>and really hasnt done much to heal the wounds of 2016 that he
>was at least partially responsible for. like dude went out on
>a dem party unity tour and used it to bash the party lol.

if a party that lost its ass at every level of government doesn't have polarization, polemic, conflict, etc, there is a problem. someone has to stir it and put it in a direction. look at the gains in the house and specifically the gains in the house for women and POC. mostly from the sanders wing, e.g. AOC.

>he literally said dems are losing working class white voters
>because they rely too much on identity politics.

is that wrong? i'd take it a step further and say they also performed worse than expected with minority voters for the same reason. white working class voters don't fit into the picture, and that's magnified on a substantive level by the lack of solidarity behind workers and organized labor in particular. in terms of minority voters, this whole "hey they wanna fuck you over and we think you're actually human" schtick has also worn paper thin. that's a big reason why more of them stayed home; it wasn't just that obama was black. that is simplistic and doesn't give black, latino and other minority voters enough credit for demanding action instead of rhetoric, demanding to be included rather than utilized. those are real issues for the DNC.

>he has issues with the party but has no problem siphoning off
>their resources without fundraising for dems nationwide
>outside of his select handpicked candidates (who are mostly
>running in already-blue areas).

that's a balancing act, he's inside the party, he's gotten people from his political tree into the mainstream. that means he's got to reconcile reforms within the party with operating within it. is he doing a perfect job? no. a good job? up for debate. but i don't see this as some grand, irreconcilable hypocrisy.

>why wouldnt some people have a problem with him running?

some people, sure, mostly bitter centrists. but again i see a lot of people who support his ideas turning on him for reasons that have nothing to do with ideology.