a future to believe in

As the Democratic debate in Iowa wrapped Tuesday night, Sen. Elizabeth Warren confronted the extended hand of Sen. Bernie Sanders. He was plainly after one of those no hard feelings, good game handshakes. We’re cool, right?

Warren (D-Mass.) wasn’t cool. It’s hard to have the presence of mind to refuse the near-mandatory displays of collegiality, but she did, folding her hands. Noli me tangere. Touch me not. CNN had cut the sound by this time, but in the pantomime she seemed to be lecturing Sanders.

Watching the Tuesday night kabuki in slo-mo, you can see that Sanders (I-Vt.), who’s notoriously irritable and suffers from cardiac issues, was riled by whatever Warren said, and by her refusal to be touched. He shook a finger at her. Then again. He seemed intent on freeing her right hand to grab it.

We all know this stock male move: Come on, baby, give me a hug; we’re still friends.

Sure, during the debate, Sanders had gaslighted Warren over whether he told her a female candidate couldn’t win the 2020 election. But now he wanted her to forgive and forget. If he could be seen shaking her hand, he might be off the hook. But... nope. Warren didn’t play along. Sanders huffed off.

When the Sanders campaign said Warren lied, and Sanders himself insisted outrageously on his feminist bona fides (in a million years), and then tried to buttonhole Warren into a handshake only to storm off when he couldn’t seal the deal — all that only enacted the sexism he was at pains to deny.

“What I saw on Elizabeth Warren’s face,” said the political scientist Jason Johnson later, “is the face of... every single person who has heard someone say something racist, offensive or sexist — you know you heard it and then you see them deny it in public.”

Warren won. She also proved she’s a master strategist. She didn’t let Sanders get away with denying he’s sexist Tuesday night. Instead, she checkmated him into proving it.

you can see that Sanders (I-Vt.), who’s notoriously irritable and suffers from cardiac issues, was riled by whatever Warren said, and by her refusal to be touched. He shook a finger at her. Then again. He seemed intent on freeing her right hand to grab it.

William Murderface wrote:

Ali ovi pokusaji da se navodna izjava pretvori u nesto jos gore - nasilje, gaslighting, govor mrznje - su urnebesni.

you can see that Sanders (I-Vt.), who’s notoriously irritable and suffers from cardiac issues, was riled by whatever Warren said, and by her refusal to be touched. He shook a finger at her. Then again. He seemed intent on freeing her right hand to grab it.

Jake Tapper: Hilary, let me start with you. The explanation that we heard from the Sanders campaign last night was basically, ‘Look, they got their wires crossed.’… What Senator Sanders was trying to say was Trump will exploit misogyny and sexism and make it difficult for a woman to win.
Hilary Rosen: Yes.
Jake Tapper: He wasn’t saying he doesn’t believe a woman will win.
Hilary Rosen: What they were saying is the little lady misunderstood. [Laughter]

dr. Labrador Špegelj wrote:U potpunosti zaslužuju Trampa, verovatno i nekog još goreg.

Mr. Moonlight wrote:

dr. Labrador Špegelj wrote:U potpunosti zaslužuju Trampa, verovatno i nekog još goreg.

slično je i nama ovde, mada me nervira takva logika

moja iskustva sa usa logikom su katastrofalna

ako slučajno nešto počne da liči na socijalno pravedno ili bar malo da se zacrveni, odmah se uključuje no commies panic mode i lansiraju par nuklearki preventivno

Djamolidine Abdoujaparov wrote:ma on verovatno nije rekao ni to--glupo bi bilo to reći kad je na prethodnim izborima žena dobila više glasova od muškarca, i to od ovog muškarca protiv koga se ide na izbore ove godine.

This is how the @nytimes originally reported the Sanders-Warren meeting in 2018: "neither Ms. Warren nor Mr. Sanders sought support from the other or tried to dissuade the other from running, said the officials familiar with the meeting."https://t.co/6WlwN4GAvW

— Eric Blanc (@_ericblanc) January 14, 2020

William Murderface wrote:Ako, ako, sve sam ubedjeniji da Berni pobedjuje, otud i ovi napadi sa svih strana.

Mr. Moonlight wrote:ništa ne menja stvari u usa, to je bar izvesno

NEW Reuters/Ipsos poll [Jan. 15-16]

Sanders 20
Biden 19
Warren 12

“The poll shows that [Sanders’] standing does not appear to have been hurt by his recent confrontation with Warren over Sanders' views of women and politics.”#PresidentSanders https://t.co/Kx1jLVcxHm

— Eric Blanc (@_ericblanc) January 17, 2020

The term “believe women” was never supposed to mean, believe everything that women say and don’t bother to investigate their claims. The simplicity of the message has irked many – including this writer – in its ability to be misused and misappropriated since its inception, but many activists have taken it up in good faith to say believing women and believing victims is only the start of a process toward justice. But in the last couple days after Warren’s campaign first made the accusation and then double-downed at Tuesday’s debate (with an unfair and obviously biased assist from debate moderator Abby Johnson), many are using it to try to shut down any debate, investigation, or dissent. When Sander’s campaign denied the accusation and supporters showed interviews going back decades of Sanders saying a woman could be president, plus evidence of Sanders’s wide support of women candidates in various campaigns, commentators remained unmoved. “Believe women.”

The language of abuse and trauma is creeping more and more into political rhetoric, as if every interaction between a man and a woman these days can be understood as a potential violation. Virginia Heffernan wrote in the Los Angeles Times, “Sanders had gaslighted Warren over whether he told her a female candidate couldn’t win the 2020 election.” Gaslighting is a term for one person lying to their romantic partner so effectively and consistently that they start to question their version of reality. Had Heffernan simply said Sanders lied, it would not have given the accusation the melodramatic pull of centuries of stories of women being tormented and abused by the men in their lives. Lying is something politicians do. Gaslighting is something misogynistic monsters do.

Material Retaliation (“Refund Warren”)
Denial and Gaslighting(It never happened)
Minimizing Harm (it happened but it wasn’t that bad)
Victim Blaming (how could she do this to him)
Himpathy (that poor man)
Invented Nefarious Motivations (what’s she really after?)

— Moira Donegan (@MoiraDonegan) January 14, 2020

zvezda je zivot wrote:

William Murderface wrote:Kakvo brukanje. Pa ni Hilari se nije ovako ponasala. CNN ne vredi komentarisati.

pa hilari je bila ozbiljan kandidat sa sirokom bazom. vorenkina baza su ona porodica iz get outa i feministkinje s tvitera tipa moira denegan