Bernie Sanders surrounded by supporters. (Charles Krupa / AP)

Criticism of presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, especially by Democrats, is “misguided and hypocritical,” writes Trevor Timm at The Guardian. And “he is doing the right thing by largely ignoring it.”

On the idea that Sanders should stop criticizing his rival Hillary Clinton:

The idea that Sanders, and to a certain extent others on the left, should stop criticizing Clinton because it gives [Donald] Trump a better chance to win is ridiculous. Do people think that Clinton should get a free pass for the next six months – and potentially incentive to move to the right – on issues like Wall Street, trade, war, foreign policy and others? Just because Trump would be a disaster does not mean Clinton should be immune from criticism, nor does it mean holding her accountable will prevent her from ultimately defeating Trump.

On his supposed failure to criticize Trump:

… Sanders criticizes Trump all the time. In fact, he has continually used as strong or stronger language in doing so than Clinton has. He was one of the first prominent figures to dispense with the pleasantries about Trump and accused him of making racist comments months ago.

“It’s one thing to say that Sanders should lay off Clinton and focus on Trump,” Timm writes. “But saying ‘don’t criticize your party’ sounds like something out of Soviet Russia. If anything, progressives should be criticizing it more”:

Gee, I can’t believe Sanders isn’t enthused about the Democratic party! Let’s see: the DNC chair is a vocal Clinton supporter who tried to hide Democratic debates on the worst nights possible for exposure, the committee cut Sanders off from its important voter database, various state party representatives have unfairly given Clinton an advantage in delegate selection processes, the party has a sweetheart fundraising deal with Clinton and they recently changed their rules to accept more money from corporate lobbyists – a practice that Sanders deplores. …

You can believe in a lot of the issues that the Democratic party stands for, believe that Clinton is the best candidate to beat Trump, while also still believing that the Democratic party is corrupt institution that caters to corporate interests over the people and needs to be overhauled.

On the idea that Sanders should drop out:

It’s not politicians who should be dictating when Sanders drops out, that’s the voters’ job. And Sanders, despite finding his mathematical chance increasingly dwindling, continues to win primaries. Last night he won Oregon, for example. So it seems that voters don’t want him to drop out, only the politicians who are tied to the system he is constantly criticizing do.

And finally, on the notion that Sanders’ supporters are somehow out of line:

What’s worse is Clinton surrogates outrage over a very small minority of Sanders supporters claiming they don’t want to support Clinton in the general election. As many commentators have pointed out in response to the countless “Bernie bro” think pieces that are churned out on a regular basis, every candidate has awful supporters.

The Clinton camp also seems to have conveniently forgotten that the phenomenon known as Pumas, hardcore Clinton supporters who were so intent on not supporting Obama after the 2008 Democratic primaries that they literally named their contingent “Party Unity My Ass.” And surprise, surprise, after a few months that controversy was largely ancient history and Clinton supporters overwhelmingly voted for Obama, because the other general election candidate was much worse.

—Posted by Alexander Reed Kelly.

Your support matters…

Independent journalism is under threat and overshadowed by heavily funded mainstream media.

You can help level the playing field. Become a member.

Your tax-deductible contribution keeps us digging beneath the headlines to give you thought-provoking, investigative reporting and analysis that unearths what's really happening- without compromise.

Give today to support our courageous, independent journalists.