Bernie Sanders: 'Don't Just Anoint Hillary-I have a damn good platform to run for president in 2016'

[kpete]

Bernie Sanders says he has a ‘damn good platform’ to run for president in 2016


“You have today in America more income and wealth inequality than any time in this country since 1928 and more than any major country in the world,” Sanders said. “So, you got the top one percent owning 38 percent of the wealth in America. Do you know what the bottom 60 percent own? 2.3 percent.”

“You know what that is?" he said. "That's called oligarchy."

...........................


One of Sanders’ most likely competitors, should he choose to seek the Democratic nomination, is Hillary Clinton. And while Sanders praised Clinton for a successful career, he was critical of the Democratic Party’s seeming coronation of the former secretary of state.

"She has accomplished a lot of very positive things in her career, but I'm not quite sure that the political process is one in which we anoint people,” Sanders said.

Though he stopped short of criticizing Clinton directly, he said she is not a sufficient champion of his message for the middle class.

“What I'm telling you is that this country has more serious problems today than any time since the Great Depression,” he said. “Those are the real issues that we've got to start dealing with.


Video & more:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/power-players-abc-news/bernie-sanders-says-he-has-a--damn-good-platform--to-run-for-president-in-2016-212513869.html

[Autumn]

1. Run Bernie. We need someone to vote FOR.

Recommended.

[yeoman6987]

4. Hopefully he runs

I just looked up his age. He is only 72 years old. That is not bad for today when many people are still working. I thought he was closer to 80. We are lucky he is going to run.

[merrily]

156. If he were suffering from rigor mortis, I'd still vote for him over Hillary.

Three years older than Hillary? Pfffft

[cui bono]

94. Yes. I want to vote to win, not vote not to lose. n/t

[Vincardog]

122. Exactly why we have to insist on real liberal candidates and platform policies. A true populist

I am tired of voting for the least worse option.

[merrily]

157. We need a new system, but fat chance the Republicans and Democrats will

vote to change it when the duopoly serves both of them so well.

[billhicks76]

165. Hillary=Republican

We have set the bar too low. Just because she's not a fanatical Tea Bagger doesn't mean she's a liberal. No one fights for anything because of "leaders" like her. And all her cheerleaders are sounding old and tired to me.

[elzenmahn]

187. Unfortunately, I'm come more and more in agreement with you every day...

...her foreign policy is waaaayy too Neocon for my tastes, especially given her recent comments regarding the Middle East.

And her playing footsie with the bankers? That was the last straw for me.

She needs a serious challenge from the left - Warren, Sanders, whoever can mount enough of a threat to get her to notice.

In short - I'm not looking for someone who will play nicey-nice with Goldman Sachs. I want somebody who will TAKE DOWN Goldman Sachs!

[billhicks76]

230. Too Many On DU Invested In Her

They don't know when to pull the plug. Momentum rules their judgement. It's disgraceful what they will defend just because she's running on the Dem ticket. She should be running on the republican ticket. Rationalization is very strong.

[Rockyj]

126. Amen!

No more corporate owned politicians!

[Veilex]

186. Indeed.

[Zorra]

2. If he runs I will campaign for him. Go Bernie. nt

[Rockyj]

127. Me Too!

I would not lift a finger for Hillary.

[merrily]

201. Not even one finger?

Sorry, just could not resist. (I did try.)

[djean111]

3. Please, Bernie.

As I have read elsewhere that Hillary is only cuddling up with BiBi in order to get money and votes - what makes anyone think seriously that, if she spouts a more liberal rhetoric during a campaign, she is not just cuddling up with progressives in order to get money and votes?
Hillary is another one, IMO, who will say anything to get elected, and then turn into a blue dog the first damned day.

[femmocrat]

14. Cripes, she is criticizing the president on foreign policy now.

Trying to "distance" herself.

I will vote for the nominee, but Bernie would really liven up the primaries! Go Bernie!

[hollowdweller]

58. Yeah after her knocking Obama no way I'm voting for her in the primary.

One of Bill Clintons successes during his presidency was that he made friends with world leaders.

Hillary wants to antagonize the world. She's certainly antagonized the base.

[cui bono]

95. Which is the real reason she didn't want to be SOS right now.

That would have made this move impossible.

How long before she jumps on the Benghazi bandwagon? Oh wait a minute... hehe.

[jwirr]

31. That is what I am afraid of. And Bernie is right. She either needs to get with it on the issues or

she is not going to get the support she wants. Money is not everything in politics. The Koch's have found that out. On the ground support from people like the DUers and the Unions is the link pin that holds us together. Without a good economic policy that addresses the issues like Bernie does she will not have that support.

I also would like to see her and Bernie and other progressive candidates set up a purely Democratic debate on these issues. Hopefully they would not be ignored by the MSM.

[rhett o rick]

62. "She either needs to get with it on the issues " Does this mean she should radically

change her stance on the issues or just change her rhetoric? I think we all know H. Clinton and she won't change her stance. She seems to ignore one of the most important issues, that of wealth inequality.

[jwirr]

71. I agree with that but if we can get her to state things our way then we at least have a chance to

hold her to it.

To be truthful we have little chance of changing things to our way regardless which way we vote - most politicians are part of the 1% and have very little understanding of what is really happening - but I just do not want to hand it back to the rethugs. They already have taken us to the brink and left us with very little we can do to fight back. If they win the filibuster, gerrymandering and voter suppression will look like good ideas because what they come up with will lock us out totally.

You may call this fear but to me it is fact. They have been doing this since raygun and they are close to the end of their plans. Only our votes, our donations and our involvement will stop them. I do not trust Hillary but if I have to I will vote for her. And then I will be here on DU to fight any problems she gives us. If the rethugs win again - what will be the use?

[rhett o rick]

121. "if we can get her to state things our way then we at least have a chance to View profile hold her

to it." I understand what you are hoping, but it doesn't work with Pres Obama.

[jwirr]

185. You are dead wrong - I have worked against those issues for 45 years and I am still working. If I

crawl into bed with Hillary because the ballot gives me no other workable choice then so be it. When I talk about no other workable choice I mean first of all that I have not in that 44 years seen one single third party candidate who could win. And I do not see one now. If Bernie runs I hope he runs in the Democratic Party primary. In the primary I will be voting for Bernie and hoping he can win but I doubt it. In fact I would vote for almost any of the proposed candidates ahead of Hillary but the country seems to be dead set on her so I will have two choices in 2016: her or some fascist in the rethug party. Oh, there is a third choice - I can knowingly throw my vote away on someone who will not win and who will more than likely help the rethugs by pulling votes away from the other choice. But I refuse to do that. I am in this fight to stop the rethugs not help them.

Secondly when there is the least of two evils on the ballot I do not just throw my vote away to the dogs. I vote for the issues I care about. Yes I am afraid for the poor, for immigrants, for minorities, for persons with disabilities and for our earth. I will not hand it back to the rethugs because I think I can punish some damn politician by refusing to vote for him or her. They will never even know I did or did not vote for them.

As to Hillary being a registered rethug! So was I. I lived in Iowa (NW IA) for most of my life. Our district was very red. Those of us who were in the Democratic Party almost never won. Look at who they are represented by now (Steve King). But we did have a way of fighting back on the local level. We registered Republican so that we could vote in the primary for local officials who usually ran unopposed. Unfortunately I don't think Hillary was registered rethug for that reason. She was and still is way to the right of President Obama.

As to your calling me Hitler and a coward. You will be alerted on if you keep this kind of insults up to DUers. You say you have more to lose than I do because you are dying. I am sorry about that. Wish you well. I am protecting my severely disabled daughter who would be dying if the rethugs have their way. I think on this issue we might just be even. Two lives at stake.

[cui bono]

99. Agree. I won't believe her if she changes her tune. n/t

[cui bono]

96. If she started sounding like Bernie would you believe her?

I wouldn't.

I believe that if she thinks populism is what it takes to get elected POTUS that she will say anything to get you to believe she is now a populist. But when she takes office it will be another story completely.

I believe she wants to be POTUS - the first woman to be POTUS - so bad she will do pretty much anything to get there.

[jwirr]

162. No I would not but I hardly believe her now.

[merrily]

158. The msm will undermine populist and/or non-establishment candidates. Always have.

The msm is rw first and pro-establishment second. Pro-populist and pro-liberal are not their agendas.

[merrily]

155. Turn into a blue dog?

She went from Goldwater Girl to founding member of the Democratic Leadership Council cum Walmart Director to a Senator who urged other Senators to vote for the Iraq War to a Presidential candidate who claimed "hard-working white people" as her constituency.

[djean111]

166. I see your point. Already a blue dog. But I think she will appear liberal or progresive when

campaigning. Didn't like what I found when I Googled her and Rick Warren, either.

[merrily]

170. She describes herself as progressive (as does Obama). And that is

correct, IMO, if you consider that the Progressive Party was comprised of the left wing of the Republican Party. Actually, Obama said he would have been considered a moderate Republican in the 1980s, so not even the left wing.

That is why I try not to throw the term "progressive" around (except when I am discussing its meaning and use, as I am now). As best I can tell, there is no universal agreement as to what is meant by it, especially when it is accompanied by the term "pragmatic" or words of similar import.

The Progressive Policy Institute, for example, was founded by Will Marshall. He and Al From were the first full-time employees of the DLC; and Marshall also signed the PNAC letter, urging Bush to invade Iraq.

[riqster]

5. Join the party, Bernie. Then I will bust ass for you.

[sabrina 1]

15. Why, why should he have to join any party? It seems that once someone joins a party

the become beholden to what the leadership wants of them.

Let the people decide. Bernie's social democratic policies are currently at odds with the Dem Party AND with most Democrats at this point.

If the Dems want him, let them give him some reasons for joining the party.

I will campaign for him if he runs just the way he is.

[riqster]

18. Not me. 2000 taught me all I need to know about third-party spoilers.

[groundloop]

23. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ !!!!!!!!!!!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^

EXACTLY!!! I'll gladly support Bernie IF he is the Democratic nominee.

[sabrina 1]

25. This isn't 2000, and Bernie isn't Ralph Nader. So, what happens when we vote out of fear that

the Republicans will run? What do you predict will be the outcome of another 'hold your nose' vote? Stopping the Repubs? That hasn't happened, they are in the cabinet of the current President, and even in the minority, we are told, WE can't do anything to stop them, EVEN WHEN WE WIN.

[riqster]

41. If he runs as anything other than a dem, Repubs will win.

Name a third-party candidacy in American history that turned out otherwise.

The Repubs are far worse than the the worst Dem.

[sabrina 1]

44. You didn't answer my question, and it is related to the failure of Third Parties. What happens

when we vote out of fear that a Repub will win?

That is the REASON things have remained the same and no Third Party candidate no matter how good, has won.

But what would happen if we got over that fear and voted for someone like Bernie who actually represents us on most issues?

Voting out of fear of Republicans? LOOK WHERE WE ARE, economically, militarily, educationally. THAT is what happens.

Supposing we all got over that fear? I'm over it frankly, did it for too long. So are a while lot of others.

But since we know fear induced voting has not gotten us very far, what is wrong with trying something new?

[riqster]

53. Bush II is what's wrong with trying a third-party approach. But it isn't new.

What you frame as "fear"-based voting I call fighting a rear-guard action.

And I do look at where we are: right now, things suck a lot less than they did in 2008.

Repubs are worse than Dems. Anyone who helps a Repub get elected, either by voting third-party or sitting it out, or advocating that others not vote, is responsible for the evils perpetrated upon us by the Repubs.

[cui bono]

100. You are wrong about one important thing.

Things have not stayed the same. Obama is what a moderate Republican was in the 80s. Politicians are leaving the GOP and joining the Dems and saying that they did not change their stances, that the party did and that's why they left and feel more comfortable in the Dem Party. Both parties have changed and both have moved rightward.

The Dem Party is now the GOP of the 80s and the GOP is now batshit crazy and evil and greedy to its core.

We NEED a third party or at least someone from that end of the spectrum to start bringing things back to the left.

[Dark n Stormy Knight]

105. It's so depressing that you are absolutely right:

The Dem Party is now the GOP of the 80s and the GOP is now batshit crazy and evil and greedy to its core.

The left has been demonized and defunded. It will take a miracle to wrest control of our country from the oligarchs.

[sabrina 1]

161. The left is being demonized by the Dem Party, and who in their right mind keeps supporting

anyone who makes it clear they despise you.

We put up with it for a long time, but more and more people are now becoming Independents which means Bernie already has a base which is growing.

Last numbers I saw re party affiliation? Only about 32% now identify as Dem and less than that as Repub. The largest number was Independent. That is where the votes for Bernie would be.

[markpkessinger]

119. I was just thinking earlier today that I can't see much daylight . . .

. . . between Hillary and an Eastern establishment Republican of the '70s.

[brooklynite]

130. If you want a third party, then feel free to start building one...

...from the bottom up -- going straight to a Presidential candidate will lead to the same failures all third party Candidates experience.

BTW - if a third party is your goal, might want to question why you're hanging out here.

[cui bono]

133. My goal is to have a president who represents what the Dem Party used to represent.

If your goal is to support another presidential candidate who will continue to enact 80s GOP policy and then take us even farther right than both Clinton and Obama have so far just because they call themselves a Democrat, then you might want to question why you are hanging out here.

[brooklynite]

135. I support progressive Democratic candidates...where they're electable.

And I work to get the Democratic Party to espouse the positions I believe in; I don't take my ball and go home.

[rhett o rick]

139. How convenient. You support them "where they're electable." otherwise you settle

for conservatives that now call themselves DEmocrats. And that's where we are today, the lower classes sliding into poverty.
I don't want a third party, I want to kick the damn conservatives back to the Repub Party where they belong.

[brooklynite]

144. Tell me, will you be kicking out the 17 million Democrats who voted for Hillary as well?

[rhett o rick]

149. What? That's a logical conclusion from what I said?

I will tell you what. In my opinion our "two" party system is rigged by the Power That Be. We get a conservative candidate and a clown to choose from. And many among us are apparently tickled to death to get to play that game. If we continue the direction we've been going we won't have a middle class.

[Number23]

174. Short. Succinct. Brutally honest and spot on true

If you want a third party, then feel free to start building one.....from the bottom up


I keep waiting for liberal havens like Vermont, Oregon etc. to launch the 3rd party revolution. It would be great to see 3rd party candidates win there, and be the bedrock for a FEASIBLE national third party that just grows and grows.

Instead, it seems as though far too many 3rd party folks just want to stand on the platform built by the Dems and scream. And they wonder why they see so few victories.

[riqster]

194. S'truth. Look to Germany and how the Greens built their party.

[riqster]

195. Point. But there is no way a TP President is gonna win. Not today.

We need it to build from the ground up.

[vi5]

151. I'm over it as well.

I've been a solid, down the line, Democratic party voter. Regardless of who it was (except in primaries where I voted my preference) I've voted for the Dem in the general election every single election since 1986. I was the first one to chastize and yell at Nader voters in 2000.

No more. I'm done. If the Democratic party wants to keep asking us for money and support and work and then kicking us in the teeth with more and bigger "centrism" and "bipartisanship", and continues to allow the rightward shift of acceptable positions in this country then they are more than allowed to do that. But they'll do it without my vote, which it's clear they have no actual interest in.

[riqster]

196. And without votes like yours, Repubs win.

They will thank you for helping them take over the country.

[vi5]

198. They're winning already.

They're winning by shifting the line of "acceptable" dialogue and positions so far to the extreme right, and the Democrats are just moving right along with them.

I wasn't a Republican in the 80's or 90's because their positions and policies were reprhensible to me. So just because now the people adopting and advocating those policies (on education, on unions, on foreign policy, on healthcare, on national security, on privacy on corporations, on taxes) have D's after their names doesn't make them any more palatable to me.

[riqster]

200. If Repubs win, things get worse.

Compare Ohio with California. Or for that matter, compare each state under D control with how it is under R control.

The "no difference" canard is complete nonsense, and cannot be proven in real life. No, reality is that Repubs are a fuckload worse than Dems.

[vi5]

202. I didn't say "no difference".

The Republicans are extreme hard right wing and the Democrats are now center-right.

Either way I'm getting traditionally conservative policies and positions almost across the board.

I'm not conservative. I never have been. So I don't want to vote for Conservative policies. Even if they are Conservative circa 1990 policies.

I will still vote for Dems when they share even a slim majority of my values and policy preferences (not I didn't say they need to share ALL of my values and policy preferences). But no more lesser of two evils bullshit for me. No more holding my nose. I'm done with that.

[riqster]

203. And again, the Repubs will thank you.

Election math in America is binary. D or R.

Less D votes = more R votes.

If we do not vote D, we are tacitly voting R.

[vi5]

207. So at what point do we stop the rightward drift?

At what point are we allowed to put our foot down and go "No more!". We're voting for Democrats and we want Democratic policies? At what point do we not accept the rightward shift of Democrats assiting in the dismantling and making it harder for unions/organized labor? At what point do we not accept the rightward shift in education policy? At what point do we not accept Democratic administrations appointing financial and economic foxes to guard the henhouses? At what point are we allowed to hold leaders accountable for actually leading on issues rather than sitting back, letting other people do all the work, take all the risks, make all the sacrifices and then taking victory laps and credit once progress has been made (ie. Obama with gay rights).

If the basic message is "We don't. We're fucked and center right is the best we can hope for." then that's fine. But then all I'm doing by voting Democratic candidate no matter what is forestalling the inevitable.

I'll still vote Democratic where I can as in many cases it still will be a viable option and the best option. But it will no longer be across the board. 28 years of doing that has been enough for me. I've seen where it's gotten the country and it's not pretty and it's nothing I want to be an accomplice to any longer.

[riqster]

208. We stop when and if the parties are truly equivalent.

Meanwhile, we push more liberal candidates to run for office. We push our elected officials to the left. We start a third party on the grassroots local level to scare then into responding to our agenda. We sue to end gerrymandering and ensure access to the polls.

And we do this above all: vote and GOTV. Not enough Americans vote, so politicos have no fear of our wrath. The only way to change that is to increase participation.

In short, we the people as a whole nut up and act like the rightful owners of the country, instead of throwing up our hands and ceding the field to the GOP.

[vi5]

216. Been there. Done that.

Been fighting the good fight for almost 30 years. Didn't make a difference. If it was just completely legitimate losses on a fair playing field then I'd keep on fighting that good fight. But the game has just gotten so rigged and the Democratic party is more than partly to blame for it as well.

Look at New York. Cuomo is a total shit head and he and the party have made every attempt to squash a liberal primary challenger. Look at Hawaii where Obama came out in support of the incumbent (I thought he doesn't get involved in primaries).

Hell, even when I think I'm voting for or supporting someone who holds certain positions, they get in office and prove me wrong (Deblasio, Obama).

Again, I'm not pulling some "Oh I'm leaving the Democratic party!!!" shtick. I'm still a registered Democrat, I'll still vote in primaries and I'll still vote for reasonable (that's all I ask) Democratic candidates. But I'm not just holding my nose and voting straight D ticket any more. For anyone.

[riqster]

218. "Been there, did that, gave up"?

So unless the party hands out candidates on a silver platter, no deal?

[vi5]

220. Nice straw man

But no. They don't have to offer candidates up on a silver platter. But they do have to not squash dissent from the left in the form of primary challenges.

As I said several times there are probably still plenty of candidates who are Democrats who I'll vote for. And the only thing I'm giving up is voting for conservatives. Whether they're circa 2014 conservatives or circa 1988 conservatives.

I wouldn't have voted for moderate Republicans in the 90's who may have been pro-choice but militarily hawkish and economically corporatist so why would I vote for them now just because they are called Democrats?

You want to? Knock yourself out. I'm too tired to put in the effort and the time and the legwork and the money any more, fighting across the board for a party that has given up on me. If that means I've given up then so be it. I'll still donate and work where I can for the candidates I support, some of which will be Democratic. But the national party, the DNC, third way types such as Hillary and Cuomo, and all of it can take a flying leap if they think they're getting a minute/dime/ounce of my support. I'm sure they'll do just fine without it.

[riqster]

222. In your anger at the party, you forget the real victims.

Hillary is a millionaire, she will not be hurt by your lack of participation in a hypothetical future contest.

No, the people who will be hurt by the lack of participation in a given race will be the poor. The children. The elderly. The minorities. The women. THEY will pay the price for your bitterness, defeatism and despair. You might not pay a price, the candidates might not pay...but nothing is free in this world. Somebody always pays.

In the last election, in one state congressional district, a (literal) handful of voters failed to vote for the Democrat in the race, and the Teapublican won. My state is now 100% Red. Dems have NO POWER OVER STATE GOVERNMENT.

Voting rights are being taken away. Women's rights are being obliterated. Children are starving and dying. Millionaires are profiting and the rest of us are struggling. Because a very few voters made the choice you propose to make.

Think a bit before you decide to be dogmatic. Think of those four voters who did what you say you will do. Every vote counts. And every vote has a consequence.

Perhaps God should have mercy on those who abandon their fellow Americans to poverty, privation, and death; but the rest of us shouldn't.

[vi5]

231. I'm out there in my day to day life working to help those people

It's the Democratic party that has abandoned them, not me. Your entire premise is based on the presumption that the Democratic party is doing even a fraction of what they can for the poor and those who are struggling.

The lesson I've learned is that if I have care or concern for those people that I have to do it. My friends and family have to do it. We are the ones that have to help them by donating our time and our money. By donating and supporting both local, and national groups that are out there doing work to help those people. No more can I donate my time and my money to a political party for nothing more than "Well, maybe if you give us more money and more votes, there's the possibility that maybe we can do something if the Republicans let us."

[riqster]

232. That is part of the solution, and I applaud your efforts.

But acting like politics doesn't matter, that the parties are equivalent, etcetera is nonsense. I also spend a lot of time AFK on direct assistance, and can tell you that the party in control has an enormous impact on the resources available for our work, and also on the amount of need.

[vi5]

234. The soup kitchen I volunteer at....

Has more people coming in now than it did during the Bush years.

The public school teachers in my family are struggling more than they did during the Bush years (thanks Arne).

Unions are in worse shape than they were during the Bush years.


As I said, I'll continue to support Democratic candidates in the Senate and house and locally when they are actually Democrats who vote for Democratic policies. The only thing I'm not doing any more is reflexively pulling the lever for anyone with D after their name.

I never said there's no difference between the two parties but there are plenty of races where the differences between the candidates are negligible and those are the ones that I will no longer support anyone who is going to shift the party further to the right than it already has been pulled.

[riqster]

235. The reasons for the rightwards drift are complex and manifold.

But they are not simply because a candidate is a right winger in Dem's clothing. Much of it has to do with critical mass.

When more Repubs are in power, they gain increased control over the zeitgeist. So a lot of Dems move right to hold onto such power as they can. This is understandable as a short term tactical measure but has proven highly counterproductive as a long-term strategy.

The solution is to elect more Dems, shift control of the discourse to the left: not to act in such a way as to enable even more Repubs to dominate the nation.

[vi5]

236. We did that in 2006.

Yes, I get the whole "not a fillibuster proof majority" thing. But after that election we had a large majority in the senate and a majority in the house and the presidency. And the rhetoric didn't shift left. If anything it shifted further right as our president went on his quixotic journey to win Republican approval and to in many cases adopt their policies.

[BainsBane]

75. Don't bother with reality

that has no relevance here.

[riqster]

81. Indeed, BB. Apparently we are in a math-free zone.

[SammyWinstonJack]

55. +1000000!

This isn't 2000, and Bernie isn't Ralph Nadar.

[riqster]

197. But the electoral paradigm has not changed.

The two parties have a lock on power in the Presidential race. A vote that does not get cast for a Dem is a tacit vote for a Repub.

[Jester Messiah]

37. So given the choice between a pro-corporate warmonger and a pro-corporate warmonger...

Which pro-corporate warmonger do we choose?

[riqster]

59. The lesser of two evils.

Sucks, but that is the choice we have.

[Plucketeer]

72. I'm likely gonna die within the next 15 years

While I keep going tho, I have to live with myself. I understand that compromise is a necessary thing (wouldn't it be marvelous if congress did?), but I also have principles. And those principles are something I'm NOT willing to compromise. I've voted Democratic since the early 90s. THOUGHT I was voting from my principles, but having been snookered, came to realize I'd been voting for the lesser of evils - and that's exactly what I/we got. Anymore - screw that.
I certainly won't be able to hold my head high when my mortal remains are reduced to ashes, but my teeny-tiny, insignificant legacy will reflect that I strove for the proper course and not just for one I felt resigned to.

[riqster]

77. I applaud the principles.

I would point out one fact: four votes turned Ohio from purple to red.

Thanks to four people in one district who did not vote Dem, we have a 100% Republican state in which women's rights are being rolled back, voting rights are under attack, poor kids are starving and dying, and the 1% are looting the rest of us.

Yes, some of that was happening before. But nothing like today. It is hell here.

I don't know why those four votes were not cast in the last election. But if anyone decided not to vote Dem because the party is insufficiently liberal, they certainly did not do anything to see their principals advanced.

Instead, the progressive agenda was destroyed.

Remember: our principles aren't just abstractions. They mean nothing except as they impact our lives and the lives of those around us.

[Jester Messiah]

104. The lesser of two evils is still evil.

Though I wouldn't frame it in the language of Good vs Evil. More like "You suck and I'm not going to vote for you."

[riqster]

110. And the greater of two evils is more evil.

I have worked in food banks for decades, and can tell you (as can anyone else in that space) that when Repubs are in charge, a lot more people are hungry.

Look at Blue states vs. Red states and compare them on things like women's rights, poverty, literacy, poll access, children's rights and inequality. There is a clear and measurable difference between the parties.

Saying "You suck and I'm not going to vote for you" is music to the ears of Repubes and their owners. It means that is one less vote they have to get on their side in order to win.

Not voting Dem = a vote for Teapubbies.

[nomorenomore08]

175. I hate to say it, but I think you're absolutely right.

Which is why, even though I won't support Hillary in the primary, I will vote for her if she's nominated.

Given my choice of dystopias, I'll take 'Brave New World' over 'The Handmaid's Tale.'

[riqster]

189. Same here. Nice analogy.

I'll vote for a cheese log if it keeps a Teapublican from gaining power.

[PoliticAverse]

51. Sanders wouldn't run as a third party candidate in the general election, if he runs...

he's going to run in the Democratic primaries.

[riqster]

61. Well, when he makes a statement like the one in the OP, it makes one wonder.

[Autumn]

26. I saw a post this morning and that one post summed everything up, it's the cure

for all the problems we have with our party.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025366419#post41

[sabrina 1]

28. Amazingly simple, short and concise solution to the problem of being taken for granted.

Thanks for the link.

[Autumn]

30. Nothing else seems to work.

[Maedhros]

106. "My Party, right or wrong" is ruining this country. [n/t]

[jwirr]

52. Not voting in the primary is not a solution and when you deliberately do not vote for a candidate

who can win is not giving up it is deserting the rest of us. When I have voted holding my nose I have still voted for a candidate who had a chance of winning because I and others at the very least need to protect the safety net. I have been around way too long to believe that the rethugs will stop trying to destroy it. Ralph Nader should have known that but he never was the champion of the poor.

[Autumn]

80. Do you have a problem with your elected Democrats or Democrats running for office deserting you?

Blame them, not your fellow Democrats.

[jwirr]

88. Demoratic voters did not come out to vote in 2012 like they did in 2008. Look what has been

happening to our economy because of that lose. It is not a conscious desertion but none the less it leaves many hurting badly. We as Democrats need to learn that we cannot set out elections and expect to have a good effect on the economy.

And by the way I do not have any problem with our elected officials in NE MN. But we need to come out to support them or they will not win.

This is not just now. For decades we have watched mid-term elections lost because we do not come out to vote.

[Autumn]

91. Some of us have never missed an election. Problem is, if you don't give some voters a reason

to vote then they stay home. That's an easy lesson to learn and Democratic leaders need to learn that. The BS about "vote for me I'm not as bad as the other guy" or "my colleague and I are in agreement on this" ?? That shit don't cut it no more. That's nothing more than telling me "who else you gonna vote for, sucker"

We do not owe them our votes, it's up to them to earn those votes.

[jwirr]

98. So if we get mad and let the assholes win then too bad for those who do get hurt. I hear you. I

just do not agree. I have voted in every election since JFK and I did it because I wanted to support the people who needed strong government with a strong safety net not because I felt defeated. The election I felt most defeated in was the Hubert Humphrey run and I almost did not vote that year - but I remembered who I was allowing to win if I did not vote. Unfortunately we did not win. We do not win too many times and it is our defeatist attitudes that help us lose.

[Autumn]

101. We all get hurt. You and I will just disagree on who it is that hurts us.

[riqster]

199. You omit one thing: the severity of the pain.

Look at formerly purple states like Wisconsin and Ohio that have turned bright red. This is hell on earth.

And it is thus because Repubs got more votes than Dems. Anyone who does not vote for a Dem is in part responsible for Repub victories.

[Autumn]

209. See I'm just not sure how the republicans can get more votes. Do the people in those

states not see the damage the republicans do? They live there, they should see it. What do the Democratic leaders in those states do to get the people that are hurting to vote for them, they were purple what happened that turned them red? Because I am certain that there are some republicans that are being hurt.

[riqster]

210. That is a good question: why do people vote against their own interests?

It's a subject often discussed here, so I won't head off-topic, especially since it makes no sense to me at all.

To my point: anytime we can help ourselves and our fellow travelers, we should do so. Voting Dem to protect ourselves from the Repubs is just such a case. Not voting Dem enables Repub evil.

[Autumn]

211. very true. but I think Democrats who lead to the center or right are also

enabling republican evil. If you don't give the people something to vote for they will stay home. What are the Democrats giving them to vote for? Wisconsin just puzzles the hell out of me.

[riqster]

213. Wisconsin and Ohio are examples of what happens when Repub voter turn out.

And Dem voters do not.

The rationale is debatable, the math is not.

Whichever side gets more peeps to the polls wins.

And when Teapubbies win, we all lose.

I don't need the party to excite me: the reality of 100% GOP control is enough motivation in itself.

[Autumn]

214. We don't need the party to excite us. But the average voter does. The republicans

always keep their party excited. Abortion, Unions, immigration, those are just a few things that always gets their base out. What do Democrats do to get their base out?

[riqster]

215. Different GOTV activists use different messages

As do party organizations. But one thing that makes it much harder is the slew of vote-suppressing arguments from the Center and Left. We are fighting uphill against our adversaries and some of our allies. Examples:

The parties are the same.

The parties are too similar.

It doesn't matter who wins.

The corporations always win, we always lose.

And so on. These messages discourage the average voter, making it that much harder to provide positive or negative incentives to vote.

A lot of damage is caused by people advocating that people not vote Dem.

[Autumn]

217. And yet those things being said are not lies. So the Democratic leaders need to show Democrats that

something can and will be done. I haven't seen any effort on their behalf to do that.

[riqster]

219. So the reality of Republican crimes and abuse of your fellow citizens isn't enough?

It is for me, and for those I volunteer with. We see the damage caused by 100% Repub rule on the streets, in the shelters, under the bridges, in the schools.

If saving the poor and powerless isn't motivation enough, well...

[Autumn]

221. Do the democratic leaders see it? Because I don't think they do.

Do they see people living in the streets, under the bridges and in shelters and on the streets? Because the word poor seems to have disappeared from their vocabulary. When is the last time you heard Obama give a speech on the poor, the homeless the needy? Middle class middle, class middle class. By the way entitlement reform, which he does like to talk about is a nice way of saying cuts, to food stamps SS and the safety net. Give the people something to vote for and they will vote. I'm not a Democratic leader, I don't have the microphone, I don't have the comfortable shoes. All I have is my vote.

I agree with you, we see the damage caused by 100% repub rule. hell we see it with 49% rule. Question is, what is the Democratic leadership doing about it?

[riqster]

224. Look at blue states. Look at red states. See the difference.

When we involve ourselves in the process, put up and support liberal and progressive candidates and elect enough of them, they do the job we expect.

When we don't, that is when things go to shit. Fuck the parties, this is OUR country. Or it would be if we stood up and acted like it. If we engage during the entire cycle and get the rest of the non-Teabaggers to the polls, we can see the country we deserve.

If we disengage, allow ourselves to be lulled to inaction by the siren songs of cynicism, the rightwards drift will eventually consume us all.

[Autumn]

226. As long as our elected Democrats continue to be given a pass on their rightward drift

things will continue as they have. Our elected Democrats and our leaders rightwards drift will eventually consume us all.

Have a nice day.

[riqster]

227. Surrender if you wish. I shan't.

A very good day to you and yours.

[Autumn]

228. I won't surrender either. We just fight a different war. Good luck to you.

[riqster]

229. And to you.

[JEB]

64. I thought that was the way it was supposed to work.

Vote for the best candidate.

[riqster]

116. Yep. And in a democratic primary, I would likely vote for Sanders.

But if he runs as an independent, all he'll do is split the center-left vote and ensure a Repub victory.

At present, Senator Sanders is not eligible to run in the Democratic primary, since he is an Independent.

[840high]

36. me2

[Scootaloo]

115. I'll bust ass for anyone who represents my principles

if Democrats will not so so, then they can go get fucked with the Republicans they're striving to join.

Either the party goes left or it goes extinct. That's what's coming to a head. The Republicans are fully embraing fascism, and fascism is always popular, where it's legal, so they're set. The Democrats/ The democrats are busy alienating the left in order to play catch-up with the fascists, which is leaving the democrats isolated and out of touch, and actually hostile to all sectors of the voting public.

I would like to dream that Bernie could yank the party back to the left if he joined. But no, I'm pretty certain "our leaders" are too heavily entrenched in business interests and foreign lobby groups plumping their bank accounts to follow that lead.

I vote on principle. if that's going to be Bernie, it's going to be Bernie. if it's going to be some unnamed Democratic candidate, then that's who it's going to be. But right now, Sanders has all but formally declared, while all the Democrats have to offer me is someone whose only virtue is that she's more or less to the left of Joe Lieberman, if there's a stiff easterly breeze

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

152. Well said, Scoot.

I'm sick of this "She's the one so get used to it" fucking nonsense.

[winter is coming]

163. +1000. n/t

[Segami]

6. "...I'm not quite sure that the political process is one in which we anoint people,..”

"...she is not a sufficient champion of his message for the middle class..."

Go Bernie!

[pleinair]

7. Run, Bernie, run!

We need a good progressive candidate

[L0oniX]

8. K & R

[MissDeeds]

9. Run Bernie!

God l love that man!

K&R

[Enthusiast]

10. Kicked and recommended a whole bunch!

Yay, Bernie!

[Iwillnevergiveup]

11. Well, from this household

3 votes for Bernie!

K&R

[riderinthestorm]

12. Yes!!! nt

[ReRe]

13. K&R

Run Bernie run: as a Democrat!

[Renew Deal]

16. What party will he run in?

[NorthCarolina]

47. I could care less. I'll vote for him regardless of the "I"nitial after his name.

Voting solely on the basis of party, and not seeking out and voting on principle is exactly why we are where we are. Take a Republican, start calling him/her a DLC Democrat and Democrats will vote for them. Of course it worked, but we must realize the process of manufactured consent and begin the process to move away from that form of societal control.

[Renew Deal]

57. It makes a big difference

Between his first election being in January 2016 or November 2016.

Chances are he won't be there in November.

[Robbins]

17. Please run

Liberals need someone to vote for other than the to right of obama Hillary Clinton.When she started talkng like Mccain to blast Obama
on foreign policy she assured I will never vote for her.She showed no lyality after he made her secretary of state.Hillary Is too much In pocket of wall street.

On Economy we need those not in 1 percent to benefit.and we need someone who will protect Social Security,SSI,Medicare,Medicaid,and Food stamps.

The slow move back to Iraq has beguin.we need someone to stand against it.

[MoonchildCA]

19. Do it Bernie!

[Overseas]

20. K&R. Yes please!

[bigwillq]

21. K and R

[oldandhappy]

22. Keep speaking out, Bernie.

Get into some primaries. Talk! Keep the other people honest. Hillary separating herself from policies she established is nuts. And supporting Israel when she does not need to say anything is only about money.

[Rockyj]

141. Do you think Hillary is trying to get the votes from Repugs...

who are real Reagan/Goldwater Republicans that can no longer stand their party? I just don't understand why she would bash Obama and side with Israel in a 24 hour period. Why would she self-sabotage herself with her base. Also, after bashing Obama I could not allow myself to hold my nose and vote for her.

[oldandhappy]

183. I have no idea what she is thinking.

I am sure she is thinking money. But beyond that -- no clue. Yes. Self-sabotage says it well. I have never wanted Bill back in the WH. Now I am worried about her lack of self control. Ahso. Keep the tissues handy. If she ends up as the nominee, I will have to vote for her. Can't take a chance on the other side!

[George II]

24. Why is it that we continuously see "news articles" with headlines that aren't correct?

Not the OP's headline, but Yahoo's. Nowhere in that article did Sanders ever mention that "he" had a platform of any kind.

As much as I like him, he is NOT going to run for President, particularly as a Democrat.

[zeemike]

27. Sanders Warren, or Warren Sanders.

Either one would be a winner in my opinion.
And would have the support of a lot of people...I know I would do what ever I could to see them elected.

[City Lights]

29. You go, Bernie!

[newfie11]

32. +++++++++++++++++++++++

Hope hope he runs and wins!!!
He has my vote!

[Cyrano]

33. Bernie can't win -- but he can pull Hillary left

Even if Bernie Sanders won the Democratic primary, he couldn't win a national election and here's why. He describes himself as a Democratic Socialist. The GOP would take the "Socialist" part, very quickly turn it into "communist" and then blast it out continuously over their echo chamber.

Most people don't pay as much attention to politics as we do here on DU. They would receive the "communist" message and very little else. Bernie would lose a national election to someone like Mitt Romney. I think we'd be crazy to take this risk.

Having said that, Bernie in the primaries could force Hillary further left on social issues and foreign affairs.

The other possibility is that Bernie could run as an Independent. Living in Florida, I remember how that turned out in 2000 when Nader ran. And I think Bernie knows that and would not, therefore, run as an Independent.

[raindaddy]

40. Pulling Hillary to the left..

Means her campaign promises start to sound a little less third way and a little more like a traditional Democrat.. The pull to the right begins before her seat in the oval office gets warm. We've seen it all before.

[Cyrano]

45. Yes, I know, but

my basic point is that Bernie can't win a national election. If we all become lemmings and march off a cliff together, the Republicans could end up with the White House in 2016. And no matter what Hillary's flaws are, we can't allow that to happen.

[arcane1]

67. What is the source of the "conventional wisdom" that Sanders can't win?

I hear lots of people saying it, but I've seen nothing to back it up.

[BrotherIvan]

82. People always feel the need to romance Republicans

who never vote D anyway. I don't know where it comes from, but our President has the same need.

We've been told for so long that only the candidate that has the most money (corporately endorsed) can win and so we get these third way blue dogs propped up by the party. It's the party that gives the edict to vote D no matter what and good Tories hammer anyone who might try to say otherwise.

[NorthCarolina]

164. It'a a gut feeling based on

err, ummm, well it's a gut feeling. That being said, the "unelectable one" will nevertheless receive three votes from this household.

[raindaddy]

69. I understand how you feel but.....

If we keep allowing the scary Republicans to dictate who we nominate to represent us we're letting them "push" us off the cliff.

I'm at the point I'd rather lose a principled battle than "win" a hollow unprincipled one. If we allow this party to keep heading down the current path, people will forget what a real democrat looks like anyway. The party will become completely identified with third way Democrats and the left will become even more irrelevant than it already is.

[Iggo]

112. If the voting booth's on the way to the cliff, we can't lose.

[djean111]

50. Exactly. The only thing pulled to the left would be easily and quickly discarded campaign blather.

Wouldn't even be surprised to see Rick Warren again.

[arcane1]

65. Correction: he'll pull Hillary's campaign rhetoric to the left.

He would have no change on how she actually governs.

[nxylas]

118. Republicans will *always* call the Democratic candidate a socialist

Even if it's Hillary.

[JaneyVee]

123. They called Obama a socialist also, and he won TWICE!

[DonCoquixote]

34. Hillary, I may choke you down in 2016

but I will be wearing my Bernie Sanders t-shirt to commerate that i voted for HIM in the primary.

And if he pulls off the feat Obama did in 2008, so much the better, that way your legacy will be that of someone who COULD have been the first madame president has she not spent so much time demonizing the left that she expected to carry her to the White House!

GO BERNIE!

[Jester Messiah]

35. This guy right here.

I could vote for Bernie with a glad heart. Of course, I'm under no illusions that the Repubs wouldn't stonewall him as badly or worse than they have Obama, but they're gonna be assholes regardless.

[SheilaT]

38. I've been saying for a good two years now that

Hillary the Inevitable is Hillary a Huge Mistake. And if she is actually nominated I may simply not vote in 2016.

I swear, one of these days I'm going to start a thread saying I just woke up from a coma that I fell into in January of 2008, and I'm presuming Hillary Clinton is now half way through her second term and I'm eager to learn about what she's accomplished so far. I'm remembering all too well how a significant number of people here and else where thought she was The Anointed One in '08, and how viciously they attacked anyone who didn't agree with them. Not to mention how she kept on campaigning even after it was clear she wasn't going to get the nomination, and came close to dividing the Democratic Party so badly that we'd loose. I should probably thank God that McCain made his own disastrous choice for VP.

Most of all I object to the very notion that there is absolutely no one new in the last six or eight years that is considered a viable candidate. Being so unwilling to think, really think about the issues that confront us and what kind of candidate we really need, is a sure formula for failure.

[Eleanors38]

56. Much the same was said in '08. Followed by collapse.

[PAProgressive28]

39. Looking forward to it

I'm under no delusions that Bernie can win (though I will do everything in my power to help him get as far as he can go). I think it will give Americans another perspective and get the party to re-analyze Hillary.

[BeyondGeography]

42. She/we/the party/the country needs to see a strong challenge from the left

Change parties and do it then, Bernie.

[TheKentuckian]

49. I would not advise a switch for any less than guaranteed debate access and the super delgates

give up their over dog influence, bare minimum. No can do? Fuck you, I'm taking it to the general.

[doxydad]

43. I would VOTE FOR BERNIE...

...in a heartbeat...however he has several hurdles to overcome. I constantly hear from moderates that think he is a Socialist, and therefore they could not vote for him. They're wrong....but he's still not electable...and that's bad for America.

[navarth]

124. He is a Democratic Socialist

and doesn't it bug you when some fool shows he's been programmed to think 'socialism' is a bad thing when they know absolutely nothing about it?

[daleanime]

46. K&R....

[obxhead]

48. Bernie or bust.

Say no to Hillary!

[grahamhgreen]

54. Hillary should throw her support behind Bernie:)

[Tuesday Afternoon]

73. I agree.

[wildbilln864]

60. Sanders/Warren 2016! n/t

[Iron Man]

63. I'd support Bernie if he ran for president.

[joshcryer]

66. Clinton is already talking about income inequality.

Student loans. Bernie isn't paying attention.

[djean111]

92. Yes, I am sure Hillary is talking about whatever seems to be a progressive issue. Talking is all.

[joshcryer]

93. Reminds me of a junior senator in 2008...

Only far more qualified than any candidate in modern history.

[rhett o rick]

137. Yes if you favor Wall Street. And so far she doesn't sound a bit like Obama in 2008.

And if, all of a sudden she does, I won't believe her.

[joshcryer]

142. Oh she's far left of 2008 Obama.

Obama didn't mention income inequality in 2008. Under Obama income inequality has exploded (4 times faster than under Bush; but this happens with a good stock market). 2008 Obama made very little waves about womens rights, it will be a core plank of Clinton's platform. 2008 Obama was against gay marriage, Clinton is for it and it is a core plank of the Democratic Party platform. 2008 Obama was against marijuana (or rather, he refused to answer questions about it when asked), Clinton will likely be open to it (and if Colorado and Washington have their way it will be a plank of the Democratic Party platform).

And, of course, because she'll likely pick a more liberal running mate like Julien Castro, the platform will be able to push the DREAM act and other acts like it.

[rhett o rick]

148. If she is talking about income inequality it's only because Sen Sanders is forcing the issue.

It's easy for her to be on the side of legal marijuana and same sex marriage since those issues have progressed since 2008. What were her stands then? Pres Obama was for transparency and rolling back the Patriot Act (apparently only blowing smoke), will H. Clinton take a hard stand re. our powerful security state? In 2008 it didn't appear that Obama favored Wall Street, but it's clear where Clinton stands. In fact I am betting she runs Goldman-Sachs as her vice president. If Corps are people, why can't they hold office?

[JoeyT]

192. Yeah, she suddenly discovered income inequality was a problem

when it became important to her getting elected. Anyone that thinks for a fraction of a second that Hillary has any position on income inequality other than "Strongly in favor of" is out of their mind.

People concerned with income inequality don't champion Wal-Mart and they don't give speeches telling banksters what wonderful people they are for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

[Romulox]

205. Did she mention her husband by name when naming off the offending policies????

NAFTA, MFN China, deregulation, etc.?

[fbc]

68. Go Bernie!

[Stellar]

70. Thank GAWD...we have someone who is not affraid to challenge Hillary!

I guess we will see how many time Hillary changes her game to fit what is popular at the moment.

[belltower]

74. Umm, martial law is on the way folks

since, surely, by the year 2018 climate catastrophe will be fully upon us: geologic & biologic methane then belching from the shit-bowels of the planet everywhere. Frequent, violent storms everywhere, all year. Drought, aquifer depletion, dead seas halving the food supply everywhere. Financial markets in complete collapse (stop worrying, today's income inequality 'problem' will be a distant memory). Electricity regularly interrupted and roving bands of armed rethugs, everywhere. Calls for a New Constitution. And on and on.... the problems facing the next president are not those thought at the outset of any candidate's 'ever-so-hopeful' campaign. So who do you want in 'command' at the dawn of the Dystopic Age (the close of the Industrial Age)? Suggest we all stop fighting the last war, prepare for the next.

Bernie's got substantial credibility with our veterans, perhaps more so than anyone else; I want these good folks on our side, fighting those nazis at the local level. I want his eloquence and honesty. I want his insistence on a Local Economy grounded upon legally-justified expropriation of whatever worthful capital is left for the remaining years of our species' existence.

Hear the nazi line against Bernie: as a Socialist, he would usher in "One World Government" ... ha ha ha - what a crock -- you fools, he'd do the exact OPPOSITE because he'll have no other choice.

[william cail]

76. Reality based living

I would vote whomever becomes the Democratic nominee for president. That being said that a Warren-Sanders ticket isn't electable. Its all about the US Supreme Court. I will vote for Hilary if she becomes the nominee. I agree on a lot of what Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are saying. But that won't win votes with people who don't pay attention. There are a lot of them.

The DU member's that are having their little tantrums saying that they won't vote or voting third party must get over it. If a Republican wins in 2016 it will be a lot worse.

If you don't vote can't complain.
If you vote third party you are voting Republican.

Purity politics doesn't work. See the last two presidential elections. Some people can't afford living under another republican administration.

[arcane1]

85. Again with the baseless claims that he isn't electable. Says who?

Personally, I'm tired of the Supreme Court being used as extortion against liberals in order to scare them into voting against their best interests.

[creeksneakers2]

184. Here's a poll

http://www.people-press.org/2011/12/28/little-change-in-publics-response-to-capitalism-socialism/?src=prc-number

[arcane1]

204. Thank you. I wonder how much it's changed in the three years since then.

[Maedhros]

107. The one benefit of having a Republican win the White House

is that when the Republican President ramps up drone warfare, puts Social Security on the bargaining table, increases military operations in Africa by 217%, proposes wars of choice in the MidEast, codifies indefinite detention into law, claims the right to execute American citizens without due process and pumps the NSA full of steroids, people like you will actually oppose these abuses rather than cheer them on for the sake of The Lesser Evil.

[MindPilot]

113. You speak truth.

The purists who put party over country have brought us to where we are now.

[Tommymac]

188. No, The Supreme Court did in 2000. n/t

[Marrah_G]

168. Nope- not voting for someone because it's "their turn" not going to happen

Frankly, I will vote for Sanders no matter if he runs as a Dem, Indie or a Socialist.

[AtomicKitten]

78. I'd be proud to work and vote for Bernie.

[PoutrageFatigue]

79. Then RUN!!!

....I simply will not support a Hillary candidacy...

[MannyGoldstein]

83. I hope Bernie *does* run

We need to hear what he has to say!

[mc51tc]

84. I so hope that you run, Bernie!

I finally agree for once with Barbara Bush, we do not need anymore presidents from the Bush or Clinton families! A Warren/Sanders or Sanders/Warren ticket would be the best for our country!

[Dustlawyer]

86. I am tired of holding my nose and voting for the lesser of two evils.

I will vote for Bernie whether he runs as a Socialist or a Democrat. If the Repugs win then we will end up like Kansas or my home state. That would be a tough lesson, but maybe then we will be ready to stop our candidates from being bought with campaign contributions.

[WillyT]

87. Huge K & R !!!

[ancianita]

89. I want him to be serious. I don't want to be set up for the big switch. If he declares, he's got my

full primary support, but he'd better be in it to win.

[Tarheel_Dem]

90. I would never, in a million years, vote for Bernie Sanders, not even in a GE.

[Comrade Grumpy]

97. Even if he were the Democratic Party nominee?

[Tarheel_Dem]

109. Damn straight.

[JaneyVee]

125. Please explain.

[Tarheel_Dem]

131. This is the reason....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1743963

I have nothing against Bernie running, he should just stick to the banner he's won under since he's been running for federal office. I don't think he should switch his affiliation just to take advantage of the infrastructure & resources, built by Democrats. Besides, he can't win.

http://www.salon.com/2014/06/03/no_bernie_sanders_should_not_run_for_president_why_his_challenge_would_achieve_little/

[Union Scribe]

178. Big shock there. nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

182. You'll all be "shocked" when 1972 repeats itself. McGovern Lives!

[GoneFishin]

102. I will not vote for Hillary. Primary or general. I will not vote for a lesser shitty candidate.

I will go to the polls, but I will leave that box empty before I will vote for Hillary. I promise.

[GoneFishin]

103. Run Bernie, run.

[Faux pas]

108. I'm with you Bernie!

[vkkv]

111. I hope to have the opportunity to vote for him

and / or Sen. Warren.

And sooner than later!

[NealK]

114. K&R

[woo me with science]

117. Thank you, Bernie. nt

[ChiciB1]

120. Count Me In!! I Can't DO Hillary...

I fully understand many here want her, but NEVER ME!

[brooklynite]

128. As a Hillary supporter, I say "welcome"...

Nobody on the Clinton side has stated they're against a competitive primary, just that it seems unlikely that most of the prospective alternative candidates seem unlikely to run if she does. Personally, I think that, as admirable as his positions might be, Sanders would be a poor choice because he wouldn't be competitive with the national electorate, but I have no problem with his running.

[allinthegame]

147. in agreement

let him run to tighten up HRC's stance on a number of unpleasnt things....see Atlantic article...
however he probably has a much chance as Ted Cruz does on the other side. No problem with him being a thorn in Clinton's side.

[nomorenomore08]

176. If anything, he might help pull her a bit to the left.

So I can't see his candidacy as anything but a positive.

[Pharaoh]

129. Burnie/Warren!!

What a ticket that would be!!

[Pharaoh]

132. But being realistic

Bernie's age would play against him. I'm still in the draft Warren camp.

[brooklynite]

138. In other words, Fantasy Candidate 1 can't win, so I'll go with Fantasy candidate 2...

Assuming anyone DID try to draft Warren (as opposed to just dreaming about it on a political blog) explain how she's competitive with a national electorate.

Or is letting. Republican get elected okay as long as you've "sent a message".

[Pharaoh]

143. whatever

[CaliforniaPeggy]

134. RUN, Bernie, RUN!

As a Democrat, please.

And leave Senator Warren in the Senate, where she can continue to put fear into the hearts (if they have them) of Republicans and Tea Partiers.

[Babel_17]

136. Kicked and Recommended (nt)

[Ruby the Liberal]

140. BERNIE!!!

Way to get that populist message out and draw the debate.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

145. : ::sigh:: : Doesn't Bernie understand that Hillary is just like all of us?

She is poor just like us...

She is center right just like us...

She's for TPP just like us...

She's for Israeli bombing Palestinians just like us...

She's for Wall Street just like us...


She's just like us, and together we can win tomorrow today.

[TheNutcracker]

146. Run Bernie! I still have your pic on my fireplace! I WANT to vote for you!

[Mosaic]

150. No need to cuss Bernie

Just say I have a Really good platform!

[rateyes]

153. I would vote for Bernie in a New York minute.

Run, Bernie, Run!!

[merrily]

154. Oh, look. Sanders used the A word (anoint). But, what does a U.S. Senator who caucuses with

Democrats know?

Obviously, DU's centrist loyalist posters know better.

[Cleita]

159. I'm praying he runs.

Thom Hartmann has a bumper sticker in his studio that says Sanders/Warren 2016. That would be the ticket made in heaven.

[WhiteTara]

160. Will he run as a democrat? If not, he has no chance. nt

[JaydenD]

169. I believe he said he will run as a Democrat

He doesn't want to mess things up with splitting the votes.
We'll see if the Clintons allow this, they seem to have a say in everything.

[WhiteTara]

172. Thanks for the info and

welcome to DU

[Marrah_G]

167. He has my vote.

I like him enough that I will campaign for him.

[YOHABLO]

171. Bernie Sanders is a true American and the only one who has been talking to the people for years.

He has been on the Thom Hartman program every Friday for several years talking about issues that affect all of us progressive and conservative. So we know where he's coming from. Hillary on the other hand is an inside the beltway parrot. I don't trust her; and we don't need half measures like we've been getting from the Obama administration.

[bluestateguy]

173. At 75 it might be time to pass the torch Bern.

nt

[Peregrine Took]

177. Vote for Hillary the Hawk? Chop off my finger first! n/t

[blkmusclmachine]

179. ,

,

[Warren DeMontague]

190. if he runs as a Democrat, he will make the process a good bit more interesting, for sure.

If he runs as a Democrat, I will consider voting for him in the Primary, of course.

[B Calm]

191. I'm not excited about Hillary. Bernie would make a great President, but the only way he can win

would be to run under the Democratic ticket. If he runs as a Socialist, he'll lose and the Republican will win. I won't throw my vote away!

[marble falls]

193. Don't Just Anoint Hillary.....

AMEN.

[Calista241]

212. Might help his cause if he was actually a Democrat.

[myrna minx]

223. K&R!

[mmonk]

225. I would work my ass off for him. There's nothing to lose in doing so and everything to gain.

[woo me with science]

233. Kick for Bernie.

[woo me with science]

237. Kick for Bernie.