Originally Posted by
Adam Allen
It is a problem that we have to say "we'll see", when we know that he lost! That is the problem! I know, just a few Republican politicians have just started to say he should accept the results of the election, but they should have been saying that all along! And yeah, while I imagine (and definitely hope) they will all eventually say he has to accept the results, it is dangerous and irresponsible for them to have gone along with it for so long. Given that we have already seen how there are right wing individuals and groups who are willing to resort to violence, and how there are thousands right now who are convinced there is a vast, nation-wide conspiracy working against them because Trump says so, "humoring" him this way can quite likely have literally deadly effects. Not even counting how many will still die yet due to the pandemic.
I suppose we can agree to disagree about what "beyond not losing gracefully" means, but I would offer how much of a poor sport Bernie was when he lost to Hillary, as an example of what not losing gracefully looks like. He grudgingly backed her once she was the candidate, but it was obviously a spiteful support.
And here's the thing, consider for a moment the alternate reality where Bernie beat Hillary, then beat Trump in 2016. After a divisive and tumultuous administration, where he was defeated by Romney weeks ago because somehow he managed to bungle the pandemic response as badly as Trump has, in our world? Alternate President Sanders does not try to undermine the election system so he can stay in power, not just because he is not as corrupt as Trump, but also because the Democratic leadership would not have supported his delusion for like two seconds once it was clear that he lost, and likewise, regardless of how often the two groups have been declared as just the same, I really don't see Bernie supporters standing with him as he tries to undermine the election process.
And I kind of don't see your point about "Hands Up, Don't Shoot". It's not as if any Democrats are in office based on the slogan. Who should be "tossed overboard" for it? Besides which, I think that saying it's "based on a lie" misses the point that the protests in Ferguson were not about just the shooting of Mike Brown. It was the response to systemic problems, and likewise I think the slogan has endured because those problems are not isolated to just Ferguson or St. Louis, but a problem with police nation-wide. I mean, I know you are not a fan of the term "Defund the Police" either, but I would say both are about trying to address how a good portion of the population do not feel as if the police "Protect and Serve" them.