264
“They really did screw Bernie”: Here's what 2016 can teach Democrats today
(www.motherjones.com)
this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2026
264 points (92.3% liked)
politics
31307 readers
2431 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So the thesis statement is not driven by actual political analysis but is from a biased source about the only event that would make him relevant in a discussion of politics? Man, if only the title or post text had told me that I would have not-clicked twice as hard.
Next up on my not-reading list, Harris's campaign strategists talking about how their strategy was actual great and people should listen to them about politics. And that's a group actually involved in a recent election. Bernie had a whole second campaign with a different strategist since the one with that guy. And during that campaign this guy wasn't involved and had to throw in with Andrew Yang instead.
I do not care about your opinion on an article you haven't read
My point here has never been defending the article. It's that you shouldn't make wrong assumptions based on headlines and comment based on those. It's bad form
The very existence and sharing of this article is a waste of time. The context that it's from the last person in the world who would give such a thesis value and in promotion of a book just makes it worse not better. My assumptions were kinder than they would have been otherwise.
Your comment saying who the author is is literally the only comment in this entire post that references the content of this specific article. Every single other comment is a generic commentary on politics, rehashed arguments about Sanders' primary run, or meta comments. Which is more evidence of its worthlessness. So I don't care that you don't care and you can tut tut about correct form to someone who has a reason to seek your approval.