clinton) used dog-whistle racial politics against Obama, while at the same time complaining about all the (anonymous) Obama supporters hurling sexist comments at Clinton.

It's interesting how Dan Savage and other reporters accept reports of Sanders' supporters bad behavior so uncritically. It used to be the media actually investigated rumors before printing them, but these days, there are no such standards in the corporate press, or at The Stranger.
@11. Hilary voted for our incursion into Iraq, which opened up a several hornet nests. (Sanders opposed this and listed his reasons, which turned out to come true.) So how is Hilary more qualified in international affairs?
Don't forget the PUMAs. Zealots, boots and trolls attach themselves to every candidate.
Anytime anyone's asked to point this ugliness out, they usually defer, saying, "I don't want to perpetuate the ugliness."
Lissa @6. Yes , most of them can piss against trees standing up. I like that little 'ol saying.
American politics seriously make me not want to vote for a Republic when it all starts up again in Australia. It is a crazy, ugly process. And these people are going for Leader of the western world. It's not some dumb game show.
No wonder a man of such eloquence as Obama swept thru for two terms.
There is some misogyny used against Clinton but it is overwhelmed by people rejecting her on ground of her representing the status quo, which isn't too surprising given she was already rejected once on the same basis. It is not too surprising to see Clinton supporters and establishment media emphasizing the former given they are also prone to pretending that legitimate criticism of her record amounts to sexism.

@11 why do you give legs to the meme that Sanders doesn't want to talk about foreign policy when he has made quite clear that he refused to be drawn into corporate infotainment about terrorism at the expense of discussing the issues.
So Lissa and LavaGirl want to have an better politic and rise above misogyny and sexism. Yet they feel validated with a perogative to always embellish their commentary with a swipe against men.

I guess Eve negotiated that with with God, because it's been around a very long time.
Let's not start on that Eve the temptress story, raindrop. Did Patriarchy start way back then, yeah, guess it did.
A Jewish owned business here in Seattle has been threatened repeatedly by racist mobs, including 300+ people who gathered of MLK Jr Day. This is a pattern of black anti-Semitism going on for half a century. In the videos they posted on youtube and interviews they said they were planning on using violence to drive out the resident, who is a 4th generation resident in a historically Jewish neighborhood. One of the organizers is a recent Kenyan immigrant. But you are focusing on some accusations of sexism and anti-black racism allegedly done on twitter? How about focusing on black anti-Semitism right here in Seattle? If this was whites targeting blacks or Muslims the Stranger would have written 100 articles condemning it by now.
So some anonymous Bernie supporters made some sexist and racist comments on twitter? How about Obama supporters? Did they never make any racist or sexist comments on social media? Didn't Obama's spiritual advisor brag about telling his granddaughter that "the Jews won't let me talk to Obama?" Obama chose him as his spiritual advisor and he never apologized for him. But Bernie is accountable for what anonymous people on social media say because they claim to be supporters?
@15: yes, she did. it was a political vote, but it also wasn't a vote for the dumpster fire that Bush started with that authority.

@19: I said Sanders is focused on domestic policy, not that he doesn't want to talk about foreign policy. I didn't even know that was a meme.

I'm about a Dem winning the election, not who has the moral high ground in this primary.
@20: Always? O_o
Whatevs raindrop. I made a factual statement that misogyny exists even within the ranks of otherwise politically progressive groups. It is as ubiquitous as the penii to which it is often attached.
That is not a "swipe at men" and I will thank you to refrain, in the face of the vastly disproportionate level of online abuse endured by women on the daily, from tone policing me. Your moral outrage is as insulting as it is obtuse and misplaced.
@24 A "Political Vote"? Glad you cleared that up.
@22-23: Oh, lighten up Francis.
"Johnny was bad toooooo" is the go to argument of a toddler.
Are you a toddler Andrew?
Do you want the response a toddler would receive?
The bad behavior of others or their followers does not mitigate the bad behavior of the Sanders supporters currently under discussion.
And I highly doubt that the Jews of Seattle are being threatened by "racist mobs". The only racist I see here is you.
Try getting your news from somewhere other than loons on YouTube.
@22, 23: You know, I've personally faced anti-Semitism from bona fide Black Lives Matter activists, but I don't use that as an excuse to be a dick and turn everything into an attack on black people. Go piss up a rope.
And the Cruz-Trump supporters applaud when they see this intra-party fighting. I'm voting for whoever gets the Dem nomination.
Vote Bernie Sanders/Adra Boo 2016
I have noticed that many Bernie supporters are completely fucking insane for a long time. I'm glad others are finally noticing.

And no I'm not anti-Bernie or anti-liberal or what the fuck ever. But I am against people who think it's justified to be a lunatic as long as their lunacy supports their pet political cause.
We get it Dan, you hate Sanders. Every candidate has some obnoxious supporters (Party Unity My Ass), and no one ever sees the ones who support their own chosen candidate. There were the same accusations of misogyny against Obama supporters 8 years ago, because no one could possibly have any substantive objection to Hillary as president, right? Never mind that there's a long list of perfectly good reasons.
@32: It is perfectly plausible for people to object to Clinton for ligitimate reasons and for some Sanders supporters to be misogynist douche balloons. I'm sorry pointing that out distresses you.
No, you're not sorry - you wish that were true, so don't lie about it. Pointing out misogyny as if it were indicative of the campaign or the candidate or his appeal is a desperate, disingenuous attempt to discredit the opposition. There are assholes who support Clinton too, but Dan doesn't mention them; that's not news either. We saw the same bad behavior the last time Clinton badly underestimated her competition.
@11 and @33 - good comments!

@11 - thanks for nicely wrapping up the pro-Clinton argument. I think she will do a great job as President if elected; while I'm glad Sanders is making her be more progressive in her positions, overall I think she is the best candidate the democrats have and I hope she wins the nomination.

@33 - you're right; there are people that are pro-Sanders and anti-Clinton for legitimate reasons; I understand those. There are also misogynists. So well-said. It was amazing to me how many on the democratic side wanted to run a man - any man - instead of Clinton. Remember them desperately trying to bring Biden in to the race as well? There is still a strong anti-woman component in both parties. One of these days it will fade away, I hope.
Ms H - Best *candidate* or best *potential president*? I could agree with the latter, but definitely not the former.
@35: I know, right? I like both Clinton and Sanders for different reasons, and I also understand their weaknesses as candidates. People of good will support both. But to pretend that there isn't a faction who object to Clinton because of the content of her pantsuit is naive at best. I suppose to smooth the feathers I ruffled @34 I should have pulled a NotAllSandersSupporters but I am disinclined to do so. Nor am I inclined to give misogynists a pass for the good of the team. And I don't think Sanders would be either.
It doesn't matter if these loud obnoxious Bernie supporters are sexist or racist. They're obviously assholes, that's what matters. They comment on any article, it may be related to Bernie or it may not be, to accuse the article of being part of the anti-Bernie and pro-Clinton (or pro-Trump) conspiracy. I like to call them Bernvangelicals.
@37 "People of good will support both."

No they don't. People in purple states may have to vote for Clinton to avoid worse but people don't have to support neoliberal hawks.

@38 Sanders supporters are completely right to point out that their candidate got a small fraction of Clinton's media coverage and much of what he got was dismissive and/or critical (like on this website). They are also right to point out that Trump got even more coverage because corporate media loves Trump's circus show. Sanders was mostly ignored and dismissed until way after he proved a real threat, while now he is being attacked so let's not be disingenuous about the establishment press supporting Clinton, the establishment candidate.
@39: Look! @38 has just described your reaction to a T.
@40 Are you claiming that my description of media coverage is inaccurate? no, so get lost and come back with some kind of argument.
@41: No I am not. I am commenting on your reaction. You may have noticed that the topic was misogyny, and yet you have managed to spin this into another example of a conspiracy against Sanders.
@42 I addressed the issue of misogyny in comment 19 so I am not sure how you conclude that I spun something in comment 39 to avoid the issue. In comment 39 however, I was pointing out that Sanders' supporters had plenty of good reasons to be wary of media coverage to someone who summarily dismissed their concerns in general and dabbled in name calling for good measure. As to whether this blurb is part of the anti-Sanders/pro-Clinton media coverage, force is to say that it does inscribe itself in the already agreed on pattern of media never/rarely saying positive about the Sanders campaign so it seems rather peculiar logic to offhand dismiss that eventuality.
@39 There is no conspiracy. The media tells people what they want to hear. They cover Trump because we want to click on articles about stupid things Trump said. As Bernie became more popular, the media provided us with more Bernie articles.

That said, yes, complaints about lack of coverage are fine. I object to the hysterical way some Bernie supporters choose to complain. Their style is like "FUCK OFF, I'M NEVER READING THIS WEBSITE AGAIN, HOW DARE YOU SAY BERNIE IS A BAD FOLK SINGER, GO DIE IN A FIRE."
Perhaps one should consider the very real fact that the GOP would LOVE to have Bernie win the nomination, since they consider him utterly unelectable on the national stage. Does no one here see how the GOP is actively promoting him, or know of the paid trolls and bloggers who promote Bernie on progressive sites? It's not rocket science.
@ 45, the brilliant strategists of the GOP also loudly proclaimed Obama was unelectable. What exactly do you think they'd say about any Democratic candidate?
@44 what's a conspiracy? 2 or more people getting together and deciding upon something and keeping it private? Like, some media staff deciding how to cover a campaign, for example? But, why do you talk about conspiracy? are you trying to imply that someone is a "conspiracy theorist" here? is that a smear to go along with the name calling?

@47 I was kind of aware that a smear campaign was going on but this is a new level in the Sanders-supporters-are-old-white-male propaganda coming from the Clinton camp.. Here is the complete link for "The “Bernie Bros” Narrative: a Cheap Campaign Tactic Masquerading as Journalism and Social Activism" at The Intercept: The Bernie Bros narrative
i always believe what people say about other people. it's so much easier than finding out what those other people actually said.
Conservatives and liberals have always done the same ridiculous and unethical shit, it is just that both tell themselves they are doing it for the right reasons, so it is ok. It is the same thing religious types do, the same thing any fundamentalist does. Hell, you see the light version right here in this comment thread.

Commenters here love playing high and mighty when it comes to talking about conservatives, but comments by conservatives are basically exactly the same as comments here, just with a different blanks filled in for their targets of scorn. The hypocrisy is blinding.

But seriously though, a few Sanders supports said mean things? Well, I am sure no one who supports the Clinton campaign has said anything untoward. Surely the Clinton campaign is completely pure of any wrongdoing or unfair characterizations. So pure, so perfect.

This Hillary desperation shit is getting really tired. You guys just sound scared.
Dan Savage, you must have missed where the editorial staff at Aunty Beeb has an axe to grind with progressive values of any kind. The BBC like mainstream like US - also shows gross prejudice against Jeremy Corbyn. I grew up listening to the Beeb.

I'd suggest you look at the work of @adamjohnsonNYC to understand the framing. You don't seem to plumb the depths of the issue. You don't have to like Adam or Glenn G to see the issues.

FTR I am not a supporter of any candidate. This quadrennial illusion that one executive is going to singlehandedly bring about the massive systemic change our society needs has to be tempered with the reality of institutional inertia. Start talking about the real issues, not this horserace ad hominem BS.…
It's cute how every four years the supporters of Candidate A think that the supporters of Candidate B are just the meanest ever.

Claiming that Sanders supporters are misogynists is pretty feeble, given that almost all of them really wanted Elizabeth Warren to run and many still want her to be the VP pick (those who don't generally argue that a good senator is more valuable than a mostly powerless VP). I've seen a lot more people pushing this nonsense "Bernie Bros" line than I have actual obnoxious Sanders supporters.

Clinton tried this same shit when she was losing to Obama - race-baiting by the campaign and claims that Obama supporters were misogynists. It's the sign of a desperate campaign in trouble.
How about a retraction and apology Dan, since you fell for a hoax?
Please, my friends and fellow liberals, don't do this. There is no value to be gained in fighting amongst ourselves and bashing one another.

Would you vote for Hillary instead of Trump/Cruz? Would you vote for Bernie?

I know my answer is unequivocally "yes".

A polite discussion about the values of each candidate for the Democratic nomination is great, but bashing one another is counter-productive. Dan Savage's blurb was about how a small minority of Sanders' supporters are hurting his reputation by bashing on Hillary Clinton (while Sanders has remained respectful and polite). Read it again and please stop this nastiness.

Without questions every campaign attracts badly-behaved zealots, and hard feelings follow.

Without question, Sanders has his share of thoughtful supporters.

But only 4 of the past 15 Democratic nominating cycles (McCarthy '68, Dean '04, Obama '08, Sanders '16) have seen eruptions of the type in question here -- cadre of political virgins who behave as if an angel of the Lord has appeared to them and and tasked with bringing forth a savior.

In these case, hard feelings can persist indefinitely - as witness several false histories suggested or recited in the current thread.

Fortunately for us, the GOP is in worse condition - so much so that it may not survive. And if it does collapse, the Democratic Party will likey undergo full-scale schism as well (in order to occupy most of the resulting political vacuum).

And in that event, we're due for multiple cycles of really serious distemper.
was bernies comment about acting respectfully pointed directly at the 'bernibros' and his supporters or was it to everybody?
@57 -- Sanders approach throughout the campaign has been above reproach, and to the best of my understanding he has encouraged everybody to act respectfully and respectably.

And FWIW Obama recently apologized publicly to Clinton and her followers for tactics employed by his 2008 primary campaign ... a clear reference to fabricated charges of dog-whistle racism circulated prominently but anonymously by associates of his campaign.
ok. i finally found some out of context quotes from some facebook thing that's been deleted. i'm surprised no one is bringing up the size of the bros dicks at this point.…

“No she’s a fucking twat,” said another. “I am of the opinion that $hillary is a fucking twat. TWAT TWAT TWAT. Bye felicia!”

“Bernie IS GREAT if you have any morals or ethics that is the end of the discussion... if on the other hand you have no moral compos then why not say trump is more electable than that clitrash ..there now you can vote for the winner... year you .. idiot.. use you vote to do the right thing or get that weak sh&^t and go home...”