Wereflea wrote, âGive us a break okay? This article was about Hillary.â
You give us a break, Wereflea. This article was clearly about how Hillary doesnât measure up to Sanders. It constantly mentions Sanders. In fact it begins with:
âAs a strong challenge from the left emerges in the form of Vermont Sen. Bernie SandersâŚâ
Thus it mentions Sanders before it mentions Clinton. The entire article is framed as a discussion about how Clinton is not a real progressive like Sanders is.
It is obvious Wereflea that you are an adamant Sanders supporter and it is also obvious that it disturbs you when some commenters here critique him.
This article is not a simple critique of Clinton. It is an argument for supporting Sanders. Thus it is entirely appropriate to discuss Sanders as well as Clinton in the comments.
I put a challenge to you. If Sanders doesnât win the nomination and Clinton does and then he campaigns for her, will you then admit those of us who said he was sheep dogging for her were right? Or will you then adopt the lesser of two evils argument as to why we should support Clinton.
We are not arguing against Sanders to help Clinton. We are arguing against him to point out that the whole shebang is to help Clinton. Letâs see what happens in 13 months and then weâll know who really is against Clinton and the establishmentarian, Wall Street oriented, MIC controlled Democratic Party and who isnât.
If you want to support Sanders, donât ask us to shut up. Respond to our points.