The myth isn’t that Bernie has some supporters whose enthusiasm is at odds with what’s best for the country (not the fabled Bros but the “Bernie or Bust” group, a philosophy which Susan Sarandon espoused when she claimed that it would be better to vote for Trump than for Clinton), but that Sanders himself is somehow responsible for this misguided approach. A number of female Clinton supporters called themselves PUMA’s (“Party Unity My Ass”) in rejecting Obama’s primary victory in 2008. Clinton did not encourage or support the PUMA’s, and threw her support behind Obama, just as Sanders did with Clinton in 2016.

I also think it’s also unfair to criticize Warren for stepping into the ring and not allowing Sanders to be the sole standard bearer for his anti-Wall Street Populism. Warren sat out the 2016 primary (other than a previously filmed interview in which she criticized Clinton for opposing banking reform).

And anyone who, like Megan Day in the tweet you quote (courtesy of Sady Doyle by way of opposition), complains that Warren should not have run against Sanders mirrors the complaint by Clinton supporters in 2015 that Sanders should not have run against Clinton. (By the way, I think Sady Doyle’s riposte is accurate, but that’s another issue; she’s not citing sexism by Sanders incidentally but the use of an old, tired form of attack).

The endorsement ad by Ilhan Omar is, I think, not unfair, but her constant refrain of “Bernie is the only candidate who…” ignores similarities between Sanders and other candidates, as well as a shared party ideal. If Sanders is the only candidate who can save America (and I know Omar didn’t say this point blank), then if he loses the nomination, we’re left with Bernie or Bust again. Omar is under no obligation to praise the candidates she’s not endorsing, but the truth is that we would be well served by any of several of the nominees, and that while one particular candidate may be the best to lead the country forward, he or she is not the only one capable of doing the job.