A good reason to not point it out consistently.

Warren is taking arrows from billionaires, Dems,
the media, etc.

In most cases, it’s arrows Bernie would be taking
if he wasn’t just being ignored.

So, in addition to it not making sense that Bernie
supporters are piling on their next best choice,
it’s also a bad strategy.

If Warren drops out, Bernie is going to get a lot
more scrutiny than you guys want.



>>On top of it, many of your attacks are tin-foil hat type
>stuff
>>like this link. Her plan is designed to divide? LOL
>
>One of the things that really irks me about the discussions on
>here is that no idea is discussed on its merits, it's always
>who is the messenger. An idea is an idea and I would gladly
>entertain an argument about some of the ideas laid out in
>Carl's piece. Sorry "credentialed Jacobin contributor and
>activist."

I just did. I read his piece. It’s tin foil hat shit man.

I’m not that guy. I gave props to the last Jacobin link
you posted.

That said, your reply here lacks some self awareness.

You guys are ready to declare Warren hillary 2.0 because
she is only say 90% similar to Bernie.

In other words, her main downside is that she simply
isn’t Bernie.

And there are plenty of bad/disappointing plans from
Biden and Pete.

Why no posts about those?
>
>>She is trying to win the fucking nomination, then the
>>election.
>
>Even one of her fiercest defenders Ryan Grim conceded on
>Twitter that it is her pivoting to the center already which is
>something I may have warned about a time or two...

Okay.

But you didn’t like her plan prior to this.

And as others have pointed out, her transition
plan isn’t terribly different than Bernie’s.

What could she do to earn your support?

Nothing. So at the end of the day, you’re just
piling on to other attacks,

And why are you more focused on Warren pivoting
to the “center” than Pete or Biden living there??

Again, why no posts about them?

>
>>Yet, you dismiss a plan that could help more people (than
>>current system) much sooner, and has more chance to pass.
>
>It might help if she could beat Trump (doubtful) and she would
>actually do it (doubtful) and it would pass without a movement
>behind it (doubtful).

If you want to say Bernie is more electable, okay.

I could see some arguments there.

But she’s still beating trump in heads to heads
I’ve seen.

There are definitely concerns with her demos.


But Bernie is less likely to get major legislation
passed - or at least just as likely.

By your own admission, M4A would take years

So her plan is to get partially there why we wait.


Not sure why that deserves more attacks than
Biden’s “universal access”

But, you guys are hyper focused on the next
progressive.

Bernie holding rallies in Manchins back yard
isn’t going to work, hell it isn’t even going
to happen.


And, why would your movement go away in
a Warren pres?

So sanders supporters are only going to fight
if he’s pres?

Which takes us back to...is it about wthe movement,
or is it about Bernie?

Are you guys going to take your ball and go home?

What about him? He wouldn’t help Warren?

Damn...


Again my biggest gripe is the co-opting
>of our movement that almost EVERY candidate has done before
>pivoting away.

So it really is about Bernie then?

Cuz you didn’t like her M4A before either,

Are you saying it’s his turn?

Hide behind Bernie and then slowly triangulate
>away.

Uh Bernie is the one who has benefitted tremendously
from Warren taking the heat on M4A.

He hasn’t gotten this much scrutiny.

That’s the opposite of Warren hiding.

The media hasn’t taken Bernie seriously. It’s odd.

But you can’t deny there aren’t benefits from that.

I respect people with true intentions even if I
>disagree, but it's the obfuscating which undermines and
>divides the movements that activists like Bernie have been
>fighting for for decades and just damages the end goal by
>muddying the waters.
>

That waters aren’t muddy because of Warren.

They are muddy because people don’t want to be
kicked off their insurance.

They are muddy because achieving single payer is
very highly unlikely.

A fellow progressive presenting a different way to
get there doesn’t undermine shit.

It’s just a different way.

And, if she just went to fully co-signing Bernie’s plan,
y’all would accuse her of co-opting blah blah.

And, she is trying to win the nom.


Again, it is insanely disappointing to see guys like
you quiet as a church mouse when it comes to
Biden and Pete...but will vilify Warren for being
slightly to Bernie’s right.

You’re going to regret it if you guys help
bring Warren down and have to watch a lot of
her support flock to Pete or Biden.

Cuz there’s a reason folks prefer Warren to
Bernie. Making her a villain isn’t endearing
to anyone, PLUS chances are a lot of people
we’re looking for someone more pragmatic
than Bernie.

You could be spending your time educating
people on the problems with Biden and Pete
to help ensure Dems don’t miss their chance.

But no, you guys are determined to take down
Warren, which you have to admit at least risks
propping up a guy like Pete.

How is that not undermining your movement??