The Clintons, however, seem to be willing to stoop to any lows in their thirst for power.
I don't think we can have a productive conversation if you think "pointing out that sexism is a thing, even within the democratic party" is "stooping to any lows."
"Stooping to any lows" is using racist dog whistles against Obama, and then using him to shield yourself from criticism 8 years later.
"Stooping to any lows" is being willing to say
anything in order to get elected.
"Stooping to any lows" is Hillary's robust relationship with Wallstreet being "negative campaigning", while flagrant lies like "Bernie wants to dismantle Medicare" aren't.
"Stooping to any lows" means adapting the mantle of conservatism to gain and hold power, and causing massive amounts of harm by pushing for and enacting conservative policies.
If you are really this bad at conflating arguments, and incapable of recognizing degree, then I agree with you, there can be no productive conversation.
No one is saying that nothing is happening, but keep on beating up that strawman.
It can't both be "just the internet" and be happening. The claim is not that there are some bad actors in the Bernie crowd. It's that there are more bad actors in the Bernie crowd than in general.
It absolutely can. The internet exists, and is happening constantly. The problem is where you say "there are more bad actors in the Bernie crowd than in general", which is unverifiable. Bernie supporters make up a disproportionate amount of the internet. Bernie supporters skew young and passionate. Further, criticism of Bernie will also disproportionatly draw shit from Bernie supporters. It's just how things work. This isn't rocket science.
We aren't hearing as much about the shit from Hillary supporters because Bernie isn't campaigning on it, there aren't as many Hillary supporters online, because for many people having more support among african americans means Hillary supporters can't be racist, and because for many people being a female candidate means her supporters can't be sexist.
a good portion of that bullshit comes from conservatives
That's a mighty quick whipsaw from "strawman" to "it's not happening."
Do you know what "portion" means? Do you deny that conservatives online are ruthlessly against Hillary? Do you even spend much time seeing this shit online? In that Intercept piece, as an example, they looked at an article (I think it may have been the article that originated the "BernieBro" meme), one of the two examples given of "BernieBros" was a
conservative, and the other was
a women who wasn't being sexist.
Part of your problem, and Hillary's problem, is that they either can't or don't differentiate between Progressives and Conservatives, because that makes the whole "Us vs Them" thing more difficult, and would require nuance.
This is why the term "BernieBot" is so rampantly used: to imply that the progressives that support Bernie are nothing but conservative sock puppets.
This is why a narrative of progressive sexism and racism is frequently used: because it is so much easier to lump progressives in with conservatives and to try and discredit them that way, than to respond to criticism. (and before you jump in to say
"B-BUT that shows there's tons of racism/sexism!", no, and I doubt you ever see how this is used/occurs. I see it frequently.)
It's why Clinton says things like Bernie "attacked planned parenthood": directly relating an offhand comment to systemic and vicious attempts by the republican party to destroy planned parenthood and subjugate women.
It's why she talks about Bernie "dismantling Obamacare", because she wants to directly lump Bernie in with republicans trying to deprive millions of people of healthcare.
Hellooo, Snelbian. Here's the "rape piece" Snelbian mentions: