“Low information voters”.
I don’t know; I can’t stand Rogan, and I find most interviews with professional politicians (even Bernie) to be highly dull. So I haven’t listened to it.
OTOH, if Bernie had said anything that could be portrayed as offensive, I’m sure that centrist Twitter would have saturated the net with clips of it.
—
More on my take around Bernie and patriarchy:
I think that this is being used by the centre as the US equivalent to the UK’s Corbyn/antisemitism issue.
-
Does misogyny/antisemitism exist as a significant factor in US/UK politics? Absolutely.
-
Is the left immune to these bigotries? Absolutely not.
-
Are the centrists pushing these arguments disingenuous, cynical, hypocritical and acting to secure the election of candidates who are themselves significantly worse on these issues? Yup.
There are genuine and valid grounds to critique Bernie from the left on this issue and many others. Many, including myself, would like Bernie to be much more overtly left re: imperialism, immigration, white supremacy, etc.
But the only honest and consistent way to do that is by actually being to his left; trying to use those arguments while also supporting an establishment candidate does not hold water.
The answer is absolutely not to attempt to silence discussion of patriarchy/antisemitism/etc. But giving free reign to every centrist attempt to cynically weaponise disingenuous leftist critique isn’t the answer, either.
I don’t have a good solution here.
Anyone wanna take bets on the likelihood of HRC offering herself as a “unity” candidate during a brokered convention?
Framing and emphasis.
Why do they assume the protesters were Vandals, and why do they refuse to capitalize Vandal?
(I realise that the initial tweet is probably fiction. Not the point)
— Langston Hughes