What's up with this talk of taking on the establishment

[Thenewire]

Coming from both Trump and Sanders. Have we not stopped to consider that the establishment might be needed in order to pass progressive policies? On the other side Trump will get all the support from the soulless republican party once they realize that there is no turning back so we can either continue attacking the establishment or accept the indisputable fact that supporting the establishment it the only way that a Democractic candidate can be elected president in this election. On the contrary you are buying into the same disingenuous arguments Trump uses to propel what is nothing more than a new republican party under his full control, something that conservatives will allow out of reckless greed.

So isn't it obvious how similar Trump and Sanders really are? Not only just the fact that both base their arguments against a bogyman. In the case of Sanders he is right, the wealthy and financial institutions are responsible for a lot of the wrongs that effect society at large, but when you use the same argument at every occasion you get it isn't very different than blaming Muslims, immigrants or minorities for all the ills effecting the nation. Sanders is stooping down to Trump's level every time he solicits this sense of moral superiority by accusing the establishment of selling out when the realities are much more complicated. We live in a world that isn't controlled by one powerful individual or an unique set of principles, it is a web of ideas and complex dealings that help achieve the progress we see today.

Sanders has been critical of the Democratic party and that is justifiable. Having a discussion helps move us toward the correct path or at the very least prevents the deviation into the safe zone of the status quo. But how can you possibly justify how Sanders is attacking other organizations who did not endorse him with the same pathetic argument? I understand how some progressives might be taking this election as some sort of opportunity to reinforce their own perception of liberalism but we are neglecting the realities of this country when there is so much at stake.

[daleanime]

1. So he's right....

but you don't like where it leads to?


Sorry about that.

[Thenewire]

5. It isn't right when the political climate doesn't allow it

The United States is too ingrained in capitalism to turn around and support socialism even knowing that it would have a positive effect. Change is never easy to a lot of people and even something as wonderful as single payer will lead to millions of job loses in the short term as insurance companies either go bankrupt or merge with one another. I personally see this as a necessary reality like mostly everyone here but it is one that will never win an election. Our biggest fight at the moment is against fascism, that is why in this election we should set aside our own sense of ideological purity or we will be divided and defeated.

[daleanime]

13. Right or wrong isn't just something that you 'allow'....

calling it 'ideological purity' just shows that you don't want it. Look around you, do you really think that there are any easy answers to the problems we're facing?

The only question is, are you willing to fight for it?

[Thenewire]

18. We must all be willing to fight against fascism

And stop it before it sneaks into power. My point of all this is that Sanders and Trump are using very similar language to make the same point. The intentions and implementations might be different but it uses the same heated argument that has been exploited by fascists and authoritarian individuals throughout history. I will not be convinced that Sanders can win the general election.

[daleanime]

21. No, you won't be.....

but I'm convinced that no other candidate we have will change the situation we face. So please enjoy your day.

[Dawson Leery]

2. I have less regard for Bernie.

The professional activists on both sides are claiming that ANYONE who opposes them is part of a
corrupt establishment.

The same applies to Sanders and Trump. It is absurd.

[davidn3600]

15. Are you suggesting Hillary isn't part of the establishment?

[Thenewire]

16. There will always be an establishment

As long as you have a country that consists of a government there will be some organization backing it up. This talk about being against the establishment is a misconstrued right wing argument against the government that Sanders has so fondly adopted into his platform.

[davidn3600]

17. No, it's the reason Hillary lost in 2008

People wanted change. They wanted something different.

It's why Hillary is struggling again. She no doubt part of a Washington establishment. People in both parties are sick of the party elites choosing who should be president. Instead, the voters want an outsider. They want something different. Trump tapped into that immediately on the GOP side. And now Bernie is tapping into it on the Democrat side.

[Thenewire]

20. This is precisely why Sanders is so dangerous to the democratic party

He is not an outsider. The fact that he is a career politician will be exploited by Trump along with many other things. We may or may not have a chance with the other two candidates but at the very least if the Democratic party loses it wont crumble. Imagine Sanders losing to Trump, do you think there will be another socialist candidate running as a democrat ever again?

[libdem4life]

3. Not so. "On the journey of 10,000 steps, one must take the first step."

Not cower in the corner or wait for all the lights to be green. Nothing great was every accomplished by asking everyone what they think. We'd still be back in the Stone Age. That's why America is great. We have the ingenuity and the fortitude to take on new challenges and make them happen.

Oh, and we don't have a "Democratic Party" anymore. We have a Corporate Party that picks and chooses which "democratic" issue it can buy and use.

PS...Welcome to DU

[tkmorris]

4. GD:P is thataway---->

Creative Speculation is... well, I'm not sure actually but it ain't here. Looks like you already know where PolySci 101 is.

[Act_of_Reparation]

6. Where are you getting this shit from?

The Luke Russert School of Political Science?

[Shandris]

7. Ooh, I was right. This IS the new line of attack on Bernie.

I saw a magazine lead with this story late last week (about how 'similar' Trump and Bernie supposedly are), and I wondered how long it would be until the...'compensated dissimenators of gently-massaged information'...showed up.

Bad news, sunshine. The Establishment, on both sides, has overplayed itself and shown just how little it cares about democracy. To cover that up, they stop calling it democracy and call it 'populism', as if that were somehow a bad thing (okay, there are ways it is, but those ways are endemic to democracy in and of itself, so with that in mind...). They might find that the setup for the last twenty years has left them highly vulnerable to their own tactics, however, and now all their previous excuses are pointless.

Besides, OP, do you mean to seriously tell me with a straight face that with the amount of income inequality alone in this nation, that electing more of the people who have made it that way is a good thing? I'd strongly recommend detaching from civilization for a little while to rediscover authentic meanings of terms.

[Thenewire]

9. Of course it isn't a good thing

But it is the only alternative to a worse outcome. I vehemently believe that there is no way that Sanders could win a general election.

[Shandris]

10. The people disagree and a MASSIVE number of them don't care.

But get this, because here's where it gets good. The R's keep hearing Trump can't win because {reasons}. We keep hearing Bernie can't win because {reasons}. But those {reasons} only work against the assumption of an establishment candidate. In other words, Trump vs. Bernie can not be as predicted, because the prediction is that neither can win and in a face-off, you already know by definition that can't happen.

No more concerning, no more begging for more time, no more obfuscation. The idea of an establishment is abhorrent in the first place, and it has demonstrated its abhorrence through 50 years of continuous neglect and assault. 'Professional politicians' is such a glaringly evil concept that it amazes me that most can't see how insidious it is. It's the world we have, of course, but every now and then even these so-called Gods of Humanity need to be reminded who they serve (non-violently, as if that needed to be pointed out). That time is now.

[demmiblue]

8. Take it to GDP.

Just because you threw Trump in there, it is obvious as to what your motive is.

[arendt]

11. "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." - Frederick Douglass

Let's play nice and maybe the establishment will listen to us. LOLOL.

We've tried that for twenty years. We got bupkus.

Lots of people are fed up with the defeatism/collaborationism you are talking.

What a load of bunk.

[Thenewire]

12. Bernie Sanders

Is a career politician and the embodiment of the political system that encourages politicians to remain in power for decades. The only way that the establishment is defeated or renewed is if we divide and Sanders is achieving just that. The ignorant belief that in order to get what we want we should let it all crumble and burn, not long after realizing that were just cutting off the nose to spite the face.

[Bluenorthwest]

25. Electing a candidate you do not want is not letting it crumble and burn. Your hyperbole box seems

stocked to the brim. What's with all the full tilt verbiage? What's your standing to claim that others should vote as you wish or they are ignorant nihilists?

[Thenewire]

26. My point is that Sander is a dangerous candidate because he will lose..

His followers are under the impression that he is larger than life and untouchable, not considering that he has been a politician for a very long time.

[arendt]

27. Is your defeatism specific to Bernie, or should liberals just commit suicide

Where do you draw the line in "objecting" to the last thirty years of neoliberal crap? Just askin. Not expecting an honest answer.

Cause all I expect from you is more dismissive sneering.

[Iggo]

14. Huh?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

19. There are no facts, only interpretations. Friedrich Nietzsche

Your interpretation of "the establishment" differs from Bernie's and mine.

[LanternWaste]

22. Your assertions/allegations are dramatically incomplete.

One would need to know the precise definition of "taking on" the establishment in regards to this conversation, as well as an objective measurements of how, how much, to what precise end, and exactly how. Otherwise, it's merely a contest between carnival barkers using the same bumper-sticker bullet points over and over again, rather than an accurate analysis and assessment.

"So isn't it obvious how similar Trump and Sanders really are?"
No. It is obvious though, that you are comparing the general to arrive at a specific conclusion, also known as "incomplete comparison", a logical fallacy predicated on a fractional assertion and rather popular in advertising.

[MindPilot]

23. Heard this a few times during recent my ventures into the wilds of right-wing radio.

Having come of age during the 60s, hearing right-wingers claim they are "anti-establishment" just makes me shake my head.

[Bluenorthwest]

24. Some of Harvey Milk's primary campaign posters did not even name his opponent, they just said:

Harvey Milk vs The Machine. He ran pointedly against the entrenched Democratic powers. You want to explain to me why he was so wrong to do so? I just left a thread with some straight person lecturing about Human Rights Campaign, want to rip Harvey to pieces? How low should I set this bar?

[notadmblnd]

28. Yeah, Sanders and Trump are exactly the same

Go sell it in the HRC group, they'll buy. SMDH

[valerief]

29. You're right. We should never have taken this country from the Native Americans.

We should have left well enough alone. I agree with you.

[redstateblues]

30. Bernie has been getting a check from the government

for 24 years. He is an outsider? He is a politician.

[JonLeibowitz]

31. He is also the most popular member of Congress. Perhaps he is not the problematic part of govt?

[lumberjack_jeff]

32. He should earn honest paychecks, like the Clintons do! n/t

[TM99]

33. Look, a better term to use than 'establishment'

is 'status quo'.

We often associate establishment organizations and politicians with wanting, for whatever the reasons, to maintain a status quo.

The status quo right now is all the Clinton is 'for'. She has no passion or enthusiasm for even pushing a few ideals. And a good leader needs to be both pragmatic and idealistic.

Many on the left voted for Obama because they believed in 'campaign' Obama's Hope & Change PR stunt. And after eight years of basically the status quo, now many are wanting serious change, not just talk!

We can't have that with Clinton. We might get it with Sanders because he is at least consistent and congruent for his last 35 years in politics. Clinton, again, is not. Hell she was against LGBT marriage and has a lifetime 88% score with HRC. Sanders supported LGBT rights and marriage decades before and has a lifetime 100% score with HRC. Why wouldn't HRC endorse Sanders over Clinton? Well, apparently because those at the top want to maintain the status quo which includes a lot of corporate sponsorships.

And I am really get sick of those claiming to be on the left constantly pretending that there is any connections whatsoever with what Sanders and Trump are saying. They could not be more apart in all ways. So frankly, I am done even considering anyone serious who takes that stance.

[Thenewire]

35. Sanders uses right wing talking points to justify his definition of the establishment.

“I would love to have the endorsement of every progressive organization in America. We’re very proud to have received recently the endorsement of MoveOn.org. We’ve received the endorsement Democracy for America. These are grassroots organizations representing millions of workers. What we are doing in this campaign, it just blows my mind every day because I see it clearly, we’re taking on not only Wall Street and economic establishment, we’re taking on the political establishment. So, I have friends and supporters in the Human Rights Fund and Planned Parenthood. But, you know what? Hillary Clinton has been around there for a very, very long time. Some of these groups are, in fact, part of the establishment.”

It isn't about the status quo. Does Sanders believe that an organization like Planned Parenthood is more corrupt and contributes less to society than MoveOn.org? Did he become senile and forget how long he has been involved in politics when accusing Clinton of being a career politician? I don't think any of these are true. I think that he is saying these things to attract right wingers who hate Planned Parenthood and LGBT rights in an underhanded fashion. He has done the same previously and he doesn't care that he is hurting these organizations after some of his supporters turn their back on them.
"What I’m suggesting is that what Trump has done with some success has taken that anger, taken those fears — which are legitimate — and converted them into anger against Mexicans, anger against Muslims,” He is legitimizing the oppositions point of view by being broad and knowing that your supporters will still defend you.

[TM99]

36. The moment you spout such nonsense as

this, that Sanders is uses right wing talking points, I am done discussing with you.

You are playing a game. If you were serious, you would recognize that it is Clinton who IS pushing right wing ideas from increased sanctions on Iran to 'no new taxes' to 'no single payer universal healthcare'.

Good bye!

[cherokeeprogressive]

34. "So isn't it obvious how similar Trump and Sanders really are?"

I think you bumpted yer head.