Sanders won't join Democratic Party

[DonViejo]

Source: The Hill

BY JONATHAN EASLEY - 11/17/16 10:06 AM EST

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wont officially join the Democratic Party even though he was appointed to a leadership position within the Senate Democratic Conference this week.

I was elected as an Independent and I will finish this term as an Independent, Sanders said at a breakfast Thursday morning hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.

Sanders has long caucused with Democrats as an independent. That has annoyed some Democrats as Sanderss star has risen on the left. They are frustrated by his influence within a party that he refuses to embrace.

Sanders on Wednesday was named chairman of outreach, a newly created leadership post designed to leverage his reach and popularity to engage working class and young voters in the political process.

-snip-

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/306528-sanders-wont-join-democratic-party

[George II]

1. He's already registered for the 2018 election as an Independent, so this business about....

....finishing "this term as an Independent" is weak and insincere. How about next term?

[Sunlei]

6. I know. It's just a weak headline to try to divide the good people 'team'.

Republicans will try very, very hard to take his seat away in 2018.

[ThirdEye]

20. There's no chance he'll lose

Due to his actions during this election, he'll win by even wider margins the next time around.

[Sunlei]

23. Sanders did & continues to do an excellent job. what I mean is how RW is willing to place in

ringers to split votes, dominate/flood local voters with 'fake news' scandals and millions in money.

Anything to win a district/state and take a non-R-Senators seat, Republicans will try to do.

[Sunlei]

2. Sanders will be a great "chairman of outreach". He's an excellent organizer and much loved.

[Kingofalldems]

3. He shouldn't run as a Democrat in that case.

[Omaha Steve]

17. You don't want his vote in the Senate

He has voted D in the House & Senate since 1991.

[Kingofalldems]

18. Did not say that.

[Omaha Steve]

19. Schumer is next top Senate Democrat, adds Sanders to leadership ranks

The party leaders are treating him like a D!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/11/16/schumer-elected-senate-democratic-leader/

By Ed O'Keefe and Mike DeBonis November 16 at 11:31 AM

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) was elected as the next leader of Senate Democrats on Wednesday, establishing him as one of his party’s most senior officials in Washington and Democrats’ primary partisan counterweight to a Trump administration.

Schumer promised a “bigger, bolder, sharper-edged economic message” in his first remarks after his election and said Democrats would remain focused on the middle class “and those struggling to join it.”

“We heard the American people loud and clear,” he said. “They felt that the government wasn’t working for them. They felt that the economy was rigged against them in many places and that the government was too beholden to big money and special interests.”

In a gesture to his party’s progressive wing, Schumer added Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to a junior role in his newly expanded leadership team.

FULL story at link.

[phleshdef]

4. Who cares? A party registration amounts to a worthless piece of paper. Actions matter.

Bernie has always been one of us in terms of that.

[uppityperson]

5. Indeed

[yallerdawg]

8. Actions matter.

I'm a Democrat because I say I am and I vote for Democrats.

No worthless piece of paper.

If Bernie can't do this, he isn't one of us.

By the way, "Democratic" in "Democratic Underground" attracted me and keeps me here.

I have no interest in "Whatever Underground."

[yallerdawg]

35. I didn't put Trump in office.

The same can't be said about Senator Sanders (I-VT).

Bet yore ass!

[phleshdef]

37. Um, he campaigned hard for Hillary. He didn't put Trump in office.

James Comey maybe, definitely not Bernie Sanders. You just completely obliterated any shred of credibility you pretended to have.

[yallerdawg]

38. Now I have no credibility?

But I'm commenting on a website on the internet!

"Um, he campaigned hard for Hillary."

Did you forget the book that precedes that statement?

"Obliterated any shred"? Yes, I think so.

[phleshdef]

39. Ooooh, smilies. Such a compelling argument

[yallerdawg]

42. One more smilie for you!

[LiberalLovinLug]

41. Party first....Country second

Good luck with that

[yallerdawg]

43. My party puts the country first.

You think the Republican Party does?

[LiberalLovinLug]

82. Funny

That's the exact excuse they use. Just change Republican for Democrat.

[BainsBane]

9. Because he is trying to dictate the future of a party he

sees as beneath him.

Actions do indeed matter, and he ran against the party during the primary. That is a large reason why so many of his supporters refused to vote for Clinton. They believed the rhetoric he used to keep the campaign going long after he had no possibility of winning. They believed Clinton stole the election and even got Trump elected. Now you would think those geniuses would wonder why she couldn't fix the general election or the primary in 2008 if she had such malevolent power, but then that would require some capacity to exercise logic.

He can be an Independent, a Green, Libertarian or Republican for all I care. But the idea that he feels entitled to dictate the future of a party that he has repeatedly disparaged and whose voters he insulted throughout the primary does bother me. If one isn't a member of a party, they have no business seeking its nomination or holding any leadership positions. Now Schumer gave him one to placate him so he wouldn't give him problems in the Senate Minority Leader vote. Turns out it worked. Bernie now backs Schumer.

[madamesilverspurs]

27. You are too kind.

Or more accurately, you are far kinder in your assessment than I am inclined to be. I don't like being used, and Sanders used the party in the most cynical way possible. And are we ever paying the most horrible price for that cynicism.

.

[guillaumeb]

51. Respectfully, Sanders ran to be the Democratic Party candidate.

So any claim that he ran against the party is difficult to accept. And given the non-Parliamentary nature of US politics, corporatists like Max Baucus can call themselves Democrats as well as people like Paul Wellstone. There is no litmus test here.

I applaud Schumer for his attempt at inclusion.

[BainsBane]

75. Look at what he said while a candidate

He continually said that Democrats had sold out. He insisted his supporters weren't "registered Democrats," but "real people," as though being a loyal Democratic makes people less than real. He also said, to the cameras, that he had decided to run for the Dem nomination because he didn't think he could get enough publicity or funds running as an independent. For years he has talked about the Democratic Party with complete contempt, and none of that changed when he decided it was convenient for him to use its resources. He did come out of that campaign a multi-millionaire. He funneled millions through a shell corporation called Old Towne Media, which he used to collect ad placement fees. I continue to believe that is why he refused to release his taxes. Note that he has three homes, the latest purchase worth multiple times his admitted net worth. Despite the constant attacks on Hillary's wealth, she never used the campaign to enrich herself. Her money came from books, same as Obama's, and of course Bernie now has a book as well so his wealth will continue to grow. That won't disqualify him because the crime of wealth only attaches to a woman who refused to stay in her place.

If you can tell me a time in our nation's history when the Democratic or any other major party wasn't "corporatist," I'd like to hear it. The major parties have been aligned with moneyed interests since the foundation of the Republic. OUr founding fathers were the richest men in the land. You couldn't even vote if you didn't have property. Slaveholders called themselves Democrats, as Klansmen later did. The Democrats were the party of Jim Crow in the good ole days. The notion that the Democratic Party was ever the left in any real sense is ludicrous. They fought the Cold War and hunted out Communists in Hollywood and academia. That was during the pre-"corporatist" days. And before then FDR received fully half of his campaign financing from Wall Street. Cabinets were staffed with "dollar men," wealthy industrialists who took only a dollar salary, just as Trump plans. There are no good old days of a Democratic left. The left was the communists (and before them anarcho-syndicalists) who were arrested, purged, and deported.

The ignorance of history that Americans demonstrate is not an excuse for allying themselves with fascism, which is exactly what the Bernie or Busters did, and some of them did so precisely because they want to return to the same past that Trump's campaign evoked. I remain certain that much of that angst is about the fact we had an African American President nearly succeeded by a woman. That anger toward "establishment"--which was never a problem under those earlier periods of party history I noted above--had a great deal to do with reclaiming white male privilege. And those Busters who voted for Trump or a Third Party did just that. I will also note the former DUers who took that posture were among the most conservative members of the site. I had never seen many of them take any progressive or even liberal position. They were particularly vocal in their disgust for women's rights and African Americans, however. They do hate the Democratic Party, but then so does the alt right. During the Reign of Trolls, hatred of the Democratic Party was seen as a measure of supposed progressivism. That they used the same arguments as the GOP should have been obvious to anyone paying attention. Note: this is by no means a comment on all Bernie supporters, most of whom supported the nominee and some even worked hard for her But those Jackpine busters are another thing altogether.

As Hortensis noted, we have to forge alliances with all kinds of people we don't like to get things done. For me, Bernie fits in that category. He now has a leadership position that makes him feel important. Good for him. He's got money and the illusion of power. Now maybe he'll consider working on getting some legislation passed.

[guillaumeb]

81. The stories that I read showed that approximately 90% of Sanders supporters indicated

that they would vote for Clinton. Given how incorrect the polling was for this election, Nate Silver's explanations notwithstanding, I think it is safe to say that the vast majority of Sanders supporters (probably) voted for Clinton.

As to Sanders supporters wishing "to return to the same past that Trump's campaign evoked", you have the right to your personal opinion, but that says nothing about any Sander's supporters motivations.

I agree with your opinion about the barely hidden racism and misogyny expressed by some few at DU, but again, we are talking about a tiny subset of people. I would think that the vast majority of Sander's supporters have never participated on this forum so what is said here should not in any way be taken as representative of the millions who voted for Sanders in the primaries.

[BainsBane]

86. The vast majority did vote for Clinton

But the margin in all states combined for Trump is now down to 55k total, according to Lawrence Tribe.

Then check thus out. http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/307014-sanders-dems-must-move-beyond-identity-politics

[guillaumeb]

88. Idid. Identity politics is a way of energizing people,

but enthusiasm for a Democratic politics seems to be lacking. And that lack of enthusiasm must be addressed. Yes gerrymandering and targeted voter suppression are big problems and are undoubtedly the reason for Trump's electoral win, but except for those of us who follow politics closely they are not issues of general concern.

In Illinois, our local media occasionally focus on gerrymandering, but only on a state level.

[Hortensis]

57. Agree with much of your disgust. But making alliances,

even with people who have been proud, contemptuous opponents for decades, is what politics is all about.

Warren woke the party up to believe more was possible, and when she declined to run Sanders took advantage of what she had started and used his very real oratorical ability to move the ball much further down the road.

He caused my jaw to drop to my chest, appalled, when he chose 2016, a year of existential battle against the forces of fascism and other hard-right -isms, as a good time to try to purge and rebuild the Democratic Party to his tastes, or as he put it "reform."

Then he lost me for good, beyond even theoretical chance of redemption, by misleading his followers into believing we were stealing the primary, and then tryhing to steal the election at the convention from the majority of voters. Imo he betrayed not just the party whose label he ran under but the trust of the followers he lied to.

But our leadership ally with him now so that he will hopefully try to build future alliances with voters. Okay. Sounds pretty ordinary to me.

Those who hate political accommodation might be happy to remember that his leadership position is very low in the hierarchy, while Elizabeth Warren has been placed in line to eventually move up to a major leadership position.

[BainsBane]

66. Good points

and yes you are right about alliances. I do think the rules should be changed so that a person must have been a Democrat for a certain number of years before seeking the nomination. I say that because of exactly what you recount about how he mislead his voters into believing that Hillary did not win the primary legitimately. He did campaign for her and tried to bring them around, but by that time the damage had been done.

[Hortensis]

79. Yes, and yes.

[Maven]

21. Actions do matter, and changing his party registration back to (I) was an action

One that sent a signal to a certain subset of his voters.

[phleshdef]

40. I don't care about party registration. I care about policy values.

[Demit]

47. But he does.

It matters to him that he be seen as standing apart from the Democratic Party. I wonder why that is.

[Auntie Bush]

77. I read somewhere that he intends to run for president again in 2020.

Don't know if this is true or not.

[Zen Democrat]

44. I live in a state with NO party registration. Zero. Nada. Zilch.

There are many of them. It's a growing trend.

[yurbud]

59. that's the bottom line--the "leaders" of the Democratic Party need to figure that out fast

[mainstreetonce]

7. He should reach out to Reps

To also be independent and vote with the Dems against Trump.

[LisaM]

10. I don't think this is exactly news.

Did anyone ever think he would?

[DonViejo]

12. Given he's just accepted a leadership position in the Party...

it is EXACTLY news

[LisaM]

15. Well, I meant that a lot of people didn't think he ever would.

Because it's so unsurprising, I don't think it's LBN.

[BainsBane]

14. For months we've been told he is a Democrat

which of course was a complete lie.

[NurseJackie]

26. He's made it clear that he's NOT a Democrat and he DISTANCES himself from Democrats... so...

... why is he afforded special consideration under DU's "thou shalt not speak ill of..." rule.

Is caucusing with the Democrats enough? Come on now... is it, really? Someone can caucus-with (or without) on a whim... but declaring allegiance to and membership with a party takes some commitment. He flirts with us when it's convenient for his own ambitions (for example, he "joined" the party to become its nominee, but quickly abandoned the party afterward.) I wonder if will ever be willing to make a longer-term commitment.

As long as he sees himself (and presents himself) as "other" and "separate", then his supporters will think of themselves that way as well... with no real loyalty to the Democratic party, and no real incentive to support or improve or grow the party.

In my opinion, when he remains SEPARATE from the party, he's harming the party and weakening it. Working from within the party, he could actually grow and strengthen it... and help to shape and guide it.

It's a missed opportunity, and even though he's obviously not a vain man, his actions in that regard are consistent with someone who thinks more of himself than the greater good.

[Feeling the Bern]

62. Because when Democrats are wrong, they are wrong.

I am tired of this party over principle bullshit.

[NurseJackie]

71. We have a two party system. Deal with it.

For national politics, it's the Democrats or the Republicans.

Principles are "nice" but sometimes you have use a little strategy too.

Nobody gets EVERYTHING they want. You move, you wiggle, you give, you take.

You try to get closer to where you want to be, but expecting perfection is political folly.

Losing intentionally on "principle" and for vanity purposes is dumb. Just plain dumb.

I guess that's why the Greenies will never be more than they are right now, and their "power" is nothing more than as a spoiler ... funded by the GOP and the Russians.

Some "principles", huh?

You guys are just too much.

[Feeling the Bern]

72. I love how people assume that I didn't vote for HRC.

And that dissent against the party is disloyalty.

[NurseJackie]

80. I love how you assume that I assume.

So "party over principle" isn't bullshit after all, eh? Make up your mind.

[mac56]

11. Integrity.

[BainsBane]

13. How exactly is using a party one refuses to join

for publicity and fundraising "integrity." If not being a Democrat demonstrates such integrity, why would you agree to an SOP that requires one to be a Democrat?

Then there is this:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=old%20towne%20media

[WhiteTara]

16. Does he plan to join our party or will he

remain a carpetbagger forever? That is the real question.

[leftofcool]

22. I vote for door number 2. He will capitulate to Trump as well.

[WhiteTara]

24. He already has. White man endorses white man

who shares economic visions.

[longship]

52. No need. He has consistently and always caucused with the Democrats!

So idiots can call him a carpetbagger, but the facts falsify that claim.

[WhiteTara]

60. I haven't called you names and I would appreciate

you not calling me names. I think that is against the TOS anyway. So please apologize.

[longship]

61. I will not.

I wasn't the one who used the term carpetbaggers here first. That would be you.

I will call out anybody using that terminology.

[WhiteTara]

67. Sorry truth hurts.

here is the definition of a carpet bagger and Bernie fits the carpet bagger title.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/carpetbagger



And of course you wouldn't apologize for being rude to a member of your community. That sounds like white male privilege to me.

[longship]

68. And you call me a name-caller?

Jesus Christ!


I am done with you.

[cstanleytech]

25. I suspect his refusal to officially join the party is the single biggest reason

for his failure to win the Democratic nomination over Hillary.

[NurseJackie]

31. It divides and weakens the party.

[Buzz Clik]

28. Thanks for your service in the primary, Bernie. Now, go back to doing what you do.

[hrmjustin]

29. His presidential moment is over so it doesn't matter.

[wysi]

30. I guess we can stop talking about him, then.

n/t

[Stainless]

32. I am not a registered Democrat

I started voting 48 years ago and I never have registered with any party. I have however always supported and voted for Democrats.

Those who choose to continue to cry and whine about Bernie are narrow-minded fools who would destroy the unity and cohesion that will be necessary to fight against the Republican agenda. Liberals and Progressives of all stripes should be welcome in leadership roles and accepted as friends whether they register and run as Democrats or not.

IMHO, Democratic Underground has been overrun by ignorant ideologues who are some of the very people that caused the loss of an election we should have easily won. Some of them are commenting in this very thread and are the reason I chose to respond.

[Ligyron]

36. I'm beginning to agree somewhat on those points

The rise of Bernie Sanders is the best hope for the progressive cause that's happened in years. He lit a fire with the younger voters which are our best hope because the older ones pretty much failed miserably.

A lot of people who voted D are pretty sick of the DNC right now. Their brilliant strategy lost us how many seats now? 60? Not to mention the state and local elections that were ignored entirely by those geniuses.

Apparently, at least according to some, Hillary was the best we could do and if we couldn't win with her - why we just wouldn't win at all.

...which we didn't.

[still_one]

49. That is why Zypher Teachout, Russ Feingold, Jane Kim and Loretta Sanchez did so well

and those people, who identified themselves as progressives, refused to vote for Hillary in the general election. That is why states like Michigan, where Hillary lost by .3%, but Jill Stein got 1.1% of the vote with the similar situation in Wisconsin and other places were instrumental in making trump president. At least 10% of Bernie supporters refused to vote for Hillary.

JPR and susan sarandon along with the FBI, fake news, and the media distortions put trump in their, and as far as I am concerned those who identified themselves as progressives, and refused to vote for Hillary, have no standing in complaining about trump.

Their actions have put women's rights and civil rights in danger

[Ligyron]

54. They should not have refused to vote for Hillary.

and those Bernie supporters who refused to vote for Hillary are idiots. I voted for Bernie in the primary and when he lost, I supported Hills with GOTV efforts and $$.

That's what they should have done and the fact that they didn't is juvenile. In most cases literally.

I am far more concerned with policy, not so much personalities.

[still_one]

58. I am sure you did, and most logical folks would have. Tim Robbins made it very clear that voting

for Hillary was critical, so they don't lose their seat, but it wasn't just their seat, is all of us who now have figure out how to put the pieces together.

I just hope they preserve the filibuster

Take care

[Feeling the Bern]

63. So it's the progressives fault she lost? Okay. . .well, conservatives websites need followers

At least 10% of Bernie supporters refused to vote for Hillary.

When they were told "we Democrats don't want your need you," the Democrats sealed the own fate.

[still_one]

69. You weren't told anything of the sort. Were you one of them who refused?

but even assuming that were true, which it wasn't, their actions helped propel trump into the WH, and put a lot of people in peril

[Feeling the Bern]

73. I voted for Clinton. Prozac. . .good thing to take.

[still_one]

74. Some will need it, but I think there are better anti depressants than that today

Problem is people won't be able to afford them

[Feeling the Bern]

76. I held my nose and voted for Clinton. Would rather have has Bernie

I would have settle of Martin O'Malley, but I did my part as good Democrat and voted for Clinton.

[still_one]

78. I understand. I have to believe most of us here voted for her

It would be nice if we could all come together to try and limit the damage for the next 4 years

I want and expect Democrats in congress to block, obstruct, or delay anything that goes against civil rights, women's rights, labor rights, healthcare, social security, Medicare, the environment, etc

[cstanleytech]

45. No, the biggest contributor to helping get Trump elected was the media and its failure during this

election to be as aggressive with Trump as it was with Clinton over her email problems.

[Demit]

48. I agree completely.

The media wanted to give equal time to both sides to not appear “biased.” But Trump lied so much and had so many scandals that every time he did or said something crazy, they had to go “on the other hand, Hillary Clinton…” and they only had one thing: emails.

“Donald Trump called Mexicans ‘rapists.'”
“On the other hand, Clinton’s emails…”
“Donald Trump ran a fraudulent ‘university.'”
“On the other hand, Clinton’s emails…”
“Donald Trump fat- and slut-shamed a former Miss Universe.”
“On the other hand, Clinton’s emails…”
“Donald Trump admitted to serial sexual assault.”
“On the other hand, Clinton’s emails…”

Media coverage of the campaign was a grotesque distortion of one candidate's minor transgression, if it was even that.

[still_one]

50. The mediia had a large part in it but they were only one piece

11 days before the election, Comey went to the republicans in Congress with a vauge letter saying they were going to look at Weiner's computer, which they had for over a month, to see if there were "email issues". The republicans immediately grabbed that, and said the email investigation was being "reopened". It was a blatant LIE. MSNBC was the first cable/satellite network to headline their breaking news that "Hillary's email investigation was reopened". MSNBC then proceeded to interview every right wing republican they could find, who continued to propagate the lie that the "investigation was being reopened". Soon, the other networks followed with the same LIE, that the "email investigation had been reopened". This went on for a few days, but the damage that was done was severe. A few days later as things begin to quiet down, Fox news bret baier reported from his sources in the FBI, an indictment was pending because of the "Clinton Foundation". That story was spewed all of Facebook and google news, (more on their part later). Two days later bret baier came out and said he was mistaken about a pending "indictment", and he apologized for the error. Good ole Rachel Maddow, was so taken by bret baier's apology, that on her show she jumped right to his defense saying what a terrific reporter he was for admitting a mistake. Of course that didn't stop fox news, or the trump campaign from continuing to spew the lie.

While all this was going on, the wonderful social networks such as Facebook, and search engine enterprises such as Google, were opening their flood gates to let the fake news right wing purveyors sell their bill of goods.

and while that was what was happening in the last two weeks before the election, the fake news, and distorted and shabby reporting by the MSM was going on long before that. WMDs anyone?

On top of that there were at least 10%, and by some estimates many more of Sanders supporters who refused to vote for Hillary..

So it was these independent forces, the media, the social network's "fake news" where up to 45% adults get their news from, the republicans, the FBI, the third party voters, and those Sanders supporters who refused to vote for Hillary who gave us trump on a silver platter.

In spite of all that, Hillary still won the popular vote

[wordpix]

34. Chairman of Outreach is a good position for him

Look, whether he's a Dem or just caucuses with them, who cares? We need Bernie, IMO.

And as one who's on my Dem Town Comm. and a regional Dem town comm., I can only say there is sympathy and like-mindedness as well as safety in numbers. Much better/more effective to get things done together instead of alone.

[NurseJackie]

46. Will he be getting people to support the *actual* DEMOCRATIC PARTY, or...

... the "Our Revolution" thingy he's got going on the side?

[ericson00]

53. why is anyone kissing this guy's ring? He spoiled the election; he moved Hillary far to the left

and elected Trump. This is a centrist country! There was no progressive version of the Reagan Revolution across the nation. In blue states among millennials, yep, but not broadly.

[JonLP24]

55. Hillary Clinton's policy on trade cost her those states

Trump is to the left of the GOP on several issues and was left of Clinton on trade and tariffs and won the rust belt.

I've been a Sanders fan since I followed politics in 2003 and he's been by far the most correct on policy, correctly called it many times over.

He's been a champion of the working man since the beginning and never sold out to special interests. He would have carried the rust belt easily but your solution is to move further to the right? When you start caring more about winning than policy you lose the people.

[duffyduff]

85. And Trump had any? Get real. These rust belt idiots are racist, sexist idiots.

They proved their stupidity for all the world to see.

[hughee99]

92. Exactly, and they used to be OUR racist, sexist idiots!

[Feeling the Bern]

64. So now being to the left is bad? Okay. . .glad to know that.

[ThirdEye]

65. Yeah it's a centrist country...

... they really came out to vote for Hillary didn't they? Obama got people to the polls by seeming more progressive.

[Lil Missy]

56. Of course he won't. He'd rather remain a parasite on the Democratic Party. n/t

[DFW]

70. Did anyone ask him to? n/t

[otohara]

83. Sanders: 'Of course I am a Democrat' 2/3/2016

BY JONATHAN SWAN - 02/03/16 10:11 PM EST http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/268170-sanders-of-course-i-am-a-democrat


Bernie Sanders: I’m quitting the Democratic Party July 2016

https://thehornnews.com/bernie-sanders-im-quitting-democratic-party/


He used, abused and divided this party and now he's on a gloating tour.

[tavalon]

84. And this is a problem, why?

He's been an independent his whole career.

[MyNameGoesHere]

87. You can't say "fuck Sanders" here.

So don't even try to say it here. I am warning you. Don't even say fuck Sanders. I will alert on you if you say fuck Sanders.

[Skittles]

95. I hear you

I said fuck Bernie and I got alerted so I won't be saying fuck him again; no indeed

[Raine]

89. Good for him.. nt

[Arazi]

90. He can't register as a Democrat in Vermont

I know this fact has been stated numerous times before but I'll put it out there again

https://www.sec.state.vt.us/elections/frequently-asked-questions/voter-registration.aspx

[hughee99]

91. Quick question about the rules...

Not specifically for your post, which is a legitimate story, but that rule about "not fighting the last primary", is that still a thing? It seems to be the discussion your post ended up spawning.

[Coyotl]

93. Big tent. Now to get the Greens to run their candidates in our primaries and support the winners.

And go into the next Presidential election as the unified left.

Who remembers when the Dems and the NPL joined parties? They won after doing so.

[Skittles]

94. LOL

ALRIGHTY THEN