|
LionArcher posted:How’s Bernie going to win Florida though? The Hispanic vote in addition to the youth vote
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 00:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
hobotrashcanfires posted:Wow really you think so? Sorry I got "so mad" at the obviously shoddy hit piece that looks more and more like an obviously shoddy hit piece. You know, basically the only things you come here to post. it's still not a shoddy hit piece? the sanders campaign has still not said where it's from or who produced it. in fact, sanders himself seems to imply his campaign *did* produce it. King of Solomon posted:The critique in the fake script is so mild that they likely figured it was going to be a nonstory until, well, it wasn't. You can't - shouldn't - respond to every little thing if you're running for office. well you can generally respond to major outlets, that is the entire purpose of having a press team. it's not like some random blog. they didn't just not reply, either. they just sent an email saying "we aren't commenting." if it was produced by the sanders campaign, the communications team would have vetted the document before it went out. if they didn't, then they can walk down to the cubicle of the field team and asked if they sent anything out. if it's still unclear, they can call the iowa leadership and ask if they produced something. if everyone says no, you reply back to the reporter and say "hey, we've never seen this before and it isn't anything we authorized." Concerned Citizen fucked around with this message at 00:49 on Jan 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 00:46
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:it's still not a shoddy hit piece? the sanders campaign has still not said where it's from or who produced it. It is. It is a shoddy hit piece. Just apologize for being so willfully gullible and move on like a goddamn adult.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 00:50
|
|
|
overmind2000 posted:The Hispanic vote in addition to the youth vote Hispanic people generally (historically) vote red. Most of the Cuban/Cuban Puerto Ricans (not true borinquen) in Florida are super hard-right and bitter about having been chased off their family's sugar plantation/jewelry market/lending racket
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 00:52
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:I know some level of reconciliation is necessary but I still feel like Bernie should be using the numerous "covers" (parodies? I am sure there is a word for it but I do not know it and want to avoid getting attacked by D&D pendants) of "Girls Just Wanna Have Fun" that used "Bernie Would Have Won" that came out after the election. I feel that would be a good way to pump up the base. That would infuriate so many Hillary voters
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 00:53
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:It is. It is a shoddy hit piece. Just apologize for being so willfully gullible and move on like a goddamn adult. i would suggest that you should at least wait until the sanders campaign actually comments before taking a victory lap, but even if it wasn't an authorized piece it's not exactly the journalist's fault if the campaign itself either doesn't know or won't say.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 00:56
|
|
|
Look, I live in Florida, we are a lost cause. The state Dem party is a joke and can't get hispanic voters to come out against a super racist president who regularly demeans them. The only way we vote for a Dem in 2020 is if the economy crashed before November.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 00:57
|
|
|
Terror Sweat posted:That would infuriate so many Hillary voters wouldnt matter because anyone who's #stillwithher is going to vote for trump if bernie (or even cowardly, lying mush like warren) wins the primary
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 00:57
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i would suggest that you should at least wait until the sanders campaign actually comments before taking a victory lap, but even if it wasn't an authorized piece it's not exactly the journalist's fault if the campaign itself either doesn't know or won't say. Yes, it is. It is the journalists fault for not checking sources and proper due diligence. I've worked in the journalism field before. "Finding a note on the internet" is not a source, it is loving gossip scrawled behind a urinal. It's lazy, stupid, malevolent, and probably wrong. poo poo, that could be grounds for a libel suit in a sane democracy, but I'm not a lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 00:59
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i would suggest that you should at least wait until the sanders campaign actually comments before taking a victory lap, but even if it wasn't an authorized piece it's not exactly the journalist's fault if the campaign itself either doesn't know or won't say. Would you say the comments in the script are a slam, a firing jab? Perhaps scorched earth?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:00
|
|
|
LionArcher posted:How’s Bernie going to win Florida though? I just leveled up last year, so now I can vote 5,000 times.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:01
|
|
|
The Bernie store is garbage. The good stuff is out of stock in most sizes, I ordered something and it took a month to get it, and the clothes are 100% cotton American made boxy garbage. If this is any indication of his Bernie is gonna run the country: not good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:05
|
|
|
Built 4 Cuban Linux posted:The Bernie store is garbage. The good stuff is out of stock in most sizes, I ordered something and it took a month to get it, and the clothes are 100% cotton American made boxy garbage. If this is any indication of his Bernie is gonna run the country: not good. My Bernie baseball cap is beautiful and this is heresy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:06
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:it's still not a shoddy hit piece? the sanders campaign has still not said where it's from or who produced it. in fact, sanders himself seems to imply his campaign *did* produce it. What about it is even objectionable? What is so bad it requires an explanation? What sense does it make that it was ever utilized given that it runs counter to the entire strategy they've been running, from appearances very successfully? Why in the world is there some "anonymous leaker" whose identity must be protected in this bland as hell document? Why would someone feel this, this is what I will risk consequence for, the people must know the truth about the thing that if actually in use would not be a secret because they would be telling hundreds or thousands of people because that's the only purpose for its existence. But it sure does dovetail perfectly with Warren's unity strategy and the media doesn't have to be "in the tank" for her to either fall for some stupid "leak", or just roll with a transparently bullshit scheme to generate ratings and revenue. I'm sure the folks at politico would never disparage their honor as journalists to tear down Bernie. That never happens regularly. Finally, where the gently caress does Bernie imply anything of the sort except for an "anonymous" source in their poo poo piece who makes that connection in the most laughably spurious logic anyone could. At this point I want you to be a lovely troll because wow if not.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:08
|
|
|
King of Solomon posted:Would you say the comments in the script are a slam, a firing jab? Perhaps scorched earth? i would agree that they are not, but the original story does not really portray it as that drastic. but i concede that some of the re-reporting and tweets about it did, and obviously the warren campaign is hamming it up and enjoying playing the victim. Cpt_Obvious posted:Yes, it is. It is the journalists fault for not checking sources and proper due diligence. I've worked in the journalism field before. "Finding a note on the internet" is not a source, it is loving gossip scrawled behind a urinal. ok well since the sanders campaign has, to my knowledge, still not even said they didn't do it yet, it's definitely jumping the gun to say it's grounds for a libel suit. we do know it came from a source who asked to be anonymous, and while politico is not the highest caliber news source it would still be unusual for that source to be anonymous to them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:13
|
|
|
sports posted:Hispanic people generally (historically) vote red. Most of the Cuban/Cuban Puerto Ricans (not true borinquen) in Florida are super hard-right and bitter about having been chased off their family's sugar plantation/jewelry market/lending racket Demographics among Latinx folks in Florida are shifting. Younger Cubans don't give as much of a poo poo about Castro or socialism in Latin America. Puerto Ricans, as a group, are pretty incensed against Trump for, well, the way he's treated Puerto Rico.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:15
|
|
|
hobotrashcanfires posted:What about it is even objectionable? What is so bad it requires an explanation? What sense does it make that it was ever utilized given that it runs counter to the entire strategy they've been running, from appearances very successfully? i don't know why anyone leaks anything. maybe it was a volunteer who felt uncomfortable about it, maybe it was someone turf warring with another employee and they're hoping to get them fired. maybe they just wanted to impress a journalist with their inside knowledge. there's a million reasons why people leak stuff and they're usually not good reasons, but if they're anonymous i'm going to guess it's probably because the source did not want people to know what they did. because leaking poo poo about your own candidate is a really lovely thing to do. quote:Finally, where the gently caress does Bernie imply anything of the sort except for an "anonymous" source in their poo poo piece who makes that connection in the most laughably spurious logic anyone could.  how else do you read that? "there's over 500 people on my campaign" seems to imply that he thinks it was from someone on his campaign
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:19
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i don't know why anyone leaks anything. maybe it was a volunteer who felt uncomfortable about it, maybe it was someone turf warring with another employee and they're hoping to get them fired. maybe they just wanted to impress a journalist with their inside knowledge. there's a million reasons why people leak stuff and they're usually not good reasons, but if they're anonymous i'm going to guess it's probably because the source did not want people to know what they did. because leaking poo poo about your own candidate is a really lovely thing to do. yeah the part where he says "no one is going to be attacking Elizabeth Warren" is especially damning you fuckwit
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:22
|
|
|
Unoriginal Name posted:yeah the part where he says "no one is going to be attacking Elizabeth Warren" is especially damning that's a really selective reading of that quote
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:22
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i would agree that they are not, but the original story does not really portray it as that drastic. but i concede that some of the re-reporting and tweets about it did, and obviously the warren campaign is hamming it up and enjoying playing the victim. "Bernie campaign slams Warren as candidate of the elite" That's not an exaggeration to you?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:23
|
|
|
King of Solomon posted:Bernie campaign slams Warren as candidate of the elite i'm not sure how but my eyes slid right over you literally using the word "slam." that's my bad. so i'll concede that yes the headline plays it up more than it is. it is a criticism, yes, a "slam" is too far.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:24
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:ok well since the sanders campaign has, to my knowledge, still not even said they didn't do it yet, it's definitely jumping the gun to say it's grounds for a libel suit. we do know it came from a source who asked to be anonymous, and while politico is not the highest caliber news source it would still be unusual for that source to be anonymous to them. Didn't do what, dude? WTF does this piece even accuse Sanders of doing? Telling people that Warren's voters are wealthier and better educated? Is that in any way at all newsworthy? Why even report on this? What is the story here except "Bernie bad"? Of course the Sanders campaign hasn't responded, they aren't being accused of anything. There is no crime, so there is no claim of innocence. Everything about this story is so relentlessly stupid you can't possibly be posting it in good faith. It is not possible that you are able to fully comprehend the written word, not drown by staring upwards into the rain, and are still stupid enough to post this link. Im-loving-possible. Concerned Citizen posted:
Oh wait, so the Sanders campaign DID respond. Well which is it? Make up your mind before you lie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:25
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:
You cannot possibly be for real. Re-read that utter garbage line of gotcha questioning. Of course Bernie won't issue a blanket denial for something you blindside him with that he has no way of knowing what you're even asking, I'm sure they'd never endlessly hound him for a week or try to spear him at the debates with it. If you're being serious you are not cut out for this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:25
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Didn't do what, dude? WTF does this piece even accuse Sanders of doing? Telling people that Warren's voters are wealthier and better educated? Is that in any way at all newsworthy? Why even report on this? What is the story here except "Bernie bad"? Of course the Sanders campaign hasn't responded, they aren't being accused of anything. There is no crime, so there is no claim of innocence. here is why they should respond: because reporters call campaigns and say "hey i'm writing a story about your campaign going negative and we have this document, do you have any comment on it?" on campaigns i have been on, if someone presented us a fraudulent document, we would pretty quickly want to tell them that their source is poo poo and they shouldn't publish the story. that is literally the purpose of having a comms team. if you think the story isn't newsworthy, you generally try to discourage the press from publishing the story. quote:Oh wait, so the Sanders campaign DID respond. Well which is it? Make up your mind before you lie. the sanders campaign did not respond to the politico article and still has not said if the document is or is not authentic. bernie himself did respond to that question but the closest he gets is that thing which just says "well there's hundreds of us, no i didn't personally approve it and don't want to attack elizabeth"
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:29
|
|
|
It seems to imply he doesn't know whether it is or not. Of course a bad faith poster like you would keep posting in bad faith. Let's recap all the ways in which this story is bad faith to the extreme: 1- The original reporter suggests that the memo is so secretive and internal that he has to type its contents, lest his source be outed. But in the follow up, he claims that he saw the material and it included a "paid for by the Bernie Sanders campaign" or some such. In other words, it either is an script going out to the public (hence the need for the "paid for by the Bernie campaign") in which case it is not so secretive at all, or it is. Also, notable that in his denial of the "rando on slack" as a source is that he doesn't deny it is a rando on slack, and just points that it had the "paid for..." thing. 2- The criticism, if there, is inherently fair. Bernie has had to answer multiple questions over multiple townhalls about his 2016 support being mostly white. The idea that this is some below the belt jab, especially after Warren herself spent weeks making a similar point about Pete's support, is laughable. 3- And yet, despite 2 being eminently fair, look at how the question is framed to Bernie: "your campaign IS trashing Warrren." Not attacking, not criticizing, not going after, trashing. 4- Warren's response was for more incisive. Her response to what, at best, is an internal document talking about talking points, is far more aggressive, blaming Bernie for 2016. 5- Ultimately, this is a self contradictory story. The argument is that Bernie is sending out canvassers with negative talking points about Warren. But as every single person who has volunteered for Bernie will tell you, that is not part of any of the scripts that are currently in use. It is such a secretive memo that the reporter has to type it out to avoid compromising a source, and yet the accusation is that Bernie volunteers are being instructed with it. Bernie has far more volunteers than anyone else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:32
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:here is why they should respond: because reporters call campaigns and say "hey i'm writing a story about your campaign going negative and we have this document, do you have any comment on it?" on campaigns i have been on, if someone presented us a fraudulent document, we would pretty quickly want to tell them that their source is poo poo and they shouldn't publish the story. that is literally the purpose of having a comms team. if you think the story isn't newsworthy, you generally try to discourage the press from publishing the story. Jesus dude, you are completely incoherent. You just posted an article where Bernie Sanders himself responded directly to the accusation in the politico article, and he basically said "I can't speak for every volunteer that we have, but I have nothing to do with attacks against Warren". You cannot be this stupid. I refuse to believe it. You cannot keep posting poo poo that directly contradicts the things you say.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:34
|
|
|
i mean at this point i guess we can just wait and see re: its authenticity. i concede that yes, it's being played up too much and i really don't have a problem with them trying to convert warren voters. i think the original story is newsworthy if it was, in fact, produced by the sanders campaign. my original criticism of the document was centered around the fact that it's a lovely script to hand to volunteers. if the story was not produced by the sanders campaign, they should have told politico that when they were asked for comment rather than just letting the story go out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:36
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Jesus dude, you are completely incoherent. You just posted an article where Bernie Sanders himself responded directly to the accusation in the politico article, and he basically said "I can't speak for every volunteer that we have, but I have nothing to do with attacks against Warren". You cannot be this stupid. I refuse to believe it. You cannot keep posting poo poo that directly contradicts the things you say. he didn't say "i can't speak for every volunteer," he was clearly talking about staff. he said he didn't approve the script, which i think is almost certainly true - even if the campaign produced it, it's not gonna run volunteer scripts by the candidate first. but he did not answer the things i said, and his campaign (which is distinct from the candidate, bernie sanders) has not said if they did or did not produce the document.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:38
|
|
|
I think this whole poo poo is ginned up, and we should maybe all be a bit wary believing stuff about the candidate who causes aneurysms among the 1% that is being broadcasted by the media companies they own. That would seem to be prudent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:38
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i mean at this point i guess we can just wait and see re: its authenticity. i concede that yes, it's being played up too much and i really don't have a problem with them trying to convert warren voters. i think the original story is newsworthy if it was, in fact, produced by the sanders campaign. my original criticism of the document was centered around the fact that it's a lovely script to hand to volunteers. if the story was not produced by the sanders campaign, they should have told politico that when they were asked for comment rather than just letting the story go out. No. You are not wriggling out of this poo poo by "we'll wait and see." There are a thousand reasons to immediately not respond to a story. Maybe it's the first time you've heard of the accusations because (surprise!) it's completely made up, so it takes time to check on it. Why did you post, multiple times, that the Sanders campaign did not respond to accusations and then immediately post the Sanders campaign responding to the very same accusation?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:40
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i mean at this point i guess we can just wait and see re: its authenticity. i concede that yes, it's being played up too much and i really don't have a problem with them trying to convert warren voters. i think the original story is newsworthy if it was, in fact, produced by the sanders campaign. my original criticism of the document was centered around the fact that it's a lovely script to hand to volunteers. if the story was not produced by the sanders campaign, they should have told politico that when they were asked for comment rather than just letting the story go out. Or maybe they realized that it is an obvious bad faith story and that any response will just drag it out further. Only gullible idiots and bad faith pundits are picking up the story of the canvassing instructions that are simultaneously being given to the tens of thousands of Bernie volunteers and yet so secretive the reporter has to type it out instead of posting a copy because it would reveal the source.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:40
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:Or maybe they realized that it is an obvious bad faith story and that any response will just drag it out further. Only gullible idiots and bad faith pundits are picking up the story of the canvassing instructions that are simultaneously being given to the tens of thousands of Bernie volunteers and yet so secretive the reporter has to type it out instead of posting a copy because it would reveal the source. ok well i guess they were wrong, since the story blew up. Cpt_Obvious posted:No. You are not wriggling out of this poo poo by "we'll wait and see." There are a thousand reasons to immediately not respond to a story. Maybe it's the first time you've heard of the accusations because (surprise!) it's completely made up, so it takes time to check on it. it does not take that much time to check out. the team in charge of responding to it would also be the team who would have had to vet it before it went into the field in the first place. there's only a very small number of people authorized to write these kinds of documents, if none of them did it then it was unauthorized which would be the end of the story. the sanders campaign has still not responded and said whether or not they produced the document, the sanders campaign did not respond to the politico article, that was a follow-up interview after the piece. bernie did make a comment on it and while it seems to imply his staff did it without his knowledge, sure he might also just be granting that without really knowing for sure. Concerned Citizen fucked around with this message at 01:47 on Jan 13, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:44
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:Or maybe they realized that it is an obvious bad faith story and that any response will just drag it out further. Only gullible idiots and bad faith pundits are picking up the story of the canvassing instructions that are simultaneously being given to the tens of thousands of Bernie volunteers and yet so secretive the reporter has to type it out instead of posting a copy because it would reveal the source. The reporter literally cited Reality Winner in their twitter mentions when challenged on the retyping thing. Absolutely galaxy brain poo poo. Sanders campaign will rendition you to Vermont and waterboard you with maple syrup, traitor 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:45
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:the sanders campaign did not respond to the politico article, You are a liar. Concerned Citizen posted:that was a follow-up interview after the piece. bernie did make a comment on it and while it seems to imply his staff did it, sure he might also just be granting that without really knowing for sure. This is the Sanders campaign responding to the piece. You admit it in the same loving breath. You cannot be this stupid. You are just a liar and you got caught.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:49
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:ok well i guess they were wrong, since the story blew up. Yes the story that makes no loving sense if true is blowing up. On the eve of the debates. And is Bad For Bernie. Oh and it looks to be the flimsiest garbage in the world that any self-respecting journalist or editor with a functioning brain would demand some evidence that causes it to make any sense and seem plausible before publishing. If only anyone could figure out the only logical explanation at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:51
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:You are a liar.  https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/11/bernie-quietly-goes-negative-on-warren-097594 -that response by bernie does not answer whether or not the campaign produced the document, but seems to imply that one of his over 500 staff did even if he did not authorize it. i think it's fair to say he may not actually know, but that is the only information we have from bernie sanders or his campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:51
|
|
|
I mean, just in case you were wondering about the sincerity of the reporter who started this story, here he is sharing a video excerpt of an interview that Sirota did 12 years ago: https://twitter.com/AlxThomp/status/1216367044146405377 https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1216241352473579521 Anyone who still takes this clown seriously is either an idiot or posting in bad faith.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:52
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:
Ok, liar, what is this if not a response to the politico article?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:54
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:i don't know why anyone leaks anything. maybe it was a volunteer who felt uncomfortable about it, maybe it was someone turf warring with another employee and they're hoping to get them fired. maybe they just wanted to impress a journalist with their inside knowledge. there's a million reasons why people leak stuff and they're usually not good reasons, but if they're anonymous i'm going to guess it's probably because the source did not want people to know what they did. because leaking poo poo about your own candidate is a really lovely thing to do. Concerned Citizen posted:it's still not a shoddy hit piece? the sanders campaign has still not said where it's from or who produced it. in fact, sanders himself seems to imply his campaign *did* produce it. How in the world do you interpret it that way? Sanders very obviously had no idea what this was about beyond possibly reading the extremely vague tweet that just consisted of "someone posted this stuff online" and just assumed some employee probably wrote/said something dumb. He has no way of knowing and even if it was some random employee it still would be completely irrelevant. Like joepinetree says here, this is the extremely obvious read of what he says vvv joepinetree posted:It seems to imply he doesn't know whether it is or not. Of course a bad faith poster like you would keep posting in bad faith.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 01:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Ok, liar, what is this if not a response to the politico article? ok, so i'm going to explain my post in excruciating and obnoxious detail. i apologize to everyone for this. let's look at my quote again quote:the sanders campaign has still not responded and said whether or not they produced the document, the sanders campaign did not respond to the politico article, that was a follow-up interview after the piece. bernie did make a comment on it and while it seems to imply his staff did it, sure he might also just be granting that without really knowing for sure. you see this as contradictory or a lie because you are interpreting bernie the candidate and the bernie campaign as the same thing. in my post, i was trying to draw a distinction because candidates typically are not hands-on with the day-to-day of their campaign. that's why i mention bernie in the sentence immediately following the bit about the sanders campaign. in this post, bernie (the candidate) appears to be saying that he did not approve the script and does not approve of attacks on his friend, elizabeth warren. that does not mean that the bernie campaign did not produce the script, in fact he still does not deny it. he simply says he has over 500 people working on his campaign. neither he nor his campaign have said if the campaign produced the document at this point, or if it was unauthorized.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2020 02:10
|
|