BREAKING : Bernie Sanders

[boomerbust]

Will consider running for President. That is all.

[Kelvin Mace]

1. Source?

[WowSeriously]

87. The horse's mouth. Today. On The Thom Hartmann Show.

It would be glorious. Unfortunately, if he runs as an Independent, he will have no public platform because the Whoreporate Media only publicized Republicans and Democrats during campaign season and then only Republicans between campaign season. Although as an older white male he has the minimum requirements to appear on the Sunday bobble head shows.

[bvar22]

115. I was watching Brunch with Bernie when he said it.

I would LOVE to cast THAT vote!

Man, to actually be voting FOR someone with a DEMOCRATIC FDR style VISION for America instead of the "least of the worst."



However, having watched it on Thom Hartmann,
I don't believe he was serious.

[WowSeriously]

170. Well, we can always dream!

[fredamae]

251. I heard him also!

Getting the Platform, itself is priceless. I'd love to hear him in primary debates. That's where a good bit of "rubber could hit the road"

[WowSeriously]

255. It would be awesome if he ran as a Democrat

Simply to ensure he is on stage for all the primary debates so he could be heard. Otherwise the Whoreporate Media will silence him.

[fredamae]

257. Yes, it would!

and you're right---our lovely "fair and balanced news" --didn't think about that....

[boomerbust]

2. Bernie Sanders on the Thom Hartman Show

[cilla4progress]

3. He should - and then throw his support to the Dem

Move the Dem candidate left, but at the last minute, don't split the vote (I'm talking to you, Ralph Nader)...

[Le Taz Hot]

27. Can you honestly see Hillary moving left of anything?

I don't.

[Whisp]

45. Nope. Not a chance.

Whatever left moves that were done, she will undo.

The Clintons have never been left, I don't know how they get people believing that.

[libdem4life]

72. Absolutely. She's not an ideologue or a populist or she wouldn't be where she is. She is pragmatic

and can turn on a dime, which is what most love to hate about her. She also does not want any of her liberal voters ... Democrat or Independent ... those who, like me, refuse to stay home on election day ... running off with Bernie.

But if there are votes and influence and she feels it will help her attain the White House, you can take it to the political bank. She needs around 50 or 60 million voters, so has to hold multiple political positions/groups.

The only bad news I see here is that it had to be an Independent, which will provide no Primary challenge. Nor will it likely entice Warren into the political national muck because it is a tacky and iffy muck. Also, she WILL NOT challenge another woman, even if she didn't have like probably the most important job in the country right now of reining in the bankers. Ironically, it's the very industry that, like it or not, she'd have to suddenly switch gears on .... given they wield so much political power and funding in both parties ... and be on the receiving end. That would kind of make her look like a fool, if you really think about it. And that's one thing she's not.

But maybe there's a miracle Progressive out there somewhere biding his/her time...kind of like Jeb Bush is doing with the Republicans...and if so, now is the time...not 2014...now. That's where the energy needs to go.

Because right now the question is not "If not Hillary, who? But, "Do we want to win or lose the next 4-8 years?" And if not, 2013 is not "too early" to discuss, encourage, go forth and recruit...voters or potential, viable candidates.

On edit: Russia Times?????

[Le Taz Hot]

75. Well, I'm glad you like her.

There are problems down the road that of which her and her corporate sponsors seem to be unaware. Personally, I'm focusing on 2014 for the moment.

[libdem4life]

84. I'm on record as not being a fan. But that doesn't mean I'm blind to her position or the abject

lack of a significant alternative. Nor will I sit at home on election day and join the bandwagon that would let the Republicans have their way, receive all the evil corporate cash, and, at the very least, nominate 2 SCOTUS.

Republicans are eating this anti-Hillary soapbox chatter up because she terrifies them and they know she has a better chance of winning than any of their "A" Team, no matter who happens to be on it from time to time. Sometimes hard to understand some Democrats. But I still have faith.

And to make it worse, now looks like we Liberals have to deal with Bernie Sanders...a wonderful man whose politics I adore and wish to high heaven there was a Democrat anywhere near him on the political scale to run. See, thing is, he doesn't need to raise a billion dollars. The pres will be courting him more and more, as they should. He's got nothing to lose and everything to gain and I think/hope he will help to shift her to the left. Because there are more of us than make it known because we've been so long neglected, and he would give liberal politics a true hearing in the press of which we have nothing right now, make liberal arguments, and a voice other than ... No to Hillary.

And if it has to be an Independent, sobeit. Still, not a Democrat in sight.

[Le Taz Hot]

85. And I think Hillary's support is a mile wide and an inch deep.

She's got SO many negatives going in that it gives Christie a real chance to win the presidency. The ONLY appeal she has is with the Party Faithful and that won't be enough to carry her to the White House.

I don't agree with the meme that progressives sit out elections. We're the activists and that's not our M.O. We might vote third party but sitting it out is not an option.

Now, if the Democratic Party would like to start moving to the Left, that's another thing. But we both know that's not going to happen and Hillary is too beholden to her corporate masters to make any moves against what she's been ordered to do -- look out for THEIR interests. There's nothing, NOTHING about the woman that I like and there's NOTHING that will make me vote for her. Worry not, I'm in California and there's no chance of California going Republican. Now, if Bernie runs third party it's going to be a whole new ballgame.

Frankly, I think if he does run he's getting into it just to bring focus to the Left's concerns -- something the Establishment Dems haven't done since Bill Clinton. That's going to come up and bite them in the ass in 2016, IMO as the progressives are fed up with their 1% Establishment candidates.

[bvar22]

119. Speaking of negatives,

this one simple video is enough to torpedo her run for the Presidency:

[blue14u]

174. Thank you for sharing

this video.. I'm by far jumping up and down for Hillary, and it would be a stretch

for me to do much more than exercise my right to vote if she is the Democratic

candidate. I would run to the polls to vote for Bernie or Liz Warren though!!!

Bring it on Bernie!!!

DU might delete me come Presidential campaign season... I hate that, because I spend hours here, and enjoy every minute, but I want a left wing Democrat and if one runs, then I guess they

must do what they must to me. I will vote for who I want to vote for, not who someone tells me to vote for...

[MissDeeds]

212. +1000

Agree on all counts. Bernie Sanders is more Democrat than many in DC who claim to be Democrats. If DU bans those of us who support him, so be it. The well being of this country is more important than any website, forum, or message board will ever be.

[blue14u]

264. Yes, and hopefully

the DU community will not want to loose us, or our votes

in other races where Democrat's are running..

I VOTE!!! Alway's !!

[sabrina 1]

249. I feel t he same way. People have had enough of having candidates appointed, over three years

before the election too. As if there is only one person in the country who has the right to run.

Up to now most Progressives voted AGAINST the Republican. And didn't get much in return.


If either Bernie or Warren ran it would give people something to vote FOR at last. And the political pundits might be surprised at the way things turn out.

The country is vastly different now than it was in 2008 in terms of the electorate.

The younger generation eg, is much more informed and not interested in continuing the status quo which has pretty much destroyed their future.

Unions warned before the last election that they were not at all happy with the representation they were getting from the party they have been so loyal to and formed a coalition with other Progressive Orgs, including SS advocacy groups, to make their feelings known regarding continuing loyalty and funding if the trend that is so anti-labor continues.

A Bernie candidacy would be the answer for a whole lot of people who are sick of the status quo and the same candidates over and over again.

[blue14u]

263. Yes Sabrina 1.. we do

Last edited Mon Nov 18, 2013, 03:36 PM - Edit history (1)

have other choices and can win with a Bernie or Warren ticket.

The whole HRC is the only way? ... I'm just not buying into it..

The centrist, imo, is not a real Democrat!

[LuvNewcastle]

205. Love the video, bvar, thanks!

[socialist_n_TN]

135. Yep, your last paragraph, especially the first sentence is.......

an extremely valid reason to run. Sometimes you don't run to win, you run to get a hearing for your views.

[libdem4life]

155. You make good points. But I see that Hillary's poll numbers are consistent and she does fall under

The Big Tent...especially if she's the only one. Everyone knows Hillary's baggage, for decades ad nauseum, but her stint as Senator and SOS have gone a long way to not only redeeming her past, but significantly increasing her political credentials. Don't think the public much cares anymore, aside from some RWers still smarting from her continual political ascent in spite of their best efforts.

Christie, OTOH, has not been nationally vetted and there are definite hints that should he be the candidate, they will out. A New Jersey lifelong politician...there have to be some big ones. A national election is definitely not the place to have to respond and re-purpose old shenanigans.

I think it's going to be Jeb...and he will likely be drafted. He has some significant baggage, few don't, but the Bush organization can be up and running in no time, once needed. GWB is unlikely to be an issue because it's been a long time and well known Jeb is the "smart one". Still, Ugh to that.

I lived in California for almost 50 years, and one can get a bit jaded. I have family in Very Red States, both Liberals and RWers, and it's almost like different countries. Kind of like living in rural Northeast or central California.

As to the next 8 years...I have a son who is a Millennial. This is a crucial time in history, I believe. We need job programs for civilians other than the going into the military ... job programs for our newest crop of veterans, the ones who actually made it back alive (made possible by an idiotic Repub who needed to get revenge for "his Daddy&quot ...protected women's rights (those cretins are just waiting in the wings with their vaginal wands)...continued funding of education and special programs, already taking hits right and left...adult conversations about and with our allies and foes other than some Macho Quick Draw McGraw action...reversal of the Food Stamp cut insanity and increased funding...continued progress and enforcement of the ACA (shutting up the Nononono Socialism-Bad Group)...protection and strengthening of Medicare and Social Security (another "licking their chops" issue)...No more private prisons that require life sentences for a few pot plants just to keep them full...sane federal court judge and SCOTUS nominations ... et al. These are on their Chopping Block and would begin immediately to dismantle or severely cripple any or all.

Bernie Sanders as a candidate is great news. I absolutely agree that he, unlike any Left Democrats who have been effectively mothballed for a very long time, can begin to speak to Liberalism in a way no other could do. Unfortunately, a large part of his appeal is that he is not a threat to anyone, as he's an Independent and a thoughful elder statesman not really running. So he can get away with hailing from the very Bluest and Northernmost of the Northeast.

For once, someone speaks for me and probably for a lot more than we know, once they have a coherent message to which to listen. Many don't even knew what Liberalism is...or what it isn't...the evil path to another Marx and Lenin and our kids working in the coal mines for the Party Boss. I'm going to call his office and encourage him to continue, also thanking him that he is the ONLY Senator willing to put his name and reputation on the Progressive Caucus. The Republicans have a number of Senators signed on, mostly the Tea Party ones.

But Bernie will not be in our Primary, nor can he "convert". To me, what I think about Hillary personally pales in comparison, as I've thought my way through it. There are pretty much just two options to those of us who likely don't identify politically anywhere near the more Centrist positions. I've chosen to "hold my nose" before and will do it again, if necessary. Frankly, I hope it's not and there is time left for some other options, but not much.

About the 1%...that sticks in my modest, middle class, grass roots craw, as well. But when I consider the option...just give all of the "corporate money" to the Republicans ... and let them have an 8 year go at the above list, can't do it. Or, we could have a miracle and find a Progressive with lots of money because without corporate funding they are going to need it, except that would put them in the 1% and, thus, ineligible.

Wish we had better choices...and solutions. But wishing doesn't make it so.

[Le Taz Hot]

179. Which is all a very long-winded way of saying

"she's electable." People have to decide whether or not they're going to, once again, vote for another corporate sell-out or not. Now, if the Democratic Party wants to start representing me again, that's great. If not, I vote with my feet.

[libdem4life]

183. Sadly, and I truly mean that and it could change, but it seems logical. The candidate needs to raise

a billion dollars and get 50-60 million people to vote for them. It's mindboggling, but I believe that is why the two party system/electoral college leads to Center...either leaning left or right. In parliamentary systems, they do similarly, but they get together kind of like the populist groups as coalitions to do the same exact thing.

Out of those millions, a good portion have to "hold their noses" to vote. It's statistics. But millions more stay home disillusioned at the system and the lack of the Perfect Candidate, which incidentally makes each of the votes of those who did so, even more statistically relevant.

I have to cling to the term..pragmatic...so I choose the other option...to vote, regardless.

[juajen]

236. I'm sure the republicans will appreciate that. NT

[KoKo]

223. +1

[BlancheSplanchnik]

141. I really like how you put that.

I would never be able to articulate it like you, but I think you're right on it. I very much agree.

Do NOT want a split vote problem. The perfect storm the pukes got......ugh. We The WORLD does not need that.

I'm thinking of her diplomatic accomplishments as SOS.

AND, I think she would galvanize a LOT of women. She would stir up the muck of sexism in the US, much like PBO has stirred up the muck of racism.

Wait a minute: backtrack that. I mean, they don't do the stirring. The dickheads out there do it.
And blame the targets.

Fortunately, PBO and Hillary both have strong track records of staying strong in the face of such hate.

[blue14u]

173. Bernie could do what

many politicians do and put a "D" behind his name..

I love the ideal of Bernie running and bringing a left agenda..

I would vote for him.. We need someone to the left, and we need

someone to run to the left and if Hillary won't go left

then so be it!!!

[sabrina 1]

177. She lost the election, did you forget? Progressives went for the person who had not voted

for the Iraq war and who sounded very progressive on many issues, such as Mandated Insurance eg, and on not setting up Committees to 'do an end run around the Constitution' as he said about a possible Committee on the Deficit. Among other things. So clearly the public rejected the Centrist and went for what they viewed as the not Pragmatic Progressive.

Of course things didn't quite work the way the voters had hoped and her opponent ended up taking her positions on those and other issues.

But the public clearly choose Progressivism over 'pragmatism'. So I'm not sure what you mean by 'she would be where she is now'. That's true, if she not turned to be such a supporter of Bush's wars eg and had not prevaricated on the question of torture, and had not supported Mandated Ins, so you're right, if wouldn't be where she is now IF she had been a Progressive rather than a Centrist. Same thing is going to happen again if she runs.

[libdem4life]

178. She lost to Obama, yes. I wasn't as into then as I am now, but neither one of them seemed

Progressive/Liberal at all to me. They were chewing each other up. I think that's why I didn't pay a lot of attention because I would vote for the primary winner, as I always do. Neither of them had a lot of political history...or baggage.

She's definitely a Left-leaning Centrist (which is pragmatic) and she'll take the big money, which they all must do if they are serious, and even if a Progressive does emerge, which I doubt based on the same money issue, she's still positioned to be the Primary winner.

The finances and party politics are very different now. There is no current war issue, the party is behind her because they want to win, and Bill is just yammering now, which beats what he was up to before.

She got elected as a New York Senator and has been SOS since then. There isn't a potential candidate with access/ability to raise the necessary billion dollars. And for many reasons, but Elizabeth Warren who is definitely a Populist, I'll bet money on it, will not leave her current work to take on another woman candidate and position herself in what would surely be a Primary rerun bloodletting a la 2008.

Populists don't win national elections, but they do affect them. Like Bernie Sanders, whom I adore, will be able to flesh out The Liberal while enhancing his own national political persona, and I also welcome it, but don't see him as a spoiler/Nader. She'll lean as far Progressive as they make her lean, but as you aptly note, in office it's another story. Somehow, she has to get around 50-60 million people to ultimately vote for her, and to do that, she's got to do the "pragmatic" thing.

[Ikonoklast]

211. Hillary makes four right turns and gets back right where she started from before turning left once.

But...this time she'll be different!

[kenny blankenship]

222. Sure- like Obama. And then promptly moving to the right of Reagan

Last edited Sat Nov 16, 2013, 01:46 PM - Edit history (1)

once elected, again, like Obama.

Fools 'em every time!

[Comrade Grumpy]

28. If we want better policy, the Dem should throw his/her support to Bernie.

[enlightenment]

34. This! ^^^

[Maedhros]

35. Hear, Hear! [n/t]

[liberal_at_heart]

38. well said!

[daleanime]

44. +1

[zeemike]

89. Or draft him into the Democratic race...

I see no reason why not...other than the DLC won't like it.
I mean shit, the former GOP Governor of Florida is running as a Dem...

[99Forever]

102. Yep.

Or run Bernie on the ticket with Warren.

[idwiyo]

103. +1

[L0oniX]

116. I'll be interested to find out what the DU admins think about this...

and what will happen to those who will support Bernie over the Dem candidate. My guess is that DU is going to lose (expel) a lot of members if Bernie runs.

[RC]

138. And then DU will move even farther to the Right in the process.

We haven't been able to vote for a real Liberal for President, since Carter, or maybe even Eisenhower. Nixon is even a flaming Progressive compared to the current crop of Democrats in Congress.
DU has to get away from the (D) = Centralist/Liberal, before DU falls off the Right side cliff.

[juajen]

237. This Board does not interfere with opinions expressed unless the

primary is over, and then, we support the nominee. It is called the Democratic Underground, you know. Don't take on the owners of this forum unless you want to be tarred with a republican brush. They are inherently fair, but, what is, is. We are democrats first and foremost. You know the adage, "United we Stand, Divided we fall." This board doesn't fall. However, you can discuss all you want. Of course, I'm saying this, not the Board. Skinner?

BTW, I love Bernie also. I think only good things can come from him coming out of the woodwork. He is a marvelous man, if not electable. I do believe he can exert some well needed influence, however. Go, Bernie!

[RC]

254. It is not the owners, it is some of their followers that are the problem here.

I am not taking on the owners. Not at all. It is the Conservative "Liberals" I have a problem with. Those that think having a (D) is all that is necessary to be a real Democrat.
For example, you love Bernie, but have a Hillary avatar? Kinda incongruous, is it not?
Why do you think Burnie came out of the woodwork in the first place? Too many Right of Center Democrats helping the Republicans move this country even farther to the Right. Too many Democrats doing too little to stopping make this country a police state. Too many Democrats pushing for more and extended wars (Blame the MIC bribery for this one).

[brooklynite]

258. Why then does Bernie help elect the Right of Center Democrats?

Know where I met Bernie? At a DSCC retreat for big bucks (read: 1%ers) donors....working to get folks like Joe Manchin, Bob Casey and Diane Feinstein re-elected. I guess the fight for "real" liberals only goes so far?

[RC]

271. Could it be they are reasonably honest and that they have

not been bought off by the banksters and Wall Street? There is more to a persons politics than that (D) or (R), that many here on DU think is the be-all, end-all, deciding factor in supporting someone.

[brooklynite]

272. I'll let you put that question to the DU community, and see what kind of reply you get.

[RC]

273. I already know what kind of replies I would get from some.

That was the basis of my post in the first place. There are Big Tent advocates here that would welcome any kind of (D), no matter their politics, just for a supposed majority in Congress. Even though they voted with the Republicans, too often? People like Joe Lieberman, Max Baucus, Ben Nelson, and Joe Manchin, even though they take Conservative positions on important legislation? That is just wrong. We've all seen how well that works.
Democrats need to be and were historicity, Center and Left of Center. Liberal, Progressive. Not the Right of Center, conservitive, DLC, 3rd Way, Blue Dog, New Democrat, that we have running the Democratic show now. All the while dragging the country evermore Rightward.

[ancianita]

171. One's politics can be Democratic in spirit without being a Democrat. I like to think that Sanders is

an Independent in name only, but if he's truly of an independent spirit, no one here can argue that his spirit -- and the policies that it stands for -- isn't part and parcel of the way Democrats have historically believed as a party. A Democrat by any other name is still a Democrat. Just examine which party his votes align with most.

[840high]

148. Yes. Yes. Yes!

[MissDeeds]

213. Spot on

[idwiyo]

33. Screw that, he should run as Dem if that is the only way for him to get a chance to win.

[totodeinhere]

167. Or he could run as a Democrat. That would make more sense than trying a third party candidacy. n/t

[Scootaloo]

189. "Move the Dem candidate left"

...Until primaries are over.

I'd rather have a candidate who's actually on the left, rather than one who visits briefly when courting votes in a primary.

Wild idea, I know.

[juajen]

240. As for me, I just want one who can win. That's the name of the game.

[Scootaloo]

247. I've been around long enough to know that a D next to the name is no assurance of quality

I will take a long-shot liberal, over a Republican registered as Democrat, any day.

[dotymed]

224. NO.

IF he runs, he WILL win IF the vote actually counts in America.

[Greybnk48]

4. Good!

He can participate in every debate to keep the other candidates honest and hold their feet to the fire.

[NightWatcher]

6. he wouldn't be allowed/invited to any of the debates

[liberal_at_heart]

9. Yep. That's the way a corrupt two party system works. It would take a grass roots effort, but hey

we've done that before.

[Greybnk48]

11. What qualifies a candidate to be "invited" to debates?

I know Dennis Kucinich was kicked to the curb, but Bernie is a very popular Senator.

[cali]

13. Bernie is not a democrat.

[Greybnk48]

47. Doesn't he caucus with the Dems?

I know he's officially a Socialist/Independent, but they would pull that on him I would hope.

[stevenleser]

56. Has nothing to do with "they". He declares himself a Democrat or he doesn't

If you are a democrat running for any office and there are more than one Democrats vying in the same year, there is a contested primary. If only one of the folks running for that position is a Democrat, that person gets the Democratic nomination

[dreamnightwind]

109. General election debates

He wouldn't be allowed in the primary debates, unless he runs as a Dem, but he'd have a chance (I don't know how good of one) to get into the general election debates.

[Greybnk48]

217. I used the word "they" to reference someone

else's differentiation in another response between "establishment" Dems and the more liberal faction of the Dem party, i.e., Warren, S. Brown, Pelosi, Boxer, and for me, the older crowd--the Kennedys. I'm not a fan of the move to the center because I grew up in a much different atmosphere.

Also, thanks for explaining Steven. I see I was mixing up the primary contest and debates with subsequent debates among candidates nominated by each party. Sorry about that.

[frazzled]

18. Dennis Kucinich participated in EVERY debate

both times he ran. What does getting "kicked to the curb" mean?

PS: Dennis was a Democrat. Bernie is not, or at least doesn't affiliate himself as one at the moment. He could change, and then he could stand on the sidewalk.

[Greybnk48]

37. Wasn't he sort of frozen out of the discussion

or is my memory not serving me well here? I may have confused Kucinich with someone else.

[dreamnightwind]

110. I clearly remember

he was their go-to guy for the flying saucer question. That's our MSM and how they marginalize any non-mainstream voices.

[bvar22]

134. I will never forgive Potato Head for that assassination.

Kucinich was the ONLY candidate on the platform offering anything significantly different in content and policy,
and instead of giving him an opportunity to talk about POLICY,
Russert skunked him with a UFO question.


I hope little Timmy Russert is burning in hell for that.

Control of the presidential debates has been a ground of struggle for more than two decades. The role was filled by the nonpartisan League of Women Voters (LWV) civic organization in 1976, 1980 and 1984. In 1987, the LWV withdrew from debate sponsorship, in protest of the major party candidates attempting to dictate nearly every aspect of how the debates were conducted. On October 2, 1988, the LWV's 14 trustees voted unanimously to pull out of the debates, and on October 3 they issued a press release:

[font size=3] "The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.[/font]

Tim Russert's "performance" on the night of that debate only validates the
League of Women Voters decision to withdraw sponsorship and hosting of the debates.

BOTH Political Parties are guilty of perpetrating "a fraud on the American Voter",
and Russert was a willing puppet for them.

[dreamnightwind]

147. Yes, how about the take-out of Jerry Brown too?

Great post. Never forget.

Another one I'll never forget is the 1992 candidacy of CA Gov. Jerry Brown, which was actually gaining a lot of momentum. He was, IIRC, ahead of the Big Dog in the early Dem primaries, using his 1-800 number to collect small campaign donations for his "we the people" campaign.

That particular situation was handled by a hit-piece on Ted Koppel's Nightline, given much hype and fanfare, where they presented allegations that Brown had once been in attendance at a party where some people said marijuana had been used. Not used by Brown, just that someone(s) at the party had used it. Unbelievable. And of course it got played up big, doing a lot of damage. There was some other issue at the time that also hurt Brown (I forget), but the Nightline piece was for me an eye-opening as to how the establishment handles candidates that don't follow the acceptable agenda.

By the way, Jerry Brown is someone else I would support, though he is now pretty old (75). Doing a pretty good job here in California.

[juajen]

239. Yes, he is; and, I would love to see Gavin Newsome nationally!

[dreamnightwind]

248. Meh on Newsome

socially liberal, wall st. corporate type is how he always seemed to me. could be worse, could be better.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

256. This San Franciscan -

wouldn't piss on Newsom if he were on fire. Under his leadership SF has become a town for Tuppies and the 1%. He is ALL about Big Business and cares not a whit for working families or the poor. The single good thing he did during both terms was start the gay marriage ball rolling -- the rest was pure shite.

[Enthusiast]

199. +1

[Greybnk48]

215. Yes. Made to look like a crackpot.

I felt it was because he was a left of center liberal, so he was being mocked.

Funny how the far, far right of center are only just starting to be treated that way, and people are walking on eggshells to do it. Rachel just showed that Dubya's foreign policy revolved around the idea of a Biblical "end of times" FFS. But left of center is whack-a-doodle, riiiight.

[dreamnightwind]

250. Yep, anything that might threaten the bottom line

of the 1% = crackpot. Any RW crazy = edgy, mavericky, bold.

[Cleita]

81. He did not participate in every debate, especially the final

ones where the PTBs decided he shouldn't. Amy Goodman even had him on her show to answer the debate questions as he would have had been allowed to be on the stage.

[liberal_at_heart]

83. I love Amy Goodman. She is fantastic.

[2naSalit]

66. Here's the criteria for the 2012 debates

According to the Commission for Presidential Debates who organize such events:

Vice President Biden and Rep. Paul Ryan invited to CPD's debates

Washington, D.C. (September 21, 2012) - The non-partisan, non-profit Commission on Presidential Debates ("CPD&quot announced today that it has applied its Nonpartisan Candidate Selection Criteria for 2012 General Election Debate participation to determine eligibility to participate in the presidential debate to take place at the University of Denver in Denver, Colorado on October 3 and the vice-presidential debate to take place on October 11 at Centre College in Danville, Kentucky.

Pursuant to the criteria, which were publicly announced on October 31, 2011, those candidates qualify for debate participation who (1) are constitutionally eligible to hold the office of President of the United States; (2) have achieved ballot access in a sufficient number of states to win a theoretical Electoral College majority in the general election; and (3) have demonstrated a level of support of at least 15 percent of the national electorate, as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations' most recent publicly-reported results.

The Board of Directors of the CPD convened today to apply the criteria with the assistance of the Editor-In-Chief of the Gallup Polling Organization, Dr. Frank Newport. Of the declared candidates, President Barack Obama and Governor Romney were found to have satisfied all three criteria. Accordingly, President Obama and his running mate, Vice President Joe Biden, and Governor Mitt Romney and his running mate, Representative Paul Ryan, qualify to participate in the October 3 presidential debate and the Oct. 11 vice-presidential debate, respectively. No other candidates satisfied the criteria for inclusion in the October 3 and October 11 debates.

The CPD has successfully sponsored the presidential and vice presidential general election debates since 1988. The CPD's planning for the 2012 debates has extended over a period of years and has drawn upon the CPD's now-extensive experience in sponsoring general election debates. On October 31, 2011, the CPD announced the four dates and locations for this year's debates, and on August 13, 2012, the CPD announced the four journalists who will moderate those debates: Jim Lehrer, Martha Raddatz, Candy Crowley and Bob Schieffer. The CPD is firmly committed to providing, in a professional and nonpartisan manner, debates in 2012 that will allow the American public to view the leading presidential and vice presidential candidates discuss the issues facing the country.

The candidates who have qualified to participate today previously have committed to participate in the debates sponsored by the CPD.

Guess it changes with each election to some degree.

[juajen]

238. Dennis was in some debates, but eventually, the field is narrowed.

[frazzled]

15. That's not corruption ...

Party primaries are for members of a political party to choose the candidate that party will nominate under it's banner and platform. It kind of makes sense that you have to be running as a member of that party in order to participate in its primary contests or debates.

Now, if he wishes to run as an Independent (or Socialist) in the general election, he can certainly participate in the presidential debates, as long as he is showing a certain amount of support in the polls--can't remember what that number is: you do the google, I'm busy.

[liberal_at_heart]

20. then why don't the Independents get a primary debate? Because the two parties have all the power

and wouldn't allow it. Bernie Sanders deserves to have his ideas heard on a national stage and before the general election. By the general election the media has already told us who to vote for.

[woo me with science]

26. +1000000

The system has been deliberately rigged to favor the two corporate parties. That is why Ron Paul ran as a Republican.

Perot's run scared the two corporate parties, and right afterward they tightened control of the process to make sure that would not happen again. The League of Women voters resigned from hosting Presidential debates in protest of their manipulation of debate rules and formats.

We have a system that is shamelessly rigged.

[druidity33]

79. shamelessly rigged is right...

My disillusionment with the US political process began when i first heard about the LOWV decision to no longer sponsor the debates and the collusion between the 2 parties to maintain a 'dialogue' only. I'm still a registered D, but i've been wondering whether there's any benefit to changing to an I, regardless of whether i continue to consistently vote for D's. I'm barely scraping by and my enthusiasm for politics in a National way has been waning with each disappointment. So far i'm still happy with my new Senator (The bestest! Elizabeth Warren), but as jaded as i am, lately i just expect her to really disappoint me soon enough with some really important vote.

gah... sorry, had a bad day, feeling moody and cynical... hope i'm wrong.

[rhett o rick]

90. I hear you. If it turns out the Sen Warren is not corruptible, she will probably get drunk, take

some druggs and run her Mercedes into a tree. Small plane crashes is so last decade.

[dreamnightwind]

114. I don't see any advantage to registering I

Unless there's an independent party primary you're wanting to participate in. As it is, you get to try, along with many others of us, to bring the Dems back to their rightful selves by voting in the Dem primary.

I share your disillusionment with where Dems are now, but see little value in changing registration. It's our party, not the corporations', and we need to fight to take it back.

You can of course vote for whoever you want in the general election, though you won't be allowed to advocate for a non-Dem candidate here on DU, unless they change the rules.

[jeff47]

52. They do get a primary debate.

The minor parties have presidential primary debates every 4 years. You just don't hear about them because you don't belong to one of those parties, and the news does not cover them because so few people do belong.

Someone running as an independent would not have a primary debate, because there would be no primary election. They'd be going straight to the general election.

[enlightenment]

53. There is an Independent Party (far right whacks).

Most voters who are not affiliated with a party are "unaffiliated" rather than "independent". The official name of the party is American Independent or Independent American (can't recall) Party, but it gets shortened to "Independent Party" a lot. I think there is also a liberal end Independent Party as well - or there used to be one.

When I first registered to vote as a teen, I registered as an Independent - i.e., not a member of a party. About ten years later I got a notice from my state, informing me that I would be "unaffiliated" because there were political parties using the word Independent in their name.

No skin off my nose - I've been unaffiliated since then, regardless of where I live - but that's why "Independents" don't get a primary debate. They are not a party. Unaffiliated voters run the spectrum of political philosophy; if I had to pick something close to my perspective, it would be Socialist - but I have a sibling who is also unaffiliated who would be somewhere on the opposite end (needless to say, we don't discuss politics much).

[liberal_at_heart]

58. yeah, I can see that. We actually have a lot of parties. None of which get any attention because

the two parties have all the power. But we do actually have a lot of different parties that are not Independent. Not all Independents are far right whacks though as proven by Bernie Sanders.

[enlightenment]

80. Well, yes.

I don't see myself as a far-right whack either. I am not a fan of the de facto two party system in the US, but American's are nothing if not brand loyal.

[stevenleser]

54. Debate whom? He has decided to not be part of a party

If you decide as a worker in a career field where union membership is possible to not be part of a union, you don't get union benefits.

Primaries are about who get to represent a party in an election. He has decided not to be part of a party. He could schedule debates with anyone he wanted.

[truedelphi]

77. Thanks for the dis-information, Steven.

Over 40% of all American voters no longer consider themselves to be loyalists to either the Democratic or the Republican party.

And the reason for that, I suspect, is how both parties allow their leadership personnel to implement objectives favored by the One Percent.

When you disenfranchise Bernie Sanders from the debate process, you disenfranchise 40% of all Americans. And you further the cause of the One Percent.

[NYC Liberal]

126. It's not about "disenfranchising". Do Republicans get to participate in Democratic primary debates?

No. Primary debates are about selecting a party's nominee.

Now, if you want to raise an issue with the media not covering third-party primaries and their debates, that's an entirely different discussion. If you want to raise an issue with third-party candidates not being allowed into the general election debates, that's also anther discussion.

[zeemike]

96. Gee, and here I was thinking it was all about the will of the people.

But I suppose all that is a delusion....party rules...

[bvar22]

123. We haven't had a legitimate Presidential Debate ....

..since the League of Women Voters stopped hosting them.

Control of the presidential debates has been a ground of struggle for more than two decades. The role was filled by the nonpartisan League of Women Voters (LWV) civic organization in 1976, 1980 and 1984. In 1987, the LWV withdrew from debate sponsorship, in protest of the major party candidates attempting to dictate nearly every aspect of how the debates were conducted. On October 2, 1988, the LWV's 14 trustees voted unanimously to pull out of the debates, and on October 3 they issued a press release:

[font size=3] "The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public.[/font]

Kudos to the League of Women Voters for showing something missing from the shams of both Political parties every 4 years....INTEGRITY!

[zeemike]

139. That statement gives me increasing respect for TWV.

They did not mince their words at all...good for them...too bad the fraud is perpetuated by the media.

[truedelphi]

69. A quote JFk made with remarks as to how in America, people deserve to speak and hear the truth

as that is the hallmark of democracy -that quote comes to mind.

Since Nine Eleven, and the kleptocracy and oligarchy that the event has firmly established, it is now far more important to the Puppet Masters that we citizens merely obey and conform to whatever fears and anxiety they are cooking up for us -- and we are required to conform with total obedience.

No one needs a third party in an oligarchy. After all, the purpose of open debates is free exchange of information and ideas, so citizens can put together the best ideas for running the nation, and select a candidate for office based on those ideas. .

But in an oligarchy like we have currently, there is no need for exchange of information, or ideas or for putting together a decent plan on new ways to put the nation in order. In an oligarchy, there is only one thing that is important and that is in capturing the wealth of the nation for the .17% of the top One Percent.

So at this point in our history, what matters is having as few political deviations as possible. The fact that the Republican and Democratic Party leadership both support Endless wars, rule of law written by bankers and Big Industry, continual siphoning of nation's wealth to the MIC/Surveillance state etc, means that eliminating discussion of information and ideas is far more important than having a real debate and a real exchange of ideas.

[h2][font color=red]

ONE BIG MONEY PARTY UBER ALLES!!

[/h2][/font color=red]

[Gore1FL]

73. They could have a primary debate. They have conventions.

No media really covers them, though. They are not realistic choices because of the way our system is set up.

[liberal_at_heart]

76. "the way our system is set up." Exactly.

Our system is set up in such a way that only ideas from two parties get heard.

[Gore1FL]

149. I disagree.

We simply build coalitions before the elections rather than afterwards. The ideas can be heard if they work with instead of against the design. Third parties try to ignore the system, rather than leverage it. I like it that way. I have a better notion of what I am voting for when I "pull the lever," rather than being surprised later when platforms change after-the-fact. They simply need to run in the primaries to be heard.

The fundamental truth is that when a majority of votes are required (rather than a plurality) the natural upshot is going to be 2 parties. Even former presidents (Martin Van Buren, Millard Fillmore, and Theodore Roosevelt) failed to win as third-party candidates. We can change the Constitution, or work with it.

[Tarheel_Dem]

88. Independents aren't free to debate? You talk as if the American people aren't smart enough to know

if they're progressive or conservative; Democrat or Republican. That's just simply not true. One only has to look at the miserable showing of third parties to know that serious people don't take them seriously. The third party advocates who infest this place can't believe that people just don't buy their shit. Instead of building an infrastructure of their own, they've decided to be lazy & sneaky and try and appropriate the infrastructure of the "two parties".

Nothing is preventing Bernie Sanders from having his "ideas heard on a national stage". Bernie's profile is as high as Ron Paul's, so he already has a platform. Much like Ron Paul & Dennis Kucinich, he has an ideologically devoted following, and absolutely no chance in hell of ever being elected nationally. The most he could do would be to throw the election to the Republican, like Ralph Nader. I don't think Bernie's as diabolical as these idiots:





This is what makes serious people scratch their heads. This is the face of liberalism. Nutjobs!

[blue14u]

180. The times they are a changing..

Where these two may be nut jobs, Bernie is not!

So ok, let the Independents create their own strong party.. and we will see

if what you say is true. Either way a wrench will be thrown in two of the three parties.

I am a Democrat, and I love Bernie and would vote for him over Hillary..

Am I now banned from DU, where I would support Democrats in other races?

What if Bernie puts a "D: behind his name .. then what? If I can have a choice

of a left wing candidate, that is what I want and will vote for. Hillary is not

that.. She is third way centrist and leans right. Why in the world would I vote for her

over Bernie? Why would you if your a Democrat? I wouldn't.. It's that simple. I always vote... Always have, always will.

[Tarheel_Dem]

274. The times haven't changed that much.

Vote for Democrats.
Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

Unless there's a special rule created for Bernie Sanders, just like Ron Paul, you won't be able to peddle him here.

[blue14u]

277. I knew about this rule on DU.

I have been reading here sense August of 2012.

I simply shared my opinion started in the OP.

Why are you sending me this?

I have no interest in voting for a third way centrist again to be clear.

Are you trying to tell me that all the other people who posted support for Bernie

over Hillary, and it was pretty overwhelming, as is with Elizabeth Warren also, will be banned from DU? He could put

a "D" behind his name and we could see a strong candidate in him with views closer

to Democratic than HRC third way centrist. I want to choose who I vote for. I don't want to be told who to vote for. I have been voting sense 1974. I choose who I vote for. I will not start letting some organized, status quo, group tell me how to vote. I choose Democrat and I choose to be a member here. So if I once want to vote Independent, but in all other races choose Democrats, I'm no longer welcome?

It seems odd to me that any time someone on DU doesn't root for HRC we are meet with this kind of reply. I don't like it. I don't want to be railroaded and told I must vote for her and only support her. I vote. Is there a problem?

I can check out of DU if Skinner or Earl G don't want me here and my freedom to choose who I feel best represents me is at risk. I assure you, I will never vote for a republican, but Bernie Sanders has a strong stance on things like SS, which I understand HRC will throw us under the bus on, and her support of the top 6% is not a Democratic stance either. That's just one and two problems I see with her.

[Tarheel_Dem]

278. Nobody's told who to vote for at DU, but you are forbidden to push...

third parties here. Bernie is an Independent. Shall I repeat that? Bernie Sanders is an Independent. Perhaps you could get started on "Independent" Underground? You don't have to support anyone the "Democratic Party" chooses as it's candidate, but when election season begins you can't work against them either.

Hence:

"Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

I'm still not sure what your argument is. You asked if you'd be banned for supporting Bernie, and I showed you the rules. Did you not really want an answer?

[blue14u]

279. My argument is

I don't need you to tell me the rules for posting and being

a member at DU!!!

I read them when I bought my membership...

I do hope you also contacted all the others in this thread to let them know the

"rules" you seem so determined to tell me about...

I can handle my account and posts without your interference and snarky responses.

Perhaps you can find someone down thread to harass and who will support Bernie

if he runs... OMG!!!!

Good luck with that!

..

[Tarheel_Dem]

280. Harass? Need I remind you who responded to whom initially? Refresher:

"I am a Democrat, and I love Bernie and would vote for him over Hillary..

Am I now banned from DU, where I would support Democrats in other races? "

Who wrote that? I assumed you didn't know the rules you now claim to be familiar with. If you didn't want an answer to your query, perhaps you could've left that bit of "snark" out of your post?

And maybe you and all the Bernie pushers can found your own site, where there's no conflict with the current rules of DU. Let me give you a bit of a reality check. This is DU, which is an internet site that routinely & overwhelmingly supported Dennis Kucinich in presidential polls, he'd get 75%-80% of the "DU" vote. However, in the real world, he could barely muster 1% in Democratic primaries. I don't much care who you support at DU, as it clearly has no real world consequences.

[blue14u]

281. Tarhell_Dem... again

you continue to harass me for a simple comment about Bernie Sanders and that

I would support his run for President over Hillary..BTW... the times are changing, Just look what we did in VA alone two weeks ago... SOME of us are aware of that sweep in VA that Democrats won and are working and VOTING every chance we get to change this BS we have now...

Again, I am well aware of the rules of DU, as I READ EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM

when I PAID for my membership...

See the Gold Star next to my name???

I don't see that you have one!!!!

WOW, so allow me to put a sharper pencil on this for you and maybe, just maybe, you will move on and stop harassing me before I alert the Administration.


This site is for politics concerning and supporting DEMOCRATS!!!!. Real Democrats, NOT fake third way centrist who claim to be Democrats when in reality are RW intruders, and are not real Democrats imo, and have been farther to the right than I could have ever imagined...

I knew that, know that, and support that..again... see the gold star I paid for to be a member on DU???

You have a personal problem with my opinion about Bernie and who I will support when the time comes... take it up with EarlG and Skinner please..

I don't have time for this nonsense, as I am here to talk politics and encourage people to vote for Democratic values and issues!!!

I sincerely hope you find whatever it is you are looking for with someone else..

For the record... I will be sure NOT to link to any of your posts to continue a thread. I will respond to others who are polite, and civil, and not trying to be the Inspector General and Commander in Chief of DU!!!! OK?

Now move on. PLEASE!!!!!

Peace, Love, and Politics is my life...

[Tarheel_Dem]

282. "Move On"? Well, I guess that's what you should've done to begin with. Right?

You don't give orders here, and your celebrated "star" doesn't give your opinions any more credence here than anyone else. I've paid my dues, and to call out the absence of a star for any DU'er is really bad form. You have no idea why someone may not have "a star". As a matter of fact, in better times, I not only maintained my own star, but I bought stars for those who couldn't. Not only are you seemingly not familiar with the rules of DU, you're obviously even less familiar with etiquette.

"fake third way centrist who claim to be Democrats when in reality are RW intruders, and are not real Democrats"

Since you've called out others, and have been here for a relatively short time, how do we know you're not a "fake leftist emoprog"? We've had several high profile cases of that, ya know? You Better Believe It! And there have been recent cases where DU'ers skirted the rules and setup sock accounts. So, before you go slinging mud at Dems you deem unclean, remember each time you sling that mud, you get a little on yourself.

As these seem very important to you, and they apparently set you apart from others, have another one on me....

blue14u's Gold Star

[frazzled]

172. If someone sponsored the debates they could have them

There's no real party that is the "Independent Party," but independent voters and donors could get together to sponsor a series of debates of their own. There's no law against it.

The primary debates are not a government function, they're party functions, with private fundraising.

[totodeinhere]

168. Not necessarily. If he ran as a third party candidate the threshold would be a

certain percentage in the polls. If he could poll well enough he would be in the debates. After all, there is a precedent for a third party candidate in the debates. Ross Perot participated in 2002.

[scheming daemons]

5. That's nice to drive the debate. But he won't get more than 15% in any primary.

[cali]

7. I can't imagine that he would do it for any other reason but to drive the debate.

[Cali_Democrat]

19. Yep

I'm sure he knows he doesn't even have a snowflake's chance in hell of winning.

[cali]

23. but he has a blizzard's worth when it comes to impacting the race

far more so than Dennis ever had.

[Cali_Democrat]

25. Dennis is all about Dennis

Bernie is a good guy. People will pay attention to him.

[rhett o rick]

244. I think he should register as a Democrat and participate in all the primary debates.

Then after he loses to big money, he can switch back to being not committed and continue debating for the general if he is allowed. He will have a great platform to promote progressive ideas.

Or better yet, if Sen Warren runs, Sen Sanders can step out of the primary race at the last minute and try to give his supporters to Sen Warren.

Just babbin'

[blue14u]

181. You seem so certain...As

I have seen, much fuss is being made about these third way centrist candidates running

as Democrats.. To me they are not Democrats.. I would like to at least have a choice

other than Hillary...and apparently so would many others I see here day after day

on DU... Maybe you are just discouraging people to further your own agenda..... I have seen some of your other posts lately

they have a negative tone.. Maybe it's just me.. You do have a agenda though...

Are you third way, centrist? or are you a Democrat? I believe there is a big difference.

[scheming daemons]

185. there will be probably a half dozen candidates

Bernie, God love him, wont sniff first in any primary.

[blue14u]

187. Are you saying he

can't pass the sniff test? If not, why not?

He seems more Liberal than some current Dems... especially HLC...

[scheming daemons]

188. i am saying the electorate, as constituted

.. will not see him get 15% in any primary.

He will get the same support Kucinich got in 2008.

[blue14u]

191. AHHH, so its true

Last edited Mon Nov 18, 2013, 01:49 AM - Edit history (1)

For the record, I did vote for Perot, I was angry at the system....

. I was told so many times I wasted my vote, by my

politician Mother... To this day I disagree.... A VOTE is never wasted... but that was her

spin... I was used to it all by then, and she was angry because I didn't support her RW

canadate...

[blue14u]

262. Yes, there will be

Last edited Mon Nov 18, 2013, 01:52 AM - Edit history (1)

many who apply and fade into the sunset.

Elizabeth Warren on the other hand has a tremendous amount

of support here at DU, and I suspect other places.

She is a real Democrat. Let's have one for a change please. The centrist

are cramming HRC down our throats like she is the only one who could win

in 2016. I think we have other options, and could win with a more

" to the left candidate"..

[cali]

246. what. the. fuck. multiplied.

I am confronted every day here for being "too liberal".

You are a very confused person if you garner from my posts here that I'm a centrist.

Have you missed all of my posts on the TPP?

and here's why I'm sure: Bernie is my Senator. I know a bit more about him than YOU, having actually attended many town meetings/pot lucks where Bernie is present.

And bernie has said exactly what I say about why he'd run. I posted an article about that from the Burlington Free Press.

Here's a link:

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20131115/NEWS03/311150043/Sanders-wants-progressive-2016-presence


Yeah, I have an agenda: I'm a Bernie Sanders progressive and socialist. I vote for Vermont Progressive Party members and democrats.

You owe me an apology. Not holding my breath.

I'm really disgusted by false accusations of any kind.

[blue14u]

259. Excuse me? I checked and rechecked...I see YOU are the one confused..

I don't see where I ever addressed any of your posts in this thread.

Why are you all freaked out and why on earth do I owe you an

apology at all?

Please address me in a more civil manner in the future.

I won't hold my breath!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Good. Great! We need a candidate we can vote for rather than another "not as bad" hack.

He'll get my vote.

[A Simple Game]

131. I have been saying for over a year, no more lesser of two evils, go Bernie!

I could see him getting the VP spot on the Democratic ticket or the Democrats begging him to take the Presidential spot. Slim chances but who knows.

Yes I know he is not now a Democrat, but that could change by just a simple signature and a check mark.

[A Simple Game]

136. I have been saying for over a year, no more lesser of two evils, go Bernie!

I could see him getting the VP spot on the Democratic ticket or the Democrats begging him to take the Presidential spot. Slim chances but who knows.

Yes I know he is not now a Democrat, but that could change by just a simple signature and a check mark.

[valerief]

210. +1000

[LWolf]

220. He'll get mine as well.

Anyone worried about splitting the vote ought to be organizing petitions urging the party to make him an honorary Democrat.

[HijackedLabel]

10. Excellent.

A week ago I woudn't have been as open to the idea.

But I've been really pissed off lately and my pragmatism is wearing thin.

[Greybnk48]

14. Ha! I like that My pragmatism is wearing thin too! n/t

[Aldo Leopold]

153. And my thinmatism is wearing prag!

[closeupready]

12. If the media takes a hack like Arianna Huffington seriously,

they have NO excuse to ignoring the presidential campaign of an actual US Senator.

K&R

[liberal_at_heart]

16. He would get my vote.

[LoisB]

32. Mine too. Dream ticket for me would be Sanders/Warren (in either order).

[blue14u]

182. Hear Hear

mine too!!!

Run Bernie RUN...


I will run to the polls to vote for you and LIZ in a tornado!!!

Either order as long as they are on the ticket!!!

[mother earth]

253. And mine :)

[LittleBlue]

17. I'd follow Bernie into hell

And I know others feel the same way.

He's the only type of person who can possibly begin to fix this country. Forget the corporatists, the difference between them all is just a question of how fast the country falls into the shitter. Didn't we just see Hillary taking $200k per speech from Goldman Sachs? More of the same with those candidates; the banks run the country and fuck everyone else. She'll throw the 99% some scraps and they'll feed off the floor and be glad for it while the bankers use them for footrests.

[OutNow]

192. Ditto.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

21. How many times can I rec this?

[KoKo]

22. I hope he does! And that he can Debate the Candidates!

We need his voice.

[cali]

24. not in the democratic debates. he's not a dem

[KoKo]

49. Aware of that...but, maybe we can change the system...and he will

be allowed into the Debates as a Socialist with enough push back from Voting Rights Advocates and other Groups. I've felt that 3rd Parties should be allowed into the Presidential Candidate Debates for awhile now.

I was pleased that Democracy Now gave airtime to the Green Party Candidates Convention and ran the Debates alongside the Dem & Republican Debates when they weren't allowed into last year's debates.

The TIME HAS COME!

[blue14u]

186. The time is now!!!

Lets do it... Tell me what I need to do to help

make it happen, and I will be the first one in line to help!!!

Go Bernie.. We need to change this two part system anyway and there

is no better time like the present!!!


I'm a passionate believer in VOTING for the best. Party's are great,

but I want choice and to be excited about who I am VOTING for!!!!

[RufusTFirefly]

120. There's a precedent here

Lifelong Socialist and muckraking author Upton Sinclair re-registered as a Democrat in 1933 and ran for Governor of California in 1934. He wiped the floor with his opponents in the Democratic primary with his EPIC (End Poverty in California) movement. Although the anti-poverty message galvanized the general public, the prospect of a Governor Sinclair terrified the power-that-be in the Golden State, most notably the Hollywood moguls, who launched a shameless smear campaign against him, complete with phony documentary footage of "hobos" arriving in droves. It worked. Sinclair lost to Frank Merriam in the general election.

"The American People will take Socialism, but they won't take the label. I certainly proved it in the case of EPIC. Running on the Socialist ticket I got 60,000 votes, and running on the slogan to 'End Poverty in California' I got 879,000. I think we simply have to recognize the fact that our enemies have succeeded in spreading the Big Lie. There is no use attacking it by a front attack, it is much better to out-flank them." -- Upton Sinclair

[KoKo]

154. I don't know how we "outflank them" but maybe Sinclair's Time Has Come!

After all...what he saw has been REVISITED...and there's MEMORY out there and hard times that folks didn't see coming.

I think it's time once again for this. I do.

[KoKo]

158. BTW, Cali! Remember Joe Lieberman left Dem Party and Ran Indy...

when challenged from the Left Dem in CT.

If he could do it...then why not Bernie (the Socialist) who CAUCUSES with Dem Party just as Lieberman did when he ran as an Independent and Won his Seat Back but as an Independent who Caucuses with Dem Party.

[Le Taz Hot]

43. Oh, look,

making fun of old people. What's the matter, your anti-choice message didn't get you into enough shit around here now you have to go after the elderly? Stay classy, eb.

[el_bryanto]

59. I'm not making fun of old people

Why would you think that?

I have a lot of respect for Bernie Sanders -it's more a comment on the vague blandness of the phrase "considering a run for President," which I find humorous - because I suspect every politician and a good portion of non politicians have considered a run for the president - at least for a moment or two.

Bryant

[Le Taz Hot]

64. Nice attempt at a save.

[el_bryanto]

71. I deleted it - I guess it was funnier in my head. nt

[woo me with science]

92. It's gonna get ugly very fast if Bernie Sanders does run.

His voice and chosen issues will absolutely destroy the carefully crafted lie that corporate Democrats are doing their best to represent the 99 percent.

They will do *everything* they possibly can to smear and destroy him.

We are already seeing the beginnings of that, along with the inevitable nasty swipes at those who show support for him, on this thread.

[Le Taz Hot]

99. Anyone, ANYONE challenging Hillary

is going to be excoriated by the Establishment Dems. The attacks won't be on policy but personal. Whether he runs as an Independent or runs as a Democrat, either way the dynamics are going to be VERY interesting.

[woo me with science]

137. Could not agree with you more. nt

[NorthCarolina]

204. Screw the conservative establishment Dems AND the Elephant they rode in on.

They've done enough damage to the party, and the country. If Bernie runs, he WILL have my vote.

[mmonk]

208. +1

[Whisp]

133. lol! 'nasty swipes'...

up till now DU has been very respectful to most if not all Democrats.

[idwiyo]

106. They have no problem with age or choice, as long as it's the one they personally approve of!

[Chan790]

46. ???

(I don't understand the point of this post or what you're getting at.)

[Le Taz Hot]

57. It's a slam against the fact

that Bernie Sanders is older -- he's implying that Sanders is senile. Disgusting, yes, but he's allowed to get away with it.

[el_bryanto]

61. No it isn't - but don't let that stop you from alerting it.

[Le Taz Hot]

67. Not my style.

I prefer the "give 'em enough rope strategy." It requires no effort on my part.

[idwiyo]

30. k&r VERY enthusiastic K&R!

[Le Taz Hot]

31. Wow!

And on DU we won't even be able to advocate for him. Now that's a problem.

[idwiyo]

36. Not if he runs as Dem, and he should, as it's the only way to beat the friggin system.

[Le Taz Hot]

39. I can't imagine him switching political parties now.

It's going to be rough around here if its between Christie, Hillary and Sanders. By default we're supposed to support Hillary, at least on DU.

[Chan790]

55. Doesn't have to.

Ron Paul ran repeatedly as a Republican for President and held his House seat for nearly 20 years as a Republican and registered as a Libertarian.

Why does Sanders have to be a Democrat to run for their nomination? Nowhere in the law or the party bylaws does any Democratic nominee or candidate for the nomination have to be a member of the Democratic Party.

In fact, the Democratic Party cross-nominates 115 people on average every year at all levels of government, the majority of whom are not registered Democrats. In DC it's common for the Democratic party to nominate members of DC Statehood Party due to how elections are conducted in DC regarding provision of seats on boards and councils (typically there are a # of seats that must be held by the non-majority party, which in DC is always the Democrats), in CT where I grew up, approximately one-third of all Democrats running for town/city-level offices are cross-nominees of CT Working Families Party with a near-even split in party registration.

[Le Taz Hot]

62. Well, this is interesting.

I can't imagine the Establish Democrats letting him into the debates, though.

[stevenleser]

63. Yes, he does. Next week, when I am not on an iPad, I'll link to it.

The situations of cross nomination are rare and specific to certain states and areas.

[Chan790]

68. Okay. Interesting. I always assumed it was everywhere.

I'll take your word for it, you seem knowledgeable about such things.

[idwiyo]

60. I hope he does switch. Really hope so.

If not, I'll have to find a website where I would be allowed to express my support for Mr Sanders. Even though I can't vote for him.
I definitely will leave DU during primaries. Both possible candidates make me sick. . Can't imagine voting for either one of them.

[Le Taz Hot]

70. According to post #55

he doesn't have to. The jury's (metaphorically speaking) is still out on the validity of this one.

[blue14u]

190. Why by default?

Last edited Mon Nov 18, 2013, 02:14 AM - Edit history (1)

If Democrats pick their own candidate, why is there going to be rough times ahead. Who

is telling me I can't vote for the Dem I WANT? I want BERNIE or Liz Warren...

What's wrong with that?

What a messed up system. If TPTB decide its HRC, my choice is gone...

We need to change some rules around here if that's the case.

Who is deciding this for me and my VOTE?

grr:

[zeemike]

98. And I see no reason why he can't.

If a GOPer can run as a Dem why not an independent?

[idwiyo]

100. And in this case it will be a damn good Dem!

[Whisp]

40. wow. nice.

[lumberjack_jeff]

41. I love Bernie. If he becomes another Ralph Nader, I won't. n/t

[Dr. Strange]

42. I hope he runs as an independent, with Nader as his VP.

Then I could bottle all the head-explosions on DU and convert it to energy.

UNLIMITED POWER!!!

[woo me with science]

48. I would crawl through broken glass to see Bernie Sanders elected.

It's outstanding news for the country that he may bring a voice outside the rigged and artificially narrowed corporate party mantras.

Limiting the debate is the ONLY way the two corporate parties can sustain the FICTION that liberal policies are "fringe," untenable, or unelectable.

New ideas and real change are considered serious and possible only when they are presented as serious and possible. Put Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren in front of the public and let them speak, and they will blow away Hillary Clinton or any other corporatist.

The country is hungry for actual representation, and it's time to make that option real. We need voices and candidates like Bernie to remind people of what really IS possible for the 99 percent.

[Whisp]

51. and one may probably be calling him out as a caver

in a short time after he gets elected and doesn't fix the world and it's ills to your specific needs and liking.

just sayin'.

or one might actually not expect him to fix the world and it's ills to your specific needs and liking like you expect Obama to do it.

just sayin' 2.

[woo me with science]

94. Oh look. Right on cue.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4040247

[Whisp]

107. I'm okay with Bernie.

I'm not okay with how the president has been treated by a certain group, where everything he does is wrong wrong bankster hoodlum evil wrong.

I am certain that if Bernie does manage the WH (which is imposible) but even if he did, the obstacles Obama faces that prevents a lot of good work being done, will some how be excused for Sanders.

You know it, everyone knows it.

[idwiyo]

112. I sincerely doubt that people who have principles would make excuses if Sanders wins

but starts siding with corporate scum, MIC, etc. Few groupies would of course, but not majority of his supporters.
There is a damn huge difference between cult of personality and support for elected official. He does wrong he gets shit for it. He keeps doing it, he loses support. It's that simple.

[woo me with science]

143. Very well said.

The cult of personality has worked hard to replace accountability for politicians with grade school loyalty tests.

As telegraphed here, those who support a progressive candidate will be later be cynically accused of having been wrong or impossible to please if they later differ from that politician on any issue whatsoever.

[socialist_n_TN]

145. THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^...

And a lot of the "losing support" part comes WHEN YOU DON'T EVEN TRY! As President, you DO have the power to marshal support for whatever policies that you choose to. And you can fight for them as long as you choose to.

Obama caught shit because he did NOT fight very long or very hard for progressive policies when he gained office.

[cali]

193. "Okay with Bernie". What does that even mean?

[Whisp]

218. It means this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024037863

were you looking for this?:

[dreamnightwind]

124. +1,000

We absolutely need for the real problems and their possible solutions to get a full debate in front of the public. That would make a huge difference, it really would, and if it's just the usual suspects of the 2 major parties in the debates, we won't see even a hint of the real issues discussed. It's all "off the table". There is nothing I feel more passionately about.

[sarcasmo]

50. Bernie!

[Whisp]

65. I guess it's official and we can talk about 2016 w/o being told to stfu. n/t

[Laelth]

93. An eternal optimist, you are.

I feel certain the STFU threads will continue.

-Laelth

[Armstead]

74. Bernie Yes! But it's too bad the Democratic Party has become so Corporate Lame that...

...such a thing as a third party candidate is necessary.

In a sane world, Bernie's values and positions would simply be mainstream Democratic.

[Laelth]

95. Well said.

In a sane world, Bernie's values and positions would simply be mainstream Democratic.

Too true.

-Laelth

[L0oniX]

122. If people vote for a corporate Dem they will get what they deserve!

Jeeze and talk about repukes voting against their own better interests. It'll be another commonality Dems have with repukes ...as if there are not enough already.

[Armstead]

157. Unfortunately Corporate Dems talk a good talk but....

don't walk their talk.

When I hear Bill Clinton or Obama, I often emotionally respond with "Yes" to their progressive populist sweet talk.

But then seeing what they actually do -- and who they hang out with--- I realize I wuz sold a bill of goods.

[L0oniX]

160. ...and I even went to an Obama campaign rally.

[Marrah_G]

164. ^this

[Boom Sound 416]

78. On Democratic ticket?

[LWolf]

221. If

the Democratic Party is smart, yes.

[Boom Sound 416]

225. Agreed

[ananda]

82. Please make it so.

Please!

[rhett o rick]

91. Does anyone have a source for this? nm

[MynameisBlarney]

97. If he does, I hope he chooses Elizabeth Warren as his running mate

because I'd be torn deciding against either of them.

[HockeyMom]

101. Given the insane House and just marginally better

Senate, Bernie would not stand a chance. If Obama cannot get anything done, Bernie could in this scenario? While I love this man, I just don't think it would work.

[99Forever]

104. He's got my vote over ANY other.

Period.

Bar none.

[libdem4life]

105. Bernie is a great, old-time Liberal. One of a very few who mostly don't get much press due to the

past few decades of Liberal Democrats being in forced hiding. He is inspiring, believable, and his lifetime embodies his words and positions.

I love that he will might actually might be featured, as a candidate, by the MSM now, as Russia Times is not among that group. It would be great for every day people to learn that the Liberal Left does not exist to bring back Marx or Lenin and force abortions and enslave our innocent children with union jobs and other such nonsense.

But he's clearly not a Primary Candidate and changing to Democrat, say like Charlie Crist, because it is too late, seen as ingenuous and not going to happen.

Still, if he's announcing in 2013 maybe it's not "way too early" as seems to be the mantra. And further, then why the cheering squad for Elizabeth Warren to declare in 2013...give up her amazing performance and incredible progress AGAINST the banksters and be forced to accept donations from them? Imagine the cooperation she'll get if they even smell she's going to be coming back to them for donations, even as just a candidate for a major political party? That lacks logic.

So, Bernie and Elizabeth are wonderful politicians, but not options to "her". That's not going to do it in 2014 or 2106, so we'd better get to work NOW on the not-her who can at least give the Republicans, who of course are terrified she can win, a run for their big corporate money/votes.

I'm going to say it outright ... better a "bought" Liberal Democrat than a "bought" Tea Party Republican (or facsimile thereof). We can still work on 2014 and 2016 down ticket at the more personal level, but it's going to take a lot smarter political minds and even more work to purge the evil corporate money from politics. That's where it starts...not at the national political level...because those relationships are already set up for them to even get there.

[dreamnightwind]

128. Really? Completely disagree with your conclusions. - eom

[libdem4life]

156. OK. I'm sure a lot here do. It's all pretty much opinion until it's over anyway. Then, it's a new

conversation entirely.

[dreamnightwind]

162. Right on

[Marrah_G]

108. He would have my full support and as many hours of volunteer work as I can manage.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

111. Love it! Go Bernie

[AzDar]

113. Bernie!

[Robbins]

117. Well

If there Is a true liberal Independent presidential campagin by someone like Bernie Sanders I will consider supporting it.

The Clintons are not liberals.Bill has already given knife to obama and helped lead 39 house democrats to join republicans today.

Hillary Is to right of Obama on most issues.If you think Obama Is too corporate friendly or compromises too much with republicans
what makes you think Hillary would be any better?Has people forgotten the triangulations of 1990's including deregulations.

The CLintons are like just up Liberals and vote democratic while we worry about being more centrist and conservative lite.

The MSM Is out to elect Chris Christie In 2016.

Voting for a true Liberal may be what Is needed to shock the Democratic Party Into stop going to the right

[CountAllVotes]

118. Bernie Sanders has my vote!

YES HE DOES!!!

A real Democrat! YES HE IS!!!

& recommend!!!

[Jefferson23]

121. I will throw all my efforts, money his way, Sanders and Warren, what a ticket.

I am going to allow myself to dream and I'm going to keep in mind, some dreams do come true.


K&R

[Initech]

125. Sanders and Warren: Wall St.'s worst nightmare!!

[NC_Nurse]

130. That's my dream ticket!

[raindaddy]

127. Great news!

He's got my vote! I won't vote for another DLC Democrat!!!

[mc51tc]

129. K&R

He had my support more than anyone!

[Demo_Chris]

132. Sweet! I really respect that guy. nt

[Half-Century Man]

140. Please Sir

It would be my honor to cast a vote for you and help convince others to do the same.

[Tarheel_Dem]

142. Meh. Bernie's "impact" would be similar to this guy.....

[Earth_First]

161. I see you're in the Hillary "TPP" Clinton crowd.

Cute.

[Tarheel_Dem]

276. I support Democrats, and unless the rules have changed, so does DU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

[Beacool]

184. Yep, another fantasy candidate.

[MADem]

200. Hillary Clinton provided funding to Bernie Sanders for his Senate run.

She actually used that HILLPAC to help increase the D--and "caucusing with D"--majority. Bernie got dough from her.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00363994&cycle=2006

I guess that's an inconvenient truth, though, for some here who want to hang out in the fact-free zone!

[Beacool]

226. I like Sanders, but to think that he could win in a general election

against the nominees of both major parties is ridiculous. He would only weaken the Democratic nominee, as Nader did to Gore and Perot did to Bush Sr. Regardless of who ends up being our nominee, I would vote for that person over any other one. The last thing this country needs is Christie, Jeb or, Lord forfend, a Tea Party member as president.

[MADem]

230. I concur.

I offered that tidbit to counter the suggestions that HRC "hated" Sanders. She hated him so much she gave him a chunk of cash that she raised, through her efforts at those rubber chicken-press the flesh fundraisers, to help elect Dems to Congress. That's the only point I was trying to make.

[Beacool]

231. I think that too many people here have no clue about Hillary.

She's a warm person and not the caricature that the Left and Right describes. They make her sound like she's some kind of evil creature. The Left keeps calling her corporatist shill, etc.; the Right calls her a Marxist, Socialist and accuse her of far more vile deeds.

It's nuts.

[MADem]

234. She will make a superb President--probably the best prepared one we've

had in eighty years.

[Beacool]

260. We'll see.

I hope so.

[cali]

194. Bernie is nothing like Nader. And he has NO history of "divide and conquer"

what a surprise that you don't like Bernie. Not. Conservatives don't.

[Tarheel_Dem]

275. The asshole who wanted to primary the current president? Oh yeah...

I've got much love. NOT!!!!

[tblue37]

144. I doubt he expects to win, but he intends to push the national

conversation leftward. A threat from the left can influence Dem candidates just as one from the right influences Repubs.

Go, Bernie!

[dreamnightwind]

146. Woo-hoo! K & R. Contact him!

I might have to change my sig-line, still hoping EW goes for it though.

I love Bernie more than any other politician, and would do anything to support his election.

If he's serious, he really should run as a Dem. He already caucuses with them, and is usually very careful to support the Dems even while trying to pull them left, so switching to Dem would be appropriate in his case.

He's no Nader, he doesn't buy into the false-equivalency trap, and that's a good thing. I can't see Bernie doing anything that will help Republicans.

I don't really get the argument I've seen a number of times that we can pull Hillary to the left by running a show campaign that just voices left-wing positions without a chance of winning. Hillary is nimble enough to easily move left for a primary (if she needs to) and be right back to herself for the general and, more importantly, after inauguration. We can't pull Hillary to the left. Her donors are the ones who can and will be pulling her, every single day she's in office. Such a campaign could get some issues and positions before the public, but it won't substantively change Hillary.

We need a real, determined left-wing candidate to totally go for it in the Democratic primary, in my opinion. Doing so as an independent in the general WILL do damage to the Dem's chances and help the Republican, at least if the independent gets enough votes (polling high enough to get into the MSM debates). The MSM is quite likely to give very little attention to such a candidacy. If it was a RW independent they'd be all over it.

I suggest we write Bernie inquiring about and encouraging him to do this, and to do it as a Dem.

Some Bernie contacts:

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/contact (it's actually not clear to me how to write him at this site, except to address certain other issues).
https://www.facebook.com/senatorsanders‎
https://twitter.com/SenSanders
email [e-mail] (not sure if this goes to an official staffer or if it just goes to a Bernie fan site. It's listed on the Friends of Bernie Sanders website, http://www.bernie.org/)
call [phone]

If anyone has a better list, offer it up, or email me and I'll update this post.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

151. Interesting!

[B Calm]

152. Would he run under the Socialist ticket?

[KoKo]

159. Joe Lieberman ran as an Independent when challenged by Dem Left...

and he Won and Caucused with the Democrats.

Bernie seems to always Caucus with the Democrats. So...WHY NOT? If Lieberman can run Indie against a Dem Candidate and win as an Indy...then why not Bernie as a Socialist who runs as Socialist...but, promises to Govern with the Democrats of the LEFT?

[B Calm]

198. Bernie would not even be allowed in the debates. Make more sense

if he ran on the democratic ticket. If he wants any chance of winning or if he just wants to move the democratic party left, then he needs to run as a democrat. Running as a socialist will only split the democrat votes and would be a dream come true for the republican party.

[RoccoR5955]

163. Run Bernie Run

With Elizabeth Warren!

[Oakenshield]

165. He'd have my vote!

It's high time we had a socialist in the White House.

[DissidentVoice]

166. This sounds great, but...

Will he do like so many of the others and "move to the centre" to get elected?

Sorry. I've been burned by too many Democrats who have done that.

[davidpdx]

169. If he runs as a D I'd be interested on knowing more and would consider voting for him

[Beacool]

175. Seriously?

He's 72 years old and an Independent. He can run if he wants to, but Ron Paul had a better chance of winning than Sanders.

[cali]

195. It's not about winning for Bernie. If he runs it's to influence the debate

and corporoHillary is 69. And she's and her corporate buddies and backers are why Sanders is considering a run.

Good.

[Mostly Orbiting]

197. Excellent Point

I think you're exactly right as to Sanders' potential motivation.

[Beacool]

227. Yes, but Hillary has a good chance of winning the general election.

Sanders has zero, and the last thing this country needs is a Republican president. Forgot to add, Hillary is 66 right now, Sanders would be 75 years old by 2016, even older than Biden.

[cali]

229. again, this is about influencing the debate and pointing out that Hillary is a corporate

creature.

Yes she can potentially win. I hope she doesn't win the primary.

She's is a self-serving corporate shill and little more.

I wish that weren't true but there is a MOUNTAIN evidence supporting that- from her days as a WalMart board member to her role in crafting and pushing the obscene TPP.

[Douglas Carpenter]

196. Bernie Sanders' message of economic fairness resonates with almost everyone across the political

spectrum

[Beacool]

228. I think that the Left needs to get a reality check when it comes to 2016.

The vast majority of the country has no clue who Sanders is and wouldn't vote for him even if they did. I hope that he doesn't become a spoiler like Nader. I'll be voting for the Democratic nominee, whoever that person may turn out to be.

[Douglas Carpenter]

232. The simple reality is - most people do agree with most of what Sen Bernie Sanders has to say

precisely because he keeps the focus on bread and butter issues. In fact almost everyone agrees with most of what he has to say - except the rich. The sensible center of the political class has been living in cloud cuckoo land alternative universe reality that imagines against all evidence to the contrary that social liberalism mixed with slightly modified neoliberal economics is what most people want. When somebody can lead the charge in saying out loud what most people already feel inside - the unimaginable starts becoming more possible. I don't see any scenario where Sen. Sanders would run as a third party candidate.

[Beacool]

233. He is not a Democrat.

He would have to run as a third party candidate.

[Douglas Carpenter]

235. not at this time - but he can change that anytime he wants. The context of any of his conversations

about running implied that he would run seeking the Democratic nomination.

[Beacool]

261. Maybe so, but he'll be just as electable in a general election as Cruz.

[Douglas Carpenter]

265. I don't know where you get that idea. Across the political spectrum people listen to Bernie Sanders

and discover that he makes a lot of sense. I have heard Tea Party conservatives acknowledge that they agree with a lot of what he says. There is not a shred of evidence that most Americans agree with the neoliberal economics of the leadership of both parties. There is a lot of evidence that the vast majority of people recognize the system is rigged against them and welcome a voice that articulates that.

[Beacool]

266. I'm tired, I'm going to bed.

At this point, whatever. If the Left wants to commit political suicide, go ahead. Keep pushing people that would be mowed over in the g.e.

[Douglas Carpenter]

268. I think you need to get away from the world of political true believers and listen to ordinary

people. I think you might discover that ordinary people are a bit more aware of the score than you think.

[Beacool]

269. I listen to people and I live in a Democratic part of the country.

I haven't heard any talk of Warren for president, let alone Sanders. I have no clue who will be the nominee in 2016, but if the Left wants to be the spoiler and give the election to the Republicans, be my guest. It worked great when Perot and Nader did it.

[Douglas Carpenter]

270. I would not support a third party effort as tempting as it may be.

[Vashta Nerada]

242. I'm shocked that someone with a Hilary Clinton avatar would say something like this.

[Beacool]

267. I'm shocked that anyone would think that Sanders would have a snowball chance in hell

to become president. Wishful thinking and common sense are two different things altogether.

[avaistheone1]

176. Bernie would make a great president.

[orpupilofnature57]

201. Now there's a salution to the political society .

[ann---]

202. Sorry to say, but

I think he may be too old to win any new Dem votes. I LOVE him, but progressives should be realistic. Elizabeth Warren has a better chance than Sanders does. in my view.

[mmonk]

203. Then we need a good draft movement to begin.

[Jackpine Radical]

206. Bernie will be 75 in Sept 2016. If he runs, it will be a gesture

and I wouldn't discourage his doing so in order to get some issues onto the left side of the table, but obviously he has no intention or illusions concerning actually holding the office.

Hillary will be 69.

Liz Warren will be 67.


I say we run the young one.

[boston bean]

207. What ticket is he going to run on, anyone know?

[NorthCarolina]

209. PLEASE

Please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, run Bernie!

Sanders 2016!

[MissDeeds]

216. + 1 pretty please

K&R for Bernie

[karynnj]

214. Front page article in the Burlington Free Press (Burlington, VT) - on Sanders

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20131115/NEWS03/311150043/Sanders-wants-progressive-presence-in-2016-president-race


He was the mayor of Burlington before he was a Congressman - starting a long streak of progressive party mayors - recently ended by a Democratic mayor, who Howard Dean at a recent Burlington Democratic event suggested, would likely have been a progressive rather than a Democrat had he been in politics then. He then spoke of how the VT Democratic party moved to the left. (He admitted that his wife had voted for Sanders for major - while he voted for the Democrat. He said he first realized Sanders might win when, chatting with the mailman, he learned he was for Sanders. )

[Mosaic]

219. Good News

I need more information from him to see what party he will be in, etc. The country is ready for a Democratic Socialist, and he's right on time.

[rhett o rick]

241. I love Bernie and appreciate this thread but is there a source for the OP? nm

[Vashta Nerada]

243. He would be a candidate I would support.

[Rain Mcloud]

245. I consider President Bernie Sanders to be an awesome thing

The tens of billions of dollars spent by the right wing lunatics to defeat him,returned to the economy,the newest deal ever!

[lark]

252. If he runs, I'm voting for him.

He'll be satisfying my life long dream to vote for a true progressive.