Remember, Bernie is a compromise candidate.

You should be glad the workers of this country aren't rising up to take every penny that the wealthy have stolen from the working class.

I'm a Bernie Bro and see hateful, name calling towards Sander's supporters everyday, but were tough enough to blow it off and not piss and moan about it all over the media. Also I've been voting blue no matter who science 1992, and will not ever again, I regret voting for Hillary every time she fails to take responsibility for her incredibly bad campaign in 2016.

Pretty sure we'd be forced to Share it with y'alls
and I am OKAY with that.

Love They Neighbor

Medicare For ALL

Or all-Corps Rule
Take yor pick.

You're brave, Katie.

@1: I have a hard time seeing Bernie compromising on any bill before Congress.

How does one verify they're Sanders suporters?

Are our Elections not Hackable?
They're. [mostly] Paid. Trolls.

Should Bernie offer them Union Wage$ + Bennie$
to play Nice in the Ether?

I'll mention it to him.

So, we're just supposed to believe Twitter when they say they've rid the site of bots? Okay, for the sake of argument let's say we believe that. But how about trolls? How about real people who are pretending to be Bernie supporters. You don't need to be a computer algorithm to cause trouble.

I would note two things Bernie said at the debate: (1) Only 0.01% of his supporters are assholes and (2) his supporters get just as much abuse as they dish out. Neither of those things is true and everyone knows it. It's ridiculous how Bernie just skates at these debates.

(cue: multiple commenters proving me right)

The candidate who gets the most delegates will have demonstrated that they have the ability to best actuate the Democratic constituencies. And that's the best measure we have for who has the best shot in the general.

I know a number of people who have told me they'd vote for any Dem but Sanders. Or sometimes any Dem but Sanders or Warren (go figure.) There's no way to measure that kind of voter's influence vs. those Chapo Traphouse dipshits so why even worry about it?

Turn off the Twitter.

But I will say I think its bizarre that people have such devotion to a figure like Bernie Sanders. I have nothing in particular against the guy and I'd be totally cool with him as candidate and president. But he's like a coelacanth who has survived in a dark, deep sea canyon since the caboniferous epoc of Lyndon Johnson and the Great Society. Good for him and all - those were quality policies. But he's just another politician.

Choosing the lesser of two evils is the problem, not the solution. For decades on end we've done it. It is what has given us two corporate owned right wing parties (one neoliberal, one neofascist) and allowed someone as insane as Trump to get elected. Continuing to choose the lesser of 2 evils will only take us farther down the path we're on. Did you not witness Obama leading to Trump?

I would much rather have 4 more years of Trump than 4 to 8 years of another neoliberal Democrat. Only Bernie changes the path we're on. Electing any other Democrat just postpones any chance at a change in direction for 12 to 16 years, just like Obama's election did. No thanks.

And here's the deal. We are willing to sit this one out. And too bad for you, that you don't like it. So, think about it. You can compromise and join us or you can oppose us and certainly lose. Because we're done doing deals with neoliberals.

@11 "we". You mean you and your poker buddies?

And with respect to 10, choosing the lesser of two evils is neither a problem nor a solution: its the only thing possible. You're still choosing the lesser of two evils - but you've decided that lesser evil is Donald Trump. So, ok - read you loud and clear. At least its an ethos.

See, thing is, I've got all these Bloomie bots tweeting hate speech at me, so my guess is they're just mostly Russian bot farms trying to sow dissension.

@10 Well, it looks like you're going to get 4 more years of Trump. Bernie Sanders will never be President.

I'm just so glad I don't have a TV or subscribe to Twitter.
@1 Adam Kadmon: I don't know---a bloody revolution in 2020 could still happen if enough of the 350,000,000 of us finally say enough. It might be just what's needed to end the criminal insanity of KKKorporate RepubliKKKan lawlessness.
@5 kristofarian for the WIN!

@7 -- "... two things Bernie said at the debate: (1) Only 0.01% of his supporters are assholes and (2) his supporters get just as much abuse as they dish out. Neither of those things is true and everyone knows it."

Pray tell.

@12 That's the thing. We don't care about electing Democrats. We care about changing the trajectory of the nation. You and those like you are not our allies. We are political enemies. You can talk all you want about no choice but to choose the lesser of 2 evils, but we aren't on your team. And yes, I already stated, I'm fine with 4 more years of Trump, if the alternative is another neoliberal.

No evidence there are networks of 'troll bots' attempting to influence the 2020 election through disinformation?? Mueller, the FBI, DHS, NSA, bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, Facebook CEO himself (in Oct 2019), not to mention foreign intelligence agencies, have ALL released reports for YEARS detailing evidence of Russia, Iran and China doing JUST that.

Ignoring all that, you actually use a quote provided by the Daily Beast(yeesh) from Josh "the Indiana dad who moonlights as a Russian troll hunter" Russell to quash that silly 'rumor'. Excellent work.

@10: I wouldn't assume that there would be another U.S. Presidential election in 2024 or beyond after a Trump re-election in 2020.

@17, You cannot "change the trajectory of the nation" if you sit out the election and hope for the purity pony next time around. You cannot claim to want to "change the trajectory of the nation" if you are fine with another 4 years of Trump. You are, indeed, a philosophy school dropout.

@19 I'm totally over your alarmism. People have been using that line forever. Your scare tactics will not make me choose one monster over another. No matter who the bigger monster is. I'm done with it. And so are many MANY Americans.

I recommend reading some US history. Richard Nixon, W, Andrew Jackson, and Ulysses S. Grant have all been president. We still have elections.

17: You would of made an excellent German communist, circa 1932, with that type of thinking. I don’t think I need to tell you how that “purity über alles” thinking turned out.

@20 You're arguing for following the exact same path that brought us to where we are, and yet I'm the one whose approach is doomed to failure? There's a long game here. You and yours have been losing that long game for my entire lifetime. And you expect me to fall in line? Lol. Never. It's you who needs to change. Your way that has failed, not mine. When you lose again to Trump, it will be your failure, and yet as usual, you'll blame people for voting wrong. Wtf? It is the job of politicians to earn votes. The Democratic Party that you support cannot do that. The problem is your ideas.

This media talking point is by far the stupidest one in the race.

People are rude online sometimes. Is this news to anyone?

Bernie supporters are frequently pissed the fuck off about imperialism, health care, immigration, climate change, homelessness etc.

But by all means, let's not talk about that. Let's talk instead about how folks are mean online and we should instead be as obsessed with manners & norms as upper middle class WASPs who watch cable news.

@23 What's sad/hilarious is that you are taking the exactly wrong message from the 1930s. Parties have to appeal to voters. The Democrats don't do that. And neither did the establishment parties of the 1930s. They are the ones who allowed the fascists to rise. People don't want what you and yours are offering. And your response is... too bad. You have to vote for us. No we don't.

Also for those of you who haven't figured it out yet, it's not about Bernie. It's about the demands of a movement- and Bernie is the ONLY presidential candidate responding to them. If another were, people would be defending that person.

If you don't believe me, watch what happens if some other candidate gets the nom (either fairly or through shenanigans). Bernie will endorse that candidate and campaign for them- assuming it's not Bloomberg. Do you think this movement will die then? Just watch how quickly this movement drops Bernie and carries on against the status quo without him. If liberals weren't so busy looking for Russians under their beds, waiting for FBI guys to save them, and waiting for Maddow to drop the pee tape, then you'd have noticed what happened in 2016 & 17.

It’s pretty simple. He has a powerful message that gets people excited and some people get aggressive when they get excited. It’s the same reason that protests for good causes occasionally get violent. If you get enough people passionate, someone will act out. This isn’t news or something that anybody else has to answer for. I don’t understand why bernie should be responsible for making sure the entire internet has manners.

Also, just speaking personally here, I think that any person who celebrates Pelosi tearing up a piece of paper after spending a couple months on a dog and pony show that did nothing except put the nail in the coffin of Biden's career & motivated Trump's base- all the while voting for Trump's budgets and war machine- should be insulted online. Especially if they want to give everyone else political advice.

No seriously though. I'll tell you clearly what's actually happening.

Mainstream liberals have thought of themselves as culturally superior, a cultural elite of sorts, with fingers on the pulse, since at least the later 60s. Since the 90s, it's been the entirety of their politics as well. And they are completely out of touch now, dinosaurs. Some of the "abuse" I've seen directed towards them online has been true trolling & bigotry- I see no indication that these folks are more/less likely to be Bernie supporters than anyone else. But the majority of it seems to be liberals complaining that they can't take the high road and support a candidate that doesn't want health care for everyone or an end to brutal war. Liberals must reckon with what mainstream Democrats have done, imperialism & ICE expansion & the crash. Either condemn it or admit that you aren't so progressive after all and that you are willing to throw millions of people under the bus to maintain your lifestyle.

" Twelve percent of Sanders supporters voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 general election." ummm, could we see some multiple (maybe even one) journalistic confirmations of this statement? Not to mention some integrity?? Good grief!!

"Did you not witness Obama leading to Trump?"

No, I did not. I saw Reagan and Gingrich and Fox News leading to Trump. It is a pretty bizarre line to draw between Obama and Trump. Obama was a center left pragmatist. Trump is a reactionary. First of all, it is unlikely that Obama could have moved the country farther to the left. Second, it is unlikely that the election of a reactionary would have been any harder with a more left wing black man in office. Trump won by rallying white people into believing that Obama was too far to the left and Hillary was a crook. I doubt it would have helped if he actually was a leftist.

"We are willing to sit this one out."

Right. Just like you sat out the last one, and the one in 2000. You (and your ilk) elected George W. Bush, who in turn started the war in Iraq. You have been sitting out elections since 1972, and what exactly, has it gotten you? Not shit.

You were probably around when FDR was elected. Fuck that guy -- not a true socialist. Norman M. Thomas was your man or better yet, William Z. Foster. Why vote for a socialist when you can get a communist? Hell, you would have opposed Lincoln, since he wasn't an abolitionist.

The point is, your strategy never works. Never. Even when Teddy Roosevelt ran on the Progressive Party ticket, all he did was split the vote, and kill off the progressive wing of the Republican Party forever. The Greens destroyed the most environmentally aware major candidate in a generation. In contrast, Lincoln only won because the Liberty Party held their nose and voted for a Republican.

If you have any sense, you will hold your nose and vote for the most left wing candidate in this (and every) race. Then fight like hell for every progressive policy out there. It is the only approach that has ever worked.

@10 and all the rest of your posts-why do you still presumably live in the US? unless you're expat, then why do you care?

@18 -- I think the problem with this article is that she focused on Twitter. It is quite possible that Twitter is clean, but Facebook is not. If I was trying to spread lies, I wouldn't focus on Twitter. Twitter is where people argue, which in turn means you are far more likely to be called out for your bullshit. Facebook is the land of casual readers -- so if you slip in a nasty comment about some candidate you don't like in between cat videos, you can get away with it.

@21 >> "I was totally going to vote for Hillary but then I saw this post on facebook and changed my mind to Trump" Said no one ever.

Actually, there is a lot of evidence that that is exactly what happened. There are a lot of people who make up their mind at the very last minute. They see something terrible about Hillary Clinton and they assume it to be true, and vote that way. Of course these people are naive and gullible. They are undecided, in the information age. It doesn't take too much effort (a few Wikipedia searches, perhaps) to gather all the information you need to make an informed decision. Yet a month before the election, you still haven't made up your mind? These are the pinheads that often decide an election, and they could easily be swayed by propaganda posing as news.

@30- i have several relatives who were Bernie supporers who went for trump ;(

I want a candidate who can garner 70 Million votes, but only if absolutely every single one of those voters is a nice person who I would want to be friends with. This is a realistic demand.

"Bernie supporters are frequently pissed the fuck off about imperialism, health care, immigration, climate change, homelessness etc.

But by all means, let's not talk about that. Let's talk instead about how folks are mean online and we should instead be as obsessed with manners & norms as upper middle class WASPs who watch cable news." --EL

Dude.

(btw, Garcia went with Biden, yesterday.
I missed that one by a mile.)

@1 No one is rising up because we are all fat and have Netflix and iPhone apps and endless social media posts to distractedly scroll through, while posting political comments or articles and calling it activism.

@24 -- "You're arguing for following the exact same path that brought us to where we are"

No, dipshit, we are arguing AGAINST the exact same path that brought us to where we are. Holy shit, dude, who the fuck started the Iraq War? I don't give a shit how many Democrat Senators voted for it -- if Bush wasn't president, it wouldn't have happened. Learn some fucking history. The war was started by Cheney and Bush, and there is no fucking way it would have happened with Gore.

But Bush wouldn't have been elected if Nader supporters had voted for Gore. In Florida or New Hampshire, if those voters had simply held their nose and voted for Gore, there would be no Iraq War. That, in turn, probably would have meant no Isis, and no Syrian Civil War. This is where we are. A trillion (or two) spent, half a million Iraqi dead (give or take), and the emergence of a fucking caliphate. Without voters like you, there would be no mishandled Katrina disaster, maybe no 9/11. No massive tax cuts for the wealthy, no homeland security, no ICE. Probably no increase in financial deregulation, which quite possibly means no Great Recession. All that shit happened in the last twenty years ago, and you are OK with that, because it is all part of your master plan.

Except that is hasn't succeeded. It has been twenty fucking years, and your strategy -- as always -- has been a failure. Really -- what have you accomplished in the last twenty years because you voted for Nader? Not a damn thing.

But I appreciate your nonsense, as it fits in well with the topic at hand. I've met a lot of Sanders supporters, but none of them are like you. All of the real Sanders supporters I've ever met have been reasonable. Oh, to be sure, many are arrogant as hell. But that happens -- I can deal with that. But the only time I run into genuine dipshits (the ones who make the same nonsensical arguments you make) is while online.

Which is why Bernie has a damn good point. Maybe you aren't real. Maybe you are just a Russian Bot, programmed to make stupid arguments so that Bernie supporters will support Trump if some Democrat gets the nomination.

Or maybe you are real, and are just really, really naive.

omfg -- Change The RULES?

So whomever had the most votes Day One at
the 'democratic' National Convention gets The Nod?

Are you fucking Serous?!

otoh, adding Bloomy to the Debates broke
'Democratic' National Committee Rules.
But how else Were they gonna beat Bernie?

"As the Democratic presidential primary process intensifies, the institutional Democratic Party appears once again to be doing everything in its power to hurt the effort to unseat Trump.

The attempt to purchase the Democratic nomination by former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg is being aided by a Democratic National Committee that ran a dirty operation against Sen. Bernie Sanders in 2016. Nader also believes that the Bloomberg candidacy has at its core an effort to block Sanders from winning the nomination, perhaps by forcing a brokered convention.

'It’s Armageddon time for the Democratic Party,' Nader said. 'If Bernie wins the election against Trump, should he get the nomination, it has to be a massive surge of voter turnout which will sweep out a lot of the Republicans in the Congress. So he will have a much more receptive Congress.'

It will sweep out the corporate Democrats in the Democratic National Committee, and it will reorient the Democratic Party to where it should be which is a party of, by, and for the people. That’s why they want to fight him.'"

After the last minute, those good ole dnc
centrists, corporatists and incrementalists
not to mention neolibs tossed in ol' Bloomy
and hoped and prayed we'd Never even notice....

Should it prove no one has the 50% of the delegates required to win the nomination at the Convention, the 'D'NC also tosses in around 800 or 900 "super delegates" ([most of which are?] long-time Party members, and, tagging along on the Corporate teat's been a Most Wonderful Ride. For them).

And that's precisely where they take the 'democratic' Nomination right out of We, the People's Hands.

I know, I know, they're one of those Private Corps, so stfua.

Okay.

https://theintercept.com/2020/02/16/ralph-nader-interview-bernie-sanders-bloomberg-pelosi-democrats/

I don't agree with a lot of Ross's side of this argument, but I do agree that the world offline looks nothing like the world online. I spend a lot of time in real life in activism with people who are mostly Sanders supporters as well as those who are to the left of him and will vote for no one and some who are progressive libs who favor Warren. They are nothing like people online. You don't communicate in real life like you do online. And the world looks different to people who watch a lot of cable news, people who spend a lot of time on FB or Twitter, and people who are not online very much at all. Most of the day by day discussions and beefs we have- all the little media scandals & narratives- completely go by most people without touching them at all. I think liberals must've realized recently what a teeny tiny percentage of the population gave a fuck about the Ukraine and impeachment thing. Most don't care about the Bernie Bro thing either. Most don't care about Warren's plans and they have no idea that people think Pete is CIA or that Bloomberg was destroyed last night- most people do not give a single fuck about any of this. And even among the minority who are engaged- all the real life "Bernie Bros" and "progressives" and "leftists" doing politics on the ground, they are nothing at all like you'd assume from Twitter squabbles and comments sections and cable news talk shows. Online hoards influence media narratives which influence political campaigns which have limited capacity to cause real change in the first place.

Bush wouldn't have been president if the Supreme Court didn't appoint him.

Speaking of Nader, another snippet: "Well, the Democratic corporate establishment deep in the Democratic National Committee and the super delegate fiasco, imagine, nobody elects them, but they can tip the balance, undermined Bernie in 2016.

There are strong arguments to say that he did really win Iowa and Nevada before he landslided Hillary in New Hampshire, but that’s the past, but they’re at it again.

They have to stop Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren because their hegemony is over if one of those people gets elected, and they want to continue dialing for corporate dollars.

They want to continue Obama’s record setting fundraising from Wall Street which exceeded his Republican opponents. Imagine, he got more money from Wall Street than John McCain in 2008. He even got more money from Romney’s venture capital firm. So, that’s the internal struggle.

This business about socialism, that’s just a cover but they’re willing to immolate themselves this year, and let Trump win by basically stereotyping any kind of progressive legislation as socialism."

@Ross 38

I'm going to try to say this really plainly. Because I think it's extremely important right now.

When Obama came to power, he did so on promises to close Guantanamo and end an illegal war that was killing tens of thousands of people and destabilizing an entire region displacing millions.

Bush is entirely responsible for starting this shit, and I would not place it at Obama's feet. But both parties rallied around the Patriot Act and the AUMF (including dear Bernard) and those things gave the president an extremely large increase in power. It is a simple fact, proven now, that his administration lied to start a major war- a war crime. They also used this power to create ICE and militarize the police. This is the GOP's fault and it lies at the core of calling them the greater evil.

Now the Democrats, if they are an opposition party at all, had both houses of Congress and the White House when Obama won. He chose to wave away all of this, breaking his campaign promise and continuing the wars. Bush & the GOP were never held accountable for anything.

But it's worse than that because Obama then chose to EXPAND ICE's powers, increase the militarization of the police, and increase the power give to the executive branch under the Patriot Act including allowing him to create kill lists - extrajudicially and with no oversight at all- and then murder people abroad, including in countries where we are not at war and including American citizens. He continued Guantanamo and added people to it and expanded the war on terror to include two other regime change attempts and several interferences in Africa and other parts of the ME. The recently dropped Afghanistan Papers also outline in detail how Obama administration also continued to lie to wage war.

Now we are in a position in which Trump has these powers at his disposal and we're a couple decades into the precedent of not holding the president accountable for any crimes, making him above the law. And the Democrats cannot mount a real opposition to this as currently configured because they are complicit.

I said I'm keeping it simple and that's why I focused on blatant abuses of power like this rather than economic factors which also we could talk about in quite some depth- Obama's handling of the financial crisis leads directly to this current moment as well.

The natural result of all this is a president who is above the law and an 'opposition' party that enables all of this. If you can't see the role Obama played in the creation of this current moment then it probably doesn't seem so pressing to you that we radically transform the Dem party.

One more: "And here’s the umbrella argument, Jeremy.

Look, it’s a choice between Trump’s corporate socialism which you cannot dis-elect and throw the rascals out because it’s Wall Street controlling Washington, or democratic socialism where if you don’t like it, if you don’t like law and order to corporate domination of your lives, and the corporate state, which Franklin Delano Roosevelt called fascism in a message to Congress in 1938, you can always throw the rascals out.

That’s the difference.

And what is corporate socialism? It’s seizing your tax money and bailing out the crooks in Wall Street in 2008 with trillions of dollars. Corporate socialism is shoveling out your hard earned dollars to company subsidies, handouts, giveaways, etc, anti-market quotas.

And above all, it’s taking your money away by giving it to tax breaks for the rich and powerful which creates huge deficits that are going to be paid by your children and your grandchildren instead of putting the trillion and a half dollars of Trump’s tax cut, including cutting his own family’s taxes into rebuilding America, into rebuilding schools and public transit and water and sewage systems and bridges and highway and airports and ports.

That’s the way you [Dems] argue it, Jeremy."

@4

That's not the kind of compromise I meant.

Bernie supporters are far more radical than he is, and supporting him is their compromise.

That is to say, we will give the rigged system One More Chance before we take to the streets.

@37

Speak for yourself.
Not only do I not have Netflix, I also worked in politics for a number of years.

As an activist who has helped to organize many protests, I agree that posting online is not activism.

@2,

She wrote a fucking book in which she explicitly took responsibility for her shitty campaign, moron.

@44 --
it does give
the Harpies
inexpensive
entertainment
so there's that.

"That is to say, we will give the rigged system
One More Chance before we take to the streets."
--above ^

They're gonna try and steal it at the Convention when Bernie doesn't get the Nod on the first round -- that's when The Party's favorites pop in have Their Say and, surprise they say no fucking Way to a social Democracy -- it's Corporate Rule or hit the Highway, pal.

Hit the bricks?
Hit the Pavement?
10-4, baby.

This comment thread is populated with utter children.

Hey Katie:

Hillary lost- predictably, due to you and your sorts behavior in 2016- which gave us Trump -and yet, you're still lying here in 2020.

Perhaps a therapist is in order.

Or maybe, a retreat in the woods with Maureen Dowd.

@40 - No, multiple newspapers recounted and recounted. George W. Bush still won a plurality of Florida's votes. No recount shows otherwise.

I can't imagine why people feel so alienated in the voting process. Maybe it's because once there's an authentic candidate that speaks to their interests they get collective banished and called abusive. The same strategy was deployed on the "Obama boys" in '08. Who's really being abusive here? Who is actually weilding power? It's certainly not Sanders supporters, IMO

@52 Sorry, raindrop, but you're making assertions without doing your homework again.

"...the study also found that Gore probably would have won, by a range of 42 to 171 votes out of 6 million cast, had there been a broad recount of all disputed ballots statewide."

https://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/the-florida-recount-of-2000/

A lot of time and money has been spent on the question, and the only data-driven truth that can be drawn from it all is that the margin of victory in a projected recount result is smaller than the margin of error for the projection.

Any other reading of the conclusions is spin.

@47 Then why does she blame Bernie and the Russians every time she gets near a mic?

BTW I definitely choose the lesser of two evils, but I don't think Bloomberg is the lesser evil. I would never vote Republican, but if he's the nominee, I absolutely will not vote for either.

As for the other candidates, yeah I'd probably hold my nose and vote Warren, probably Biden and Klobuchar as well. But I would not give them a dime or volunteer for them and I'm sure they would lose to Trump. As for Pete, I'm not so sure he's a lesser evil either. He has that scary combination of arrogance and ignorance - he's an imperialist & military intelligence by career, absolutely certain that he could get an algorithm or a plan to figure out how to manage entire continents. I don't think I'd vote for him either.

I don't see the point of voting for Democrats to beat Republicans if the Democrats become Republicans.

Nonetheless, the 12% thing is a stupid talking point, and my guess is that this author knows it. More Bernie primary voters came out for HRC than usually happens- famously, everyone should know it by now, larger % of HRC primary voters switched to McCain instead of Obama. This has nothing to do with Bernie or Bernie bros and everything to do with liberals misunderstanding how people vote. There is a Dem base, then there are people who can be added to it or not depending on the candidate. That 12% of voters that switched to Trump after voting Bernie were not the Dems' to lose- that's insane entitlement to think of them that way. They were the Dems to win. Bernie won them over, so did Trump, Hillary did not.

Likewise, yes there are leftists who will usually not participate in electoral politics who might stay home for most candidates who make an exception for Bernie since he's campaigning as a Dem Socialist, but that doesn't mean they are Bernie fans holding the party hostage- they were never the Dems' in the first place. Bernie brought them in.

The question is if he brings in more people than he alienates- I honestly don't know. It's an untested strategy. But I do know that a liberal mainstream candidate loses to Trump- it's happened already.

What liberals should consider are all the people who voted for down ballot measures in 2016 but not the POTUS because they hated both choices and ask themselves what they are offering them this time.

BTW since I came here b/c of Dan's column, I might as well add that the Bernie Bros are leftists- not swing voters. They are not people who vote for Trump. They do include people who refuse to vote for either. Don't confuse the two groups. If you want to see how the left treats leftists who actually took the extreme step of not just staying home or voting for 3rd party but going out and voting for the Republican freak Trump himself, just see what happened to the career of a certain fellow Texan porn star's career when he proclaimed to do just that in the name of communism. The left does not tolerate support for fascists. It is not Bernie Bros turning to Trump by 12%, it was swing voters & independents and probably a smattering of GOP who could've been turned Dem for Bernie. I wish columnists like this would bother to read and learn about the things they so obnoxiously give opinions about.