I was the first person here to openly predict the Trump win. In December of 2015. It was a New Years predictions thread. You can look it up.

Me saying Clinton was an infinitely better candidate than Sanders was never a guarantee that Clinton would win. It was just a statement of an obvious reality that you never even attempted to refute.


>You've been gallivanting all over the boards as essentially a
>Clinton surrogate for years

I dropped her like a lead weight when Barack Obama started running. Barack Obama was a real candidate, with real ideas, and real potential, that we eventually saw fulfilled. Bernie Sanders is an Instagram candidate with an intentionally mindless following.

>- denigrating Sanders at every
>turn.

Well, yeah. I've denigrated Sanders because I'm a progressive. And his empty vanity candidacy undermined party discipline at a time when we desperately needed it and helped elect Donald Trump. I'll denigrate that fake fuck every chance I get. The best I can say about Dennis Kucinich is that he turned out to be harmless. I can't say that about Bernie Sanders.

>Forget good points, you don't even relent in the face
>of facts.

You've never brought a fact to this discussion or any other. You bring wishful thinking, delusions, and emotion (and occasionally, overt pseudoscience). That's how political movements die.

>You're still referring to Sanders supporters as "bernie bros"
>- when his coalition is younger and more diverse than any
>other candidate.

I referred to you as a bro. And you make the case for me.

>But to imply that Brown was the singular candidate who could
>succeed in a General Election is just lazy - even for you.

Says the man who's been boosting for Tulsi Gabbard. I don't know if you're the fellow anyone should be looking to for advice about who's a promising candidate.

>Maybe get some facts straight and perhaps then we could get
>along more productively in our exchanges.

Or maybe you learn the difference between facts and wishes.