Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » He said She said. Allegedly during a private 2018 meeting Bernie told Liz "a woman can't win". Which doth thee believe? The he/she? Why?
RosieG

He said She said. Allegedly during a private 2018 meeting Bernie told Liz "a woman can't win". Which doth thee believe? The he/she? Why?

She sez he said it. He sez he dint. Each is calling the other a LIAR.

Not very presidential.

Posted - January 14, 2020
Tags : None

Responses


  • 46117
    I don't really see why this matters. 

    We are going to worry what Bernie Sanders said about winning?  Would that make you not vote for him?  

    He was probably right anyway.  

    She has a hard road.  So does he.  So does anyone on that stage.  One is gay.  One is too progressive.  One is too old and stodgy.  One is too moderate.  One just had a heart-attack.  One is a woman.  

    AND EVERYONE IS NOT TRUMP. So anyone is far superior than what we now have.


    This post was edited by WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH at January 15, 2020 2:39 AM MST
      January 14, 2020 9:11 AM MST
    1

  • 113301
    Everything matters to someone. Nothing matters to some. It doesn't matter if it doesn't matter to you. It matters to others. That's how the world works. Thank you for your reply Sharon and Happy Wednesday.
      January 15, 2020 2:40 AM MST
    0

  • 35843
    I believe Bernie said it. I do not care. I think he is wrong.  I do not believe Warren is the woman who will be POTUS. 
      January 14, 2020 3:51 PM MST
    2

  • 46117
    He did say it.  But it is not in the context that is anything more than FACTUAL.  Obviously Hilldog did not win. Did she? 
      January 14, 2020 4:49 PM MST
    1

  • 35843
    Depends on the wording.  A woman cannot win vs has not won.
      January 15, 2020 4:35 AM MST
    0

  • 113301
    For anyone to say that...man or woman...brands him or her as sexist. Now who in his/her right mind wants to lead with THAT? Thank you for your reply m2c! :)
      January 15, 2020 2:41 AM MST
    0

  • 1152
    Historically speaking, Bernie was absolutely right. Women have a tough go of it in American politics and, up to the date in question, no woman HAD ever won as a presidential candidate.

    So, if the only criteria was winning, the Democrats probably would have been better off (all other things being approximately equal) with running a male candidate in 2016.

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/04/11/its-the-sexism-stupid-226620

    That being said, there comes a time when the barrier should be broken and someone should be the first to do what's never been done before. HRC came quite close (about 70k votes shifted in key states would have won the election for her) despite many circumstantial and structural disadvantages weighing against her.

    I don't know if Bernie said it or not. If he did say it, he most likely said it as an expression of his evaluation of political reality, not because he wants women back in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant.
      January 14, 2020 4:38 PM MST
    2

  • 46117
    1000 percent.  Agree.
      January 14, 2020 4:39 PM MST
    0

  • 1152
    Thanks...
      January 14, 2020 4:40 PM MST
    0

  • 46117
    Now.  In the best of all possible worlds Bernie will win and Eliz will serve in some wonderful capacity.  Or vice-versa.  

    But, I have never lived in the best of all possible worlds.  EVER.

    I have a feeling he is going to win again before this nightmare is over for good. 

    I don't think I can take it.   My friend, Allison at work gave me this.  She is a warped woman.

    This post was edited by WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH at January 14, 2020 4:47 PM MST
      January 14, 2020 4:45 PM MST
    0

  • 113301
    It's sexist SP. Whether a man or a woman makes such a pronouncement it's sexist. Is that better/worse than being a racist? I dunno. I'm gonna ask. I'm gonna ask if there any "ists" that aren't deplorable but adorable. Thank you for your reply! :)
      January 15, 2020 2:43 AM MST
    0

  • 1152
    I don't entirely agree. Pointing out that bigotry exists and it has real-world consequences is NOT the same thing as being bigoted.

    Once the bigotry is pointed out, deciding whether or not to press on with a course of action despite the negative consequences of bigotry is a separate question.
      January 15, 2020 7:29 AM MST
    1

  • 113301
    I think the fact that Bernie said it to Liz proves that it was with sexist intent SP. Why would he say that to a male opponent? He would not. He said it to a female. That's good enough for me. Now of course being as I'm a gal and you aren't our perceptions OF NECESSITY will be different. It happens. Thank you for your reply!
      January 15, 2020 7:35 AM MST
    0

  • 1152
    I must still beg to differ. 

    Saying that African-Americans are more likely to suffer from sickle-cell anemia than Americans of other backgrounds is NOT racist. It is a genetic and demographic observation.

    Saying that bigoted Americans will be more reluctant to vote for a female candidate than a male one, which could tip the balance of the election, is not bigoted in itself.

    Now, one can argue that the female candidate should press on and fight to win despite the having to overcome the bigotry of some of the voters. Or one can argue that the stakes are too high and it's better to win the immediate election while leaving confronting the bigotry of the voters to another day. The argument between advocates of both those options will be quite impassioned, and I can see the merits of both.

    Consider this stumper:  Suppose HRC had discovered she had some sort of major health problem in 2016 weeks before Election Day. She drops out and someone else (her running mate Tim Kaine?) takes her place on the Democratic ticket. The change in candidate flips just enough sexist f***tards who wouldn't vote for that Awful Evil B**ch Hilary, but who would otherwise vote for the Democratic ticket. That's enough to flip 3-4 states and Democratic Candidate X becomes the next President. Would you be happier today if that had happened? Or do you prefer things as they turned out, where the sexist f***tard vote was just enough to make Donald Trump President?

    Would you rather lose "clean," or sacrifice a principle or two to keep demented narcissistic psychopath Trump out of office?
      January 15, 2020 6:10 PM MST
    0

  • 17319
    Sexist or not, given what Hillary was up against, and STILL managed to lose, he's probably right. At least he doesn't suggest that it's okay to grab women by the p*ssy, which His Royal Orangeness beyond a shadow of doubt DID say.
      January 15, 2020 3:26 AM MST
    1

  • 113301
    She WON the popular vote R. It's our cockmamie crappy electoral college that screwed things up then and has done so before. I wonder did an electoral win ever benefit a Dem? I'm gonna ask. Thank you for your reply! :) This post was edited by RosieG at January 15, 2020 7:36 AM MST
      January 15, 2020 7:36 AM MST
    0