There has been plenty of policy discussion though, and I’ve yet to see her campaign be like “well let’s talk about Bernie Bros” instead of answering a policy question.

The day her supporters start engaging in a pattern of threats and gendered slurs like Bernie’s did after the Nevada convention, she should. But that hasn’t happened.

I can assure you that Bernie Bros are not mythical. Not every Bernie supporter is a Bernie Bro, but some are, and their misogyny and threats are no joke.

“Bernie Bro” was not the creation of her campaign. And please show me where in response to legitimate criticism her campaign pointed to the notion of Bernie Bros.

You’re acting as though I out of nowhere commented about how glad I am Bernie lost or something. I didn’t. Someone else commented about the shifting narratives around Bernie. I explained why that might be the case. There is nothing impolite about that.

I’m not familiar with her campaign having used misogyny to shield her from legitimate criticisms.

I don’t consider him anything because the media says so, I consider him to be in a position where he can only win if the super delegates overturn the will of the voters because I can do math.

How is explaining why the narrative shifted being a “sore winner”? When someone talks about how the narrative about Bernie changed are we all supposed to just remain silent even though it’s quite obvious why it happened?

I was referring to the rampant misogyny at the Nevada Democratic Convention and afterward during which the terms “cunt” and “bitch” were thrown around liberally.

Yeah, people’s perspectives tend to change once you use misrepresentations to justify your supporters’ use of misogyny and threats and then refuse to concede after you’ve lost.

Well, yeah, because lots of liberals only want to vote for people who “inspire” them so they don’t show up to do their goddamn civic duty in midterm elections.

People certainly can change and evolve and all that stuff, but that drastic of a transformation and that little regard for reproductive rights so late in life just makes me insecure. I feel the same way about Biden’s history, and didn’t want him to be VP either.

I love Sarah Polley. I love Margaret Atwood. I love this news.

Yeah, and it’s current ineffectiveness is obviously a good reason to give up on trying to make it effective ever again.

Right, but as part of the executive branch (and with all of the limitations that that can entail). And we’d have to risk her seat going to a republican in the special election.

She’d be replaced by a GOP senator for a few months until MA had a special election. Then whoever won the special election would have her seat.

I’m not a huge fan of the Warren idea. I think she’ll do more good in the senate.

Apart from the fact that the police conceded that there was no reasonable suspicion, it doesn’t matter what states “consider” to be “reasonable suspicion” in the Fourth Amendment context. It’s a matter of federal law.

The cops admitted it was an illegal stop. What’s being argued by Sotomayor is that there has to be some kind of disincentive for making illegal stops, and if we let the police use evidence that’s obtained as a result of running a search for warrants that they only run because of the illegal stop and ID, they have no…

No, when I say the cops admitted they didn’t have reasonable suspicion I mean they conceded that fact. In rendering its decision the court assumed without deciding that the stop was illegal because the police conceded that they had no reasonable suspicion.