Another aspect I find puzzling (hypocritical, actually) about the question of gender bias/misogyny, is that the same people I've encountered berating anyone that did not support Clinton as sexist above all else regularly crap on Tulsi Gabbard, Jill Stein, Marianne Williamson, etc. They reserve the right for themselves to argue that these other women are not any of them the "right" woman and therefore support of them cannot be a defense against misogyny as they had no chance of winning.

As I recall, Bernie supporters such as myself, pointed out the conerns of Clinton's electability vs Bernie's on her merits, particularly in light of anti-establishment populism that was also fueling much of Trump's following. Remember we were talking about the Democratic base. Clinton in her primary against Obama worried about if nominating a black man was a bridge too far. But this should not be the focus of any calculation in this regard. It will never be "the time" to break through barriers if the niggling worry is that it is "too soon."

In the specious smears against Jeremy Corbyn were the supposed anti-Semitism of his Labour party, why isn't there a kneejerk reaction that those opposing Bernie are anti-Semitic (though for some that might be the reason)? Because you at least have to start out with the proposition that we need to judge political candidates above all else on their actual merits. Joe Biden is being pushed as the safe, "nice guy" choice, but to counter that with creepy, boundary crossing, hair sniffing observations, or his part in failed centrist policies, you're pilloried as somehow pro-Trump. You can also not support Pete Buttigieg as president without being adverse to a gay candidate. You'd think this was self-evident, but some don't allow for that same sensibility for a female candidate. If one can reject Sarah Palin to be a heartbeat from the presidency, one can also have reasons to reject Clinton, or Warren, or Harris, or Klobuchar, or Gabbard, that have nothing to do with their gender.

Jimmy Dore has done some good segments on the sexism question, which I'll link later.

The "big deal" in my mind was the brazen attempt at kneecapping Bernie. It's right out of the Clinton playbook, which only reinforces my impression that Warren is Hillary 2.0 with a Bernie mask (I saw one wag refer to her as "Hillary 1.5" )

The kamikaze here is Warren. She attempted to take down Sanders and now she is crashing and burning. She was down, she was desperate, so she did something risky. It wasn't successful because how blatantly contrived it was.

It because a big deal when she refused to shake his hand and accused him of caller her a liar on stage. That is something that cannot be overlooked. The media aren't covering it to help Trump, they are covering it in the hopes that it will hurt Bernie. CNN is putting out stories claiming that his attempt to shake her hand after the debate was some kind of sexist male aggression. Shaking hands after a debate is cordial and common. To not shake hands is rude and signifies that there is conflict between candidates. He the decent thing and attempted to shake her hand even after the smear she had made against him and she refused it in order to create more fake drama in the hope that it will damage his numbers. The whole thing is very slimy and desperate on Warren's part.

@RoboGraham - I only learned it later but loved Bernie's rejoinder to Warren saying, "You're lying about me." That pretty much settles the "controversy" as far as I'm concerned.

I agree I love his ideas and he is a good senator thing is we need to take the senate its so important to get Moscow mitch out and restore order and the rule of law

So your evidence for him being guilty of saying it is his refusal to argue on the hot mic? It would be a politically stupid move to have an argument with a political ally on stage on national tv as Warren was trying to do. Men always refuse to argue on a hot mic after they lie to women? Which men are you talking about? Why would you make broad generalization about an entire gender?

We are smearing her? Did not all of this start when she smeared him? If he did say it, why is it coming out just now, coincidentally right before a big debate and Iowa? He allegedly said this like two years ago and she said nothing about it until suddenly her campaign decided to release this ridiculous smear. Why did they wait until this exact moment to bring it up when it happened so long ago?

We are nasty sexists? You are the one who just claimed that ALL men lie to women and then refuse to argue about it.

I wouldn't argue on a hot mic either; his refusal to do so was a smart decision.

@RoboGraham. More Bernie whining. I’m not impressed with him or his supporters. They went negative and nasty immediately! I didn’t hear any smear from Warren but Bernie bros spread it all over media just like they did with Hillary. It wasn’t about her actual policies but ugly talk about her as a woman. You wouldn’t argue on a hot mic but he was just on a hot mic so what’s the deal? He looked like a deer in headlights so if he was so innocent and such a saint, why not say there must have been a misunderstanding. But he didn’!

@Killtheskyfairy There is no need to say that there was a misunderstanding when there was no misunderstanding. Everyone understands perfectly well what happened. Warren is desperate so she had her campaign leak a purposefully misconstrued statement that Bernie made way before their campaigns even began. When the moderator asked him if he said it, he said no and defended himself. What else can he do?

I haven't heard any nasty talk about Warren as a woman. I've only heard people point out that she's not very consistent and not always truthful. Criticizing the flaws of a presidential candidate is not going negative or nasty talk. It's the whole point of the primary. Critically evaluating the candidates is how you discover which is the best and ought to be selected.

"You wouldn’t argue on a hot mic but he was just on a hot mic so what’s the deal?" What's the deal with this question? Of course I'm not on a hot mic. what's that got to do with anything? He was on hot mic and refused to have an argument. That was the mature prudent thing to do. He decided not to play into the drama because drama is what Elizabeth is trying to provoke out of him. This is a hail mary move. She knows she is losing so she had no choice but to do something bold that could shake up the numbers. It was a poor choice and she will have to deal with the consequences.

@RoboGraham A body language expert is on MSNBC now saying Bernie was lying in the hot mic incident and his body proves it. If Bernie was such a saint, his bros would not be filling social media with misogyny and when he is the

@Killtheskyfairy A body language expert is on where? One of the corporate news networks I presume.

If you are willing to take seriously a body language "expert" but won't consider his long history of supporting women's rights, his encouragement of woman to run, his literal campaigning for a female candidate that he had just lost to, and explicit intention to nominate a female VP, you are not a critical thinker.

Again I ask you, if he really did say this, why is it coming out at this particular moment? Why did her campaign make this accusation just before the big debate and shortly before Iowa when Warren is far down in the polls? It is clearly manufactured drama and poorly contrived.

No one is claiming that he is a saint. He is a decent person who happens to be one of the very few politicians who has true consistency and integrity over a very long career of fighting for the working class. He is a good leader and holds policy positions that are egalitarian and good for the country and the people.

I haven't seen any of this misogyny. Can you give me any examples? And even if some of his supporters are behaving that way, that is not a reflection upon him.He has millions of supporters. In any group that large there are going to be some bad apples. He can't control every word spoken by every person who supports him. If you want to criticize him fine but don't shit on him because of what some random bro said.

Do you think Warren doesn't have supporters who say mean bigoted things. Just yesterday a Warren supporter told me that men always lie to women and then refuse to argue. How sexist it was of her to accuse an entire gender of such a thing.

@RoboGraham She came out with it after Bernie started attacking her. The entire male gender has been complicit in keeping women as second class citizens and the GOP continues to try to roll back why rights women have gained. You seem a little too hysterical about this issue, snowflake!

oh yes I so agree too many old men and women running id like to see a younger man or woman and mayor pete is thoughtful and calm and friggin wicked smart

@whiskywoman would like to see younger people running our country, advised by older experienced person of opposite gender....enjoyed your photo selection.

@powder oh hell no

I agree

doesn't prove anything about him and warren

@whiskywoman It does help to prove that he does not actually believe that a woman shouldn't or can't become president. It is a smear created by the Warren campaign in desperation.

@RoboGraham it only shows he is open in the future I like Bernie and I think there has been a lot to do about bullshit because that is what the media does we are so hyper focused but Bernie has had other problems in his campaign on this subject mostly ones I didn't believe and if nominated though I think he won't win id vote for him

@whiskywoman It's difficult to understand what you are expressing when you don't use punctuation. What are these problems you refer to?

And there is the fact that he allegedly said this a long time ago. Warren had no issue with it until just now coincidentally right before a big debate and Iowa. This is obviously a desperate smear.

@RoboGraham not allegedly, the videos are in youtube. That's what I meant wihen I said "solid history and background of saying quite the contrary of what Warren is claiming,."

@Mofo1953 Oh yeah for sure. I was referring to what she said he said about a woman not being able to win.

neither would be better they are wonderful senators and we need them there

@whiskywoman Don't you think one of these wonderful Senators could do even more wonderful things if in the white house?

@RoboGraham mayor pete could its just as important to take the senate otherwise we are in the same place no matter what Moscow owes us at least 12 yrs salary

@whiskywoman There is much that a Sanders administration could accomplish even without the senate. Do you think Vermont or Massachusetts would replace them a republican senator?

This is a she said he said. The media is a big part of the problem but it wasn't them who created this mess. the Warren campaign put this accusation out there in a desperate attempt to take Bernie down as he is surging and she is falling. It was she who betrayed her friend.

@RoboGraham That may be true. I really don't care who started what. It didn't belong in the debate.

@Shawno1972 True. This pretty little argument has no place in the debate. Blame CNN for bringing it up. And it seems to me that the Warren campaign probably coordinated it with them.

Clearly you don't understand what communism is.

Born in Africa? Are you seriously making the same nonsense accusation about Bernie that the republicans made about Obama?

@RoboGraham - Hahaha... of course you do understand satire when you see it?

@FrostyJim Not if the satire isn't funny and just sounds like somebody saying some very absurd things. So which part were you joking about?

@RoboGraham - I will leave that up to you... satire isn't always funny unless you think it is.

@FrostyJim oh so the funny part is the idea that Michelle Obama is more electable than Sanders. I get it now. Well done.

@RoboGraham - how about Oprah? ...at least she has a strong heart?

@FrostyJim How about Sanders? He has a very long record of fighting for working people and challenging the elites. He has loads of momentum and he is raking in grassroots support and funds. He has consistent policies that will help the country and the people. He has enthusiasm with young people and people outside the democratic party. He is by far the best chance we have to remove Trump.

@RoboGraham - I will support whoever the Dems put on the ticket ...even if that is Oprah? Sorry, but I don't think it will be Bernie ...but I could be wrong.

@FrostyJim Well then I hope you are wrong. No offense.

I agree

of course you do lol

I'm not so sure about that. Warren is out for sure, she shot herself in the foot on this one. The second choice for most of her supporters is Sanders. So as she crashes and burns,most of her people will probably head over to the Bernie camp.

@RoboGraham I'm really not a Sanders fan. However, if he gets the nomination, I will vote for him.
I intend to support whomever run against 45.

@KKGator That's good to hear. We need unity.

@RoboGraham I did the same thing last time. I voted for Clinton.
She was absolutely the most qualified candidate.

I also blame all those Sanders supporters who got their panties in a bunch, and either voted for 45 in protest, or stayed home and didn't vote at all.
They're partially responsible for 45 being installed.
If they do it again, they're even bigger assholes than they were the first time.

@KKGator Well if the democrats again nominate another neoliberal,they probably will do it again. They are deeply unhappy with the establishment.

@RoboGraham Clinton was NOT a "neo-liberal". Not even close.
Even saying that is nothing but unmitigated bullshit.
She was probably the MOST qualified presidential candidate of the last 75 years.
Given that you just got done saying, "We need unity", your statement seems pretty fucking hypocritical.
Being "deeply unhappy with the establishment" is just another excuse.

@KKGator She was a very qualified neoliberal.

That's not hypocritical. I'm not advocating for people not unifying and supporting the democratic candidate,I'm just acknowledging the fact that Sanders supporters are fed up and many probably won't vote for another centrist.

I very much believe that we need unity. Last time we unified behind the moderate selected by the DNC. it didn't work out so well. This time we need to unify behind a progressive who actually has a decent shot at beating Trump.

Yeah, seems pretty transparent to me as well. It was an attempted hit.