Democrats must overhaul party and attack big business: Bernie Sanders

[DonViejo]

Source: Reuters



26 FEB 2017 AT 14:56 ET

Former U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders on Sunday urged a major overhaul of his party, calling for more aggressive efforts to court working-class voters and fight big businesses from Wall Street to the pharmaceutical sector.

Sanders, who spoke a day after Democrats chose Tom Perez, a veteran of former President Barack Obama’s administration, as their new party chairman, said it was also crucial for progressives to do more to mobilize grassroots supporters to take on Republican President Donald Trump.

“We need a total transformation,” the 75-year-old U.S. senator from Vermont said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“We need to open up the party to working people, to young people and make it crystal clear that the Democratic Party is going to take on Wall Street, it’s going to take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry, it’s going to take on corporate America that is shutting down plants in this country and moving our jobs abroad,” he added.

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/2017/02/democrats-must-overhaul-party-and-attack-big-business-bernie-sanders/

[NRaleighLiberal]

1. watch out for incoming!

[m-lekktor]

34. yep. Bernie is supposed to shut the fuck up. Only Hillary videos posted on twitter allowed!

[bluedye33139]

46. No, he should feel free to attack the party forever

[ananda]

49. This is NOT an attack!

It's just good, sound advice!

Thank you, Senator Sanders!

[Demsrule86]

105. It is an attack and since he left he party after the ill advised primary run...he has

no business to be telling Democrats what to do.

[ehrnst]

56. Butbutbut.... Bernie is the only pure candidate EVER!!!!! SHUT UP and listen to the ONLY

politician EVER to make ANY moral STATEMENTS!!!

</sarcasm>

[pangaia]

67. fake news. :)))))

[Cha]

86. Or so he thinks

[cstanleytech]

47. I think it's not that he needs to shut up as he is more than free to offer advice from the sidelines

as a cheerleader but if he really wants to help then he might want to consider stepping up and joining the party and help lead it.

[Cha]

100. That's right.. when he lobs attacks.. he can expect pushback

[TomCADem]

2. Because Democrats Are Currently In Lock Step With Trump?

If Democrats are the ones currently resisting Trump and Republican efforts to dismantle the Consumer Protection Agency, roll back the ACA, roll back environmental regulations, cut taxes for the rich, I don't see why Democrats suddenly need to overhaul these positions. Is Bernie saying that we should reverse such positions to reach out to coal miners in West Virginia to reach out to red states?

By attacking Democrats, is Bernie trying to encourage Democrats to move toward Trump?

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/bernie-sanders-can-work-with-trump-233532

Bernie Sanders: I see areas where I can work with Trump

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders extended an olive branch Thursday to President-elect Donald Trump, offering to work with the incoming Republican administration on infrastructure and trade policy.

“I don’t think it makes sense to say, ‘No, we’re not gonna work in any way in any form with the Trump administration,’” Sanders told MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “Trump has talked appropriately about a collapsing infrastructure: our roads, bridges and water systems. If he is prepared to work with us on rebuilding America’s crumbling infrastructure and creating millions of jobs and doing it in a way that doesn’t privatize our infrastructure or give tax breaks to billionaires, yes, let’s work together.”

* * *
Sanders credited the president-elect for talking about what he referred to as America’s “failed trade policy” on the campaign trail, particularly NAFTA and trade relations with China.

“If he is prepared to work with us on a trade policy which works for the American worker and not just the CEO of large multinational corporations, let’s work together on those areas,” Sanders said.

[cstanleytech]

57. To be fair I see areas even that I could work with Trump, I also see me winning a Powerball jackpot

and both probably have about the same odds of happening.

[jalan48]

3. I'm With Him!

[joet67]

27. Me too!

[Sparky 1]

145. Me three!

[Sherman A1]

4. I don't think attack is the right word here

it does not require an attack but rather standing up for what is right and what are the needs of the working class. It is the greed of CEO's and corporations that have through their attacks on those two very important concepts that need push back.

[bucolic_frolic]

5. Reforming Capitalism

is a theme of John Perkins in one of his later books. He advocates change
through corporate governance, shareholder action. I think Bernie Sanders
here is right to a point, but there is also the problem of capital formation,
capital deployment. We have shopping malls being abandoned because
capital was deployed in a greedy fashion in places that are not stable.
Zero percent interest rates aided misallocation. We hardly have free
markets anymore in any fashion. Oligopolists and monopolies control
many industries, hedge funds run our capital markets, pricing is set as
much by law as by collusion. The party must start somewhere but focusing
on Pharma and Wall Street is only a part of the problem.

[zentrum]

6. Go Bernie!

[msanthrope]

7. It isn't his party. He's an Independent. nt

[StubbornThings]

11. He's allowed to have an opinion...just like every other American. nt

[msanthrope]

14. Opinions are like assholes. Everyone has one. nt

[StubbornThings]

16. Okay.

[ehrnst]

50. Except Hillary, apparently. (nt)

[TheCowsCameHome]

15. Uh-huh. But his message is spot-on.

Listen and learn.

[msanthrope]

17. Yeah.....this one was fucking brilliant....

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/bernie-sanders-can-work-with-trump-233532

[ehrnst]

58. Bernie is so pure, isn't he? (nt)

[stopbush]

26. Yes. Why isn't he out there telling the Rs what they need to do?

He doesn't belong to that party, either. Why isn't he telling the Greens what they need to change?

[ehrnst]

59. Also the Greens. Bernie seems to be such a font of wisdom

Why does he restrict sharing it with Dems?

[Cha]

92. "seems" is the operative word

[tecelote]

32. Without Independents, we lose elections.

[Orrex]

36. Independent *voters,* sure.

But Independent candidates who nominally switch to Democrats until it no longer suits them, however, can be quite damaging to our electoral chances, as we've recently seen.

[tecelote]

40. Unless they are the right candidate for the time.

Maybe we should let Independents join in the selection of our candidate. 'Can't win without them. Why not give them a voice?

[Orrex]

76. They can already. Just ask Sanders.

All they need to do is claim to be Democrats until it's more convenient for them to re-identify as Independents.

[ehrnst]

120. Or how about Republicans, if we're going to stop letting the party decide who the candidate is. (nt)

[ehrnst]

51. True this. Few "independent" voters actually vote for "independent" candidates. (nt)

[Orrex]

77. Exactly.

I've known a few dozen "Independent" voters in my time, and all but one of them are straight-down-the-pipe Republican stalwarts, never criticizing a Republican and never having a nice word to say about a Democrat.

What they want is the illusion that they're independent thinkers, when in fact they're as devoted to the orthodoxy as anyone. They simply don't formalize it with the label. But come November, they pull the Red lever every time.

[tecelote]

81. Except poll after poll show that most Americans agree with our positions.

So, obviously, we are not reaching them with the right message.

Including them instead of focusing only on registered Democrats might be a better approach.

[Orrex]

103. Again, that's for the voters

The candidate for the Democratic nomination should be a Democrat, not a last-minute-rebranded Independent.

[ehrnst]

128. When 54% of white voters went GOP in 2012, I don't remember people demanding that the DNC

"search their souls" or that the Democrats had a "messaging problem" to white voters.

It seems only when we have a candidate that wasn't the first choice of white men do we suddenly worry that we have lost our way.

Just sayin.

[JI7]

143. actual voting matters more than what they say in polls. they vote for people like Sessions

Scott Walker , fucking trump etc.

[stonecutter357]

41. +1000

[OnDoutside]

8. Bernie's right and should bring it up at the

Next membership meeting. Oh wait....

[Talk Is Cheap]

10. You mean like the Kansas Democratic Partys annual convention....

He was the keynote speaker...

[OnDoutside]

12. Try it and buy it ?

[ehrnst]

61. I have to wonder what Vermont constituents think about this. (nt)

[Talk Is Cheap]

69. They keep on electing him - sort of says it all...

Do you think that Senators must only work in their own state?

[truebluegreen]

82. I know facts are really important

to you so I looked it up.

Bernie won re-election to the Senate in 2012 with 71% of the vote.
And the Democratic primary in Vermont in 2016 with 86% of the vote.

I'm just going to guess that they're OK with it.

[ehrnst]

127. In a very very white, very lefty, very small population

I suppose that they don't have a lot of pressing issues. Vermont has a distinctive political landscape, and doesn't always mirror the country at large.

I thought it was interesting that neither the VT Governor nor Leahy gave him their support when he decided to run in the primary.

[truebluegreen]

129. Moving the goalposts, are we?

First you want to know what his constituents think, and then you dismiss them as being lefty and white and not numerous so what they think is not really important.

[ehrnst]

133. I don't know what his constituents think, and they are very not very diverse.

Both those things are true, yes?

And those that actually work with him in VT government aren't as supportive as those constituents who don't work with him.

[Talk Is Cheap]

9. Totally agree with Senator Sanders on this...

Sanders proved candidates do not have to court big business and Wall Street.

[Orrex]

37. Yes, he proved that such candidates can get as far as losing the primary

The rest remains to be seen.

[Talk Is Cheap]

45. Millions and millions of people and Democrats...

...agree with Senator Sanders.

Although Clinton won (voter suppression and 3m popular votes), nevertheless, she lost the electoral college and the presidency...

[LenaBaby61]

68. Millions and millions of people and Democrats...

"Although Clinton won (voter suppression and 3m popular votes), nevertheless, she lost the electoral college and the presidency..."

And Bernie would have lost ALSO to tRumputin.

Like those 800 polling places in NC in Dem strongholds would have stayed open for Bernie? Like all of the voter suppression, voter disenfranchisement, voter purging and voter crosschecking which lead to the tune of millions of Dem votes being wiped out across all/most of the swing states wouldn't have happened to Bernie?

bannon, trumputin and the GOP were not going to go easy on Bernie, in fact bannon was going to go nuclear on him using a 3 inch opposition research dossier.

The election was rigged, and IMHO NO Dem was ever going to overcome all of the shenanigans that went on in this past years 2016 GE.

[Talk Is Cheap]

70. My speculation is that....

...Senator Sanders would have clean tRumps clock in a General...

For some reason, Democratic politicians do not talk about election fraud... That
is something that Democratic politicians must start talking and doing something about.

And the only current way for Democrats to win is by massive turnout (because of election fraud).

Oh, and, that 3-in oppo-research - how do you know that?

[Orrex]

80. That's simply a fantasy

In his entire career, Sanders has never faced tough media scrutiny, and he's never been exposed to the full power of a Republican attack campaign. Beyond wishful thinking, there is no reason to assume that he would have "cleaned tRump's clock."

[Talk Is Cheap]

91. I guess then that applies to any candidate running in a race...

[Orrex]

104. Obviously not

A candidate who has faced that scrutiny and attack is in a much better position to withstand it.

I remember an NPR interview in which Sanders (I) came off as petulant and cranky simply because the interviewer asked a question that he didn't like. A softball question by a passive NPR commentator, and Sanders snapped like a first term school board official.

Yes, of course his supporters praised him for talking tough and for "telling it like it is," but the fact is that he revealed himself to be unprepared. He got a little better as the primary season went on, but he hadn't yet face any tough media scrutiny, and he'd been subjected to zero Republican attacks. If he'd made it past primary season (instead of, you know, losing big time and then lingering like a zombie to keep the spotlight on himself), then they'd have destroyed him.

[Cha]

95. Precisely, Orrex.

[ehrnst]

121. He has shown bad judgement in keeping Weaver on. Who knows how that judgement would have

affected his campaign in the General?

[Whiskeytide]

156. You may be right, the...

... republican machine was hitting on all cylinders this past election.

But consider this. And I'll preface this by saying that I find your posts to always be some of the most informative and thought provoking on DU. But...

Trump won his rabid followers, along with just enough other idiots to get over the top (aided by Poot, FBI, purges, etc ... I know - but still there were a lot of non-followers that cast a vote for him). Why?

Because he promised to make things better FOR THEM at the expense of the people they hated the most - DC Elites. He built a populist foundation (on bullshit, I know - but he still built it). These people voted for him because he promised to fuck with the DC establishment and ease the grind they have been suffering for the last 30 years. It did not matter one bit that most of that grind has been directly produced by republican policy. It did not matter that the possibility he could deliver on his promises was slim to none. It didn't even matter that there was a mountain of evidence that his promises were nothing but hot air. He still PROMISED them. And they desperately wanted to hear that someone was somehow going to make things better for them.

I think there is a good chance that a similar progressive message - a "let's fuck the powers that be" and restore "power to the people" message - might have pulled some of those voters to us. Enough to win? I don't know. I suppose we'll never know for certain, though it's been analyzed to death with absolute pronouncements both ways.

But given the result in Nov - a serious, dignified, qualified candidate losing to an carnival barking orange assclown - I think we need to figure it out pretty damn soon. JMO.

[LenaBaby61]

116. ...Senator Sanders would have clean tRumps clock in a General...

Hillary did "lose" as you said.

However, look at all of the extenuating circumstances that caused her to "lose" to tRumutin.

Minus the Comey shenanigans, Bernie and ANY Dem--even FDR--would have lost to tRumputin. Now, IF the 2016 GE was fair--different president. I knew going in that voter suppression was going to be "insane." But after reading about what happened in WI, MI., PA. Ohio and of course FL, It made me sick literally to see all of those votes purged/crosschecked off the Dem voting rolls.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/11/14/1599330/-Crosscheck-Removed-450K-Voters-in-MI-270-K-in-AZ-and-590-K-in-NC

Hillary lost the election by 70,000 or so votes, and when you think about all of that voter suppression that took place in those battleground states coupled with whatever ELSE the ruskies did to interfere in our GE--yuck--makes me sick knowing that tRumputin is "occupying" the White House thanks to the GOP, Comey and tRumputin's blackmailing boy toy/crush putin tang.

"Oh, and, that 3-in oppo-research - how do you know that?"

http://www.joemygod.com/2016/11/15/newsweek-posts-gop-oppo-research-on-bernie-sander/

You can only imagine the anti-semitism Bernie would have faced coming from that fat, drunken, woman-abusing, nazi bannon times 20 because as we know, tRumputin got over $2 Billion in free air time, and twittler would have pounded whatever lies and nasty memes bannon told him to (Bernie's 1972 essay) or continually point out that he voted against the Amber Alert bill many times, pointed out that Bernie's been in the Senate 25 yrs, plus throw in the red-baiting tapes, pictures of Bernie making various pro-communist/socialist comments, bring up and smearing his wife Jane, and more commie/socialist memes for effect. Of course most in the media would have run with what would be considered salacious (Bernie's '72 essay/Voting against Amber), while NOT bothering to fact check self-professed p***y-grabbing, tRumputin. I remember one news anchor saying that since tRumputin told so may mistruths (Many in the media never bother saying he LIED) SO much, that she/he didn't bother pointing out his alleged "mistruths" because there were too many to correct. Most in the so-called "liberal" media that doesn't exist did a horrible job fact-checking tRumputin.

But then again, all I mentioned about Bernie would have ended up being a moot point because a coup took place; the election was RIGGED, STOLEN, Voter-suppressed and interfered/tampered with (ruskies), as I feel that NO Dem was going to win the 2016 General Election.

[LS_Editor]

62. Due to the former DNC chair, who resigned for what reason?

[Orrex]

78. Are you blaming the former DNC chair for Sanders multi-million voter deficit?

He lost.

He would have lost to Trump.

Full stop.

[Cha]

85. Nope he didn't.

[Talk Is Cheap]

89. So, are you suggesting that Democratic candidates...

...continue to be in the pockets of corporatists and banksters?

Sanders received million$ from everyday people. That's what it will take.
Proof positive I would say...

[Cha]

90. They're not.

[Talk Is Cheap]

93. Ohhhh Keee Doooo Keee then...

Just look at some Dems and their voting record. I believe you will
find many instances where they vote the way their corporate donors want them to vote...

[ehrnst]

122. Like Barney Frank? Who took Wall Street money and wrote Dodd Frank? (nt)

[Kashkakat v.2.0]

13. Alright Bernie! Lets all channel our inner Roosevelt - both Teddy AND Franklin - Dem party tends to

overthink things, it can be very simple really just by looking back to how the same/similar situation was dealt with in the past..

[George II]

19. Like 1992

[not fooled]

138. Yep

And, Hillary won the election (if we had a functioning democracy) and would have been infinitely preferable to dump, and Bernie has legitimate points. Both coexist.

[George II]

18. You don't overhaul anything from the outside looking in.

[Ned Flanders]

24. Sure, because appointing Wall Street Executives to cabinet positions works so well (NOT!)

Are you really still buying into that "it takes an expert (thief) to catch an expert" nonsense?

Cognitive Dissonance. I feel like I'm discussing things with a Trump supporter.

[George II]

28. Did you read the OP?

[ehrnst]

123. Funny, I was going to say the same about your post. (nt)

[Charles Bukowski]

20. "We need to open up the party to working people, to young people and make it crystal clear that the

Last edited Sun Feb 26, 2017, 06:20 PM - Edit history (1)

Party is going to take on Wall Street."

Translation: The Democrats are nothing but a bunch of corporate shills.

Look for Jill, TYT, and the Bernie Brehs to start parroting this shit too. Let the "Trump 2020" campaign begin!

Hillary's platform was light years more working class and Millennial-friendly than Trump's. I'm sick and tired of Bernie implying otherwise.

[Fast Walker 52]

55. exactly, it's grotesque actually, under the circumstances

[Cha]

94. Thank you, Charles Bukowski!

[athenasatanjesus]

21. Except then they would have 0 support from the people with power,and thus would never get elected.

[bravenak]

22. Please stop pissing in our tent. It causes odors and nastiness.

[Cha]

97. BS needs to stick it to trump.. We have new leaders now

who were elected because they are trusted to know what they're doing.

These are the kind of people who they'll be working with.. those who treat them with respect..

Link to tweet

[bravenak]

98. Yes, a bit of respect would go a long way

[NurseJackie]

23. That's one outsider's opinion. It would probably carry more weight coming from someone ...

... who was an actual card-carrying Democrat. I wonder, are there any actual Democrats who are saying the same negative things about their own party?

Is he trying to say that our party "closed" to young people? Closed, how? Does he honestly believe that? Is he trying to say that Perez is incompetent and has no clue what his job requires.

“We need a total transformation,” the 75-year-old U.S. senator from Vermont said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

We-who? Does he have a mouse in his coat pocket?

Does Bernie's world have any shades of gray? The things he describes are always black or white. For or against. No compromise, no other considerations ... and it's as if he believes the Democratic party has done absolutely nothing, or that the Democratic party hasn't had to deal with Republican obstruction, or that we don't need to compromise to find common ground and move forward just a little bit.

It makes for firebrand campaign rhetoric, but in reality, things aren't so cut and dried. If things were as simple as he makes them out to be, he would have sponsored (or co sponsored) more bills that actually became law. So, based on his own experience, and his own record of success... he should have a GOOD IDEA of the reality on the ground, and that things aren't always as simple as can be made to appear in a fist shaking soundbyte on the evening news.

[George II]

29. Was going to ask the same thing. "We" who?

[milestogo]

38. Are there any Democrats standing up to Wall Street?

[Fast Walker 52]

53. depends how you define standing up

Hear of the Dodd-Frank bill that the GOP is trying to repeal?

[nini]

99. Have you ever heard of Elizabeth Warren?

[Demsrule86]

106. That is so funny...we have a situation where Wall Street is going to get big rewards from Trump

and in case you noticed, we have no way to stop them...but I mean we should stand up for sure...this is what I object to...the idea that big talk without winning anything being in the minority somehow has meaning...it doesn't.

[ehrnst]

63. +1000. (nt)

[Cha]

96. yeah, 'cause he's always trying to tear down our Party.. and

never with anything constructive.. just attacks like he's the only one who knows anything. When we know that's not true.

[OKNancy]

30. Wall Street, Wall Street, Wall Street

There is so much more to do. Not all of "Wall Street" is bad and certainly not all of Corporate America is bad.
I wish he would expand some of his gripes.

Oh, I hear: let's move away from identity politics from the Berniacs, but the IDENTITY of the Democratic party is fighting for civil rights. for gay rights,for women and those less fortunate. Of course income fairness will help but I don't care if the tax rate was 90% and the minimum wage was $25.00 an hour, you are still going to have racism, sexism and homophobia and also anti-semitism.

Sanders is getting to be a broken record.

ETA: and he needs to join our party. It would mean so much more if he was a Democrat, even if it was a symbolic gesture.

[Thinkingabout]

102. Good point, we are not purists, neither is Sanders, if his decision to chastise

Any ideas as not purists then likewise I can look at his ideas as not purists.

[Demsrule86]

109. I have pension money in Wall Street and that is not a winning message to take down Wall Street.

Plenty of Americans have money in Wall Street. These folks won't be happy until we have a McGovern style loss.

[democratisphere]

31. Gag order.

[pansypoo53219]

33. cut the cord to wall street definitely. OLD school business not crapitalism.

[ehrnst]

64. You mean like not accept money from the NRA? (nt)

[ehrnst]

126. Labor unions used to be the main source of funding - no longer. Until another group steps up

to fill that void (and no, $25 individual donations will not make up for that) we need to get the necessary funding somewhere.

[yurbud]

132. finance has become an end in itself rather than a means to an end.

[ehrnst]

135. Doesn't change the fact that money is needed to run for office. (nt)

[yurbud]

136. problem is, what politicians do to keep getting that money is coming back to bite them on the ass

and after a while, it's pretty hard to tell if a politician is doing what they have to placate donors so they can take care of the rest of us or trying to placate us so they can take care of the donors.

[ehrnst]

137. That's also a function of short terms. Congress is constantly having to raise money.

I agree campaign finance reform is neccessary.

Until that time, we have to use the tools at hand. And again - Barney Frank showed that he could take money from Wall Street and create legislation regulating them.

Yes, there are going to be elected officials who are in districts where huge numbers are employed in particular industry.

Another aspect to think about: It's not just the corporations who hold the keys to their reelection, it's the constituents. If they are elected with a mandate to fight for a particular industry, whether or not that industry donated, they will fight for that industry.

No amount of campaign finance laws will change that.

[yurbud]

139. that informal "all my constituents work in X industry" is more what they are supposed to do

But as Betsy DeVos proved in Michigan, just because a rich person lives there doesn't mean what they want helps other people in the state.

[ehrnst]

149. Devos isn't a politician as such. She has never run for office.

She was a party functionary.

[yurbud]

150. my point was that she was a buyer of politicians

[calguy]

35. I don't know what Bernie means when he says "we need to...?

Since he's not a Democrat, what he's really saying is "YOU folks need to ....."
Now I've always liked Bernie, and I like what he stands for, but if he's not willing to join the party, he has no moral grounds to tell us what we should do.

[ehrnst]

54. +1000. (nt)

[Occulus]

131. He's an American citizen.

He has all the moral high ground he needs.

The first thing is to stop thinking "they". As Americans, we should start our messaging with "we". Lots and lots of very good, very smart people are not Democrats and never will be registered as Democrats. We need to be open to the idea that good ideas can come from them.

[Rex]

39. Shh...not supposed to bring up Wall Street.

Get back to work!!

[stonecutter357]

42. who?

[Cha]

83. ..

[wysi]

43. Maybe if he was a member of the party...

... I would listen. Peddle that crap somewhere else, Bernie.

[womanofthehills]

112. Actually, being an independent has helped him get more bills passed

Kind of like a go between.

[bravenak]

117. Not true. He is an amendment guy. He cosigns the bills that OTHERS write.

Only like three of his own bills where he was the main sponsor have passes. I think one was just naming a post office or something.

[JI7]

44. most of the working class whites voted for trump over social issues

It's why they support him even though he hired a bunch of corporate types for his admin.

Because he is going after minorities and women's rights so they like that.

[ehrnst]

48. Yeah, he's so concerned that he might actually JOIN the party. (nt)

[Fast Walker 52]

52. does Bernie Sanders really have the best interest of the Dems in mind?

what's his game here?

The Dems ARE open to working people, open to young people and HAVE taken on Wall Street.


As far as-- "take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry, it’s going to take on corporate America that is shutting down plants in this country and moving our jobs abroad” -- that's way more complicated.

[LS_Editor]

60. Ellison not being the new DNC head shows the party still doesn't get it.

[ehrnst]

65. Because "it" is totally up to Bernie? (nt)

[George II]

84. Doesn't get "what"?

[Demsrule86]

108. It shows the Democratic party has a working brain...I like Ellison

but we were going to have big trouble with the Jewish American vote if he was elected...a constituency we can't afford to lose...we need a chairman who is not the story....but one who can help our people win. Keith Ellison is a good guy but not the person for the job. He also planned to starve our candidates by refusing big donors...I want Sherrod Brown to win in Ohio in 18...with 100 million in koch money coming against him,he won't unless he has adequate resources. If we keep up these silly squabbles we could lose our chance to take the house and face a 60 Republican Senate.

[FailureToCommunicate]

66. There sure is still a lot of misplaced Bernie hate here. He did NOT lose the election for

Democrats. Lots of factors were at play, but Bernie wasn't one of them. He supported the eventual candidate and campaigned on her behalf.

[Demsrule86]

110. I will always believe Bernie running in the primary caused the loss...that being said ...time to

move on.

[Progressive dog]

71. I don't know what party Bernie belongs to

now, but a total transformation of the Democratic party doesn't sound like a recipe for success, if we're talking about Democrats succeeding. President Obama just finished eight years as President from a Democratic party that Bernie hadn't transformed into something else.
The party already took on Wall Street with Dodd-Frank and the CFPB.
Talk is cheap.

[gopiscrap]

72. Thank you Bernie

[delisen]

73. Sanders definition of working people seems very limited. I don't think he sees many of us as workers

We have had a transformation of the working class over the past 40 years over much of the country. I don't think he realizes that when he talks about the Democratic Party needing to court working class voters, he sounds as though he is talking about white men.

He talks about corporations in the same way---yet there are differences among corporations-some are rapacious. some are not.

The sound bite communications and the generalities may get emotional responses but they do not promote understanding. We need more than Jeremiah.

Logic and reason are not sexy but democracies die without them.

[JI7]

74. i think he is talking about white men because non white working class went for Clinton

And have been voting dem for years.

[ehrnst]

124. I agree. (nt)

[OilemFirchen]

75. One trick dead horse.

Enough already.

[Jamaal510]

79. Why are Democrats

the ones who are expected to have an "overhaul" and talk more to working people when we actually got more votes overall for both the presidency and Congress, and when we actually gained seats running on the most economically and socially-progressive platform in the party's history? The only reasons why Democrats don't have power now are because of an outdated EC system, and gerrymandering of House districts.

[Blue Idaho]

87. If Bernie cares so much about Democrats

Why do I keep getting junk email begging me to join his Democratic Socialst movement?

[Cha]

88. Stick it to the repubs, BS.. We have our new leaders Tom Perez and

Keith Ellison now.

They got this.. These are the kind of leaders who they will be working with.. those who treat them with respect.

Link to tweet

[mr_lebowski]

101. Saying that the party should 'take on' is not the same as saying they 'must attack'

&quot Democratic Party should make clear they are) going to take on Wall Street, it’s going to take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry, it’s going to take on corporate America that is shutting down plants in this country and moving our jobs abroad" ...

Quoting that statement in the headline as being synonymous with '(Dems must) Attack Big Business' is disingenuous as F*** if you ask me.

But what do we expect at this point, I suppose ...

[Demsrule86]

107. Right let's give the GOP a chance to make more people believe

we will hurt the economy...that is the ticket...like it or not we are at best a center left country...Trump won by promising jobs. Running on the taking down banks is so 2008...won't work.

[Whiskeytide]

111. Threads like this -with the ...

... acerbic responses, obvious disconnects, and willingness to build walls inside our own tent, make republican strategists smile. Bigly.

[murielm99]

118. Build walls inside our own tent?

Bernie is not inside our tent. He used us. He is outside the tent, pissing into the tent.

He reverted to independent status very quickly for his Senate run.

Go home, Bernie, and leave us alone. If you stick your head out once in awhile, run your mouth about the Greens and the Repubbies. Why aren't you criticizing them?

I am so fucking sick of Sanders I could scream.

Building walls inside our tent. LOL. Have you seen the size of the protests and the people attending town halls? Those groups have been very inclusive. Have you heard of Indivisible? They popped up, seemingly overnight, and they are inclusive of everyone who wants to elect Democrats and fight trump. I don't see any walls there.

The thing making repubbie strategists smile is Bernie. Trump quoted him during his campaign. I am pretty sure trump still quotes him.

Please stop talking about Bernie. It is refighting the primary, and we don't need that. Go join your county Democratic party instead. Go to a town hall meeting. Join an Indivisible group. Go to a march. Just stop refighting the primary.

[ProfessorGAC]

119. Was He An Uninvited Speaker, Muriel?

The fact that he was invited as the keynote speaker suggests that at least somebody in the democratic party thinks he is in our tent.

[Whiskeytide]

141. I can't convince you of ...

... what I see because you don't want to see it. But I will say this. Our party has made significant strides to the right in the last 30 years. Perhaps some of it was necessary, and there are always individual exceptions and specific issue differences. But it has occurred right before our eyes within the party as a whole.

Yet, I think the populace has moved left. Or at least has been prepared and willing to move left. But without our party to lead that shift, it has floundered.

A lot of democrats supported Sanders in the primary. Quite a lot. And the fact that he gave Clinton such a relatively close run - despite her perceived inevitability - speaks volumes to anyone listening closely enough. I think it's foolish to piss on a clearly progressive leader out of some resentment because - what? - he was TOO progressive? He didn't fall in line quickly enough? He challenges the party establishment? He chooses to put an (I) next to his name?

I supported and voted for Clinton because I saw Trump as what he is... a manipulative self promoter who wants to quash the foundations of progressive thought in this country.

But I wasn't pleased with the primary. I did not think Clinton matched well against Trump. I felt she had too much baggage and was too vulnerable to Trump's political machine and tactics. It turns out I was right about that, and it pains me to say it.

I'm afraid our party doesn't realize how many old school Dems feel the same way I do.

[murielm99]

142. Because I don't want to see it?

Save the lecture.

I am not going to get into a pissing match or compare my credentials as a Democrat to yours.

Hillary was the best qualified candidate we have ever fielded. Leave the primary behind.

[Sparky 1]

146. Why is it "re-fighting the primary" every time Bernie is brought up?

That doesn't make sense. Millions of DEMOCRATS voted for Bernie. I was a Bernie delegate who ended up voting for Hillary. Isn't our party a big enough tent to include all? Do you really think it wise to drive people who like Bernie away? Bernie is a part of our scene in millions of good Democrats' minds. Just because he wasn't your choice is not a good reason to turn others away -- and this type of stuff does turn people away.

[murielm99]

148. I work with many people IRL who supported bernie.

They have put it behind them without whining. No one is being driven away. They don't feel the need to bring up Bernie every five minutes.

I don't know you, or your intentions. I don't know if you are really a Democrat. Four million more Democrats supported Hillary than supported Bernie. Millions of people supported Hillary. Grow up, the way we always have in the past when we did not get our way or get the candidate of our choice. Dean is the best example I can think of right now. He had a lot of fine supporters who worked with the Democratic party without rancor.

Start working with others without qualification. We have a lot of work to do simply to keep our democracy.

[Sparky 1]

152. As I said, " Why is it "re-fighting the primary" every time Bernie is brought up?"

[murielm99]

153. I am through trying to convince you or any other

BOB of anything.

[Sparky 1]

154. OK. It's possible I'm wrong and you're right.

I've been wrong before. So you're saying that people who like Bernie actually LIKE seeing him bashed here repeatedly and it makes them feel good about Democrats? Please point me toward some evidence of that because I've missed it whereas you may have actually seen it.

[Whiskeytide]

155. I'm not lecturing or trying to compare...

... progressive bonefides. All I'm saying is what I see.

I agree that Hillary was eminently qualified. But that doesn't mean that she was the right candidate for this political environment. She quite obviously wasn't because she lost to a political imbecile. Many of the reasons she lost (and I'm in the camp that there were multiple reasons, not just one or two) were not her fault, or were bullshit, etc... But that is sort of my point. She fell prey to those "reasons" because she was vulnerable to them.

If we don't do some introspective analysis of this loss, we will likely repeat it. That doesn't mean I'm re fighting the primary, or that I was a BOB (I wasn't). It means I'm a democrat who is tired of losing when every conventional metric suggests we should be winning. When that keeps happening, I think it's time to reexamine those metrics.

And if you saw Sanders' response to the STFU address (not a typo), I dare you to find something substantively "not a true progressive" about what he said. He leads a huge following. By your own account enough to have impacted this past election. So piss on him - and them - all you want. But I think the party does so at its peril and to spite itself.

[SharonClark]

114. What was the purpose in posting this op? To fight the primary again?

Because it was the same old same old.

[MedusaX]

115. Umm no...

Do we often see tens or hundreds of thousands in the streets protesting Wall Street or big Pharma's?

Or hundreds of lawyers offer to work pro-bono on the weekend for laid off workers?

If this whole nightmare has taught us anything...
it is that people will passionately embrace a fight FOR something ...
For women's rights or LGBTQ equality or
for the acceptance of & rights of immigrants & refugees ...
For freedom of speech, free press, public education, clean air, sustainable development practices, technological advances, affordable healthcare,
Freedom of or from religion ...
the separation of church & state
for government accountability & transparency
For liberty, justice, and the right of every individual to pursue happiness -- whatever that may entail

When a platform built on "positivity" is reinforced with "reality" -- like:
- freedom of speech means that we may hear things that we do not agree with
- Clean air requires a certain degree of regulation which may be inconvenient to industries and may result in higher prices for some goods/services
- supporting 1st amendment rights is equally as important as 2nd amendment rights... or any other
And ultimately there will need to be processes and procedures codified to ensure that we can each choose which rights we wish to exercise - knowing that each can be exercised safely and without risk of infringing on another's rights....

You end up with a message of Truth & Power that can easily be embraced, both logically and emotionally, by a very broad base.

[alarimer]

130. Yes, stop pandering to Wall Street and Silicon Valley

It's why they lose. Every single fucking time.

[ehrnst]

134. So join the damn party, Bernie. Or start one yourself. (nt)

[Blue_Tires]

140. The party wasn't open to working people before?

[Sparky 1]

147. Sort of. Read "Listen Liberal" by Thomas Frank to learn how it has changed. n/t

[nikibatts]

144. You don't gain new allies by attacking them. Where do you think good paying jobs will come from?

Democrats, we have a new DNC Chair and staff to set us on a forward path of inclusion and diversity. Let's give them a chance and direct our energies to fighting for our values with smartness and not smugness.

[brooklynite]

151. "urged a major overhaul of HIS party"

Umm.....