One more time: Bernie supporters are not unrealistic about what he could do

[cali]

Let's clear something up. Bernie's supporters don't expect a magic wand

We know that his priorities are aspirational. We know that if he was elected, that would be the beginning, not the end. We don't expect miracles, we expect him to fight the corporate money and power that is swiftly turning this country in a very bad, very dangerous direction. We don't believe that scrambling to tinker around the edges or produce fig leaves to politely pretend you're doing something is the right approach, because at this time that really is just tantamount to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I think a lot of Bernie's supporters feel as I do:

It's about integrity, and Bernie having consistently fought for the right things for a long time. It's about trusting his judgment, and I pretty much do. He's represented me for 25 years. So he's earned it. It's about ethics. In many ways, to me this primary is about character as much as anything else.

Sanders supporters know that when Bernie is talking about revolution, he's talking about shifting the culture and we know that doesn't happen overnight. We know that cultural shift precedes enacting single payer. We know we could fail.

We trust him to fight for people.

[CTyankee]

1. Perfect!

[cali]

3. Thank you very much. I always hesitate

to speak for others, but I know a lot of Bernie supporters and everyone says this sort of thing. At least that's how I'm justifying my presumption.

[TDale313]

2. Thank you!

[TCJ70]

4. This is it exactly...

...but don't expect the status quo folks to get it. They'll just accuse you of wanting unicorns or something.

This election is about priorities and re-orienting government towards people over profits.

[cali]

6. Well you said it better and pithier than I did

[oregonjen]

101. Exactly!

[Old Codger]

5. Maybe this is wrong

But a thought that I had in what we expect from Bernie. IMHO I hope for Bernie to be what we all thought/hoped Obama would be...I expect that he will fight for what he expresses as his hopes for our nation, and not go to any bargaining table giving away the high ground even before it starts....

[cali]

7. I think that's part of it.

[uponit7771]

59. So a historically gerrymandered GOP congress means nothing... sigh.. its like, we're being tought

Last edited Sun Jan 24, 2016, 06:42 PM - Edit history (1)

... the president, without a congress to back him, has any high ground to begin with!??!?!

FDR had an 70% DEM congress throughout 4 terms

Obama had a DNC controlled congress for 59 days...

[Fawke Em]

68. The biggest problem with Obama is that he STARTED negotiations in the middle.

I wish that he would have started them from the left and we could've gotten, say, a public option, for example.

[Enthusiast]

74. Nailed it!

[uponit7771]

84. Where would the votes come from? We've hashed this over and over and people on this issue never

... really address that.

The votes for SP weren't there, hell ... the votes for ACA were hardly there.

[green917]

98. to quote a favorite movie of mine

"You don't fight the fights you can win, you fight the fights that need fighting! "

Continually, we have watched president Obama negotiate by starting far to the right of where any issue could have started and large swaths of the American people are fed up with it. Even if the votes weren't there, by nature of the fact that majorities of the American people wanted a public option, the advocates and experts from that side of the debate should have at least had a seat at the table to discuss the possibilities but that was dealt away to the insurance companies for God knows what kind of quid pro quo. On the stimulous package, the president offered far too large a proportion of the package as tax cuts to the wealthy out of the gate and it still want good enough (hell, he even went to them on the hill). I could go on and on. I support Bernie because I know he will at least make the effort to get populist pro-working class issues resolved before completely giving away the store to the other side. When you start a debate by aquiescing to most of what your opponent wants, you've already lost the debate and we have watched our party's politicians deal away far too much over the last 40 years.

[Fawke Em]

102. Thank you.

You said basically what I would have.

[uponit7771]

103. Ok, I'll take this one as another "there were no votes for SP" response... You don't have to fight

... those fights only one way either... many ways to fight a fight other than throwing energy into the improbable.

[green917]

132. there were no votes for it

Because from the outset, the professionals advocating for it weren't even allowed to present their case to congress or the American people and the president chose not to fight for it.

[OnionPatch]

87. That's why I'm voting for Bernie.

He's not going to roll over and make concessions before the bargaining even begins. That's such a lame strategy.

[OrwellwasRight]

82. 80% Progressive?

Nonsense. If that were the case his court packing scheme and other defeated efforts would not have failed (e.g., he initially proposed to include universal health care in both the original Social Security Act and the Wagner Act -- both proposals were deemed too radical and removed). What he had was good negotiating skills--he knew that you always start high and negotiate form there). He asked for more than he thought he could get so that he could compromise down. Hillary starts somewhere in the center-right and negotiates down from there.

And Obama had Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate for his first two years in office. Let's stop rewriting history.

[uponit7771]

85. Facts matter, img and link inside...It was avg around 70% peak of 80

[img]http://www.brendan-nyhan.com/.a/6a00d83451d25c69e20120a8f2119b970b-pi[/img]

[OrwellwasRight]

89. Yes, facts matter. Let's learn some.

"Democratic" Party ≠ "progressive"

This was particularly true in the 1930s and 1940s, when Southern Democrats were both racist and conservative. You do know that national parties used to have no ideological integrity like they do today, right? This is why one of the great progressives in American history was a Republican, Robert LaFollette: http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/turningpoints/tp-035/

Here is some additional historical background, which you may need:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/jimcrow/stories_org_democratic.html

See especially this, at the end of the piece: "Even though Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a Democrat, and a relatively liberal president during the 1930s and '40s, he rarely challenged the powerfully entrenched Southern bloc. When the House passed a federal anti-lynching bill several times in the 1930s, Southern senators filibustered it to death."

Filibustering an anti-lynching bill = NOT progressive.

Therefore, it is not correct to say that FDR had an 80% "progressive majority".

Facts matter.

[uponit7771]

104. Sigh, ... then they word smith you.. none of that changes the fact that Obama's congressional...

...make up looked nothing like LBJ and FDR...

NOTHING

but people still expect FDR and LBJ results.

Magical Asterisks

[OrwellwasRight]

121. I see. Once confronted with real facts,

they no longer matter so much and you revert to generalizations?

Sure, FDR had larger Democratic majorities. If that is what you meant, that is what you should have said.

FDR did NOT, ever, have an 80% PROGRESSIVE Congress. That matters. The Southern, racist, conservative Democrats weren't really with FDR. They were mostly against him, which is why he had to compromise to get his goals through. Had he started with low goals, we would not have the legacy of the New Deal today. We would have the Half Deal.

[uponit7771]

123. The new deal passed congress with much more votes than the ACA... there's no comparison

...

[OrwellwasRight]

125. No, there isn't any comparison.

One president fought for radical change, and one fought for incrementalism. You can't get what you don't ask for.

[uponit7771]

129. and congress's at the time had NOTHING to do with what they asked for!?!? Really!?!?

[magical thyme]

117. Another example: Krugman pleaded for massive stimulus as infrastructure upgrades, not tax cuts

Obama asked for ~half what Krugman said we *needed*

Obama settled for ~half that, much in the form of tax cuts.
Krugman may well have overstated what he believed we needed to give Obama room to start a little lower.

But you do not enter a negotiation asking for half what you need...unless you plan to lose.

[uponit7771]

118. Here's the link to the congress Obama had to deal with...

[img]http://www.brendan-nyhan.com/.a/6a00d83451d25c69e20120a8f2119b970b-pi[/img]

Please tell me how in the world was Obama supposed to get anything out of these guys who, from the beginning, was set out to do nothing to advance the country!?

Sanders congress will be worst than Obama's!!!


And neither GOP congress has shown they give a damn about Americans...

I think that is one of the biggest differences between the two candidates; one understands the GOP congress doesn't have to care about the people, they don't serve them

[magical thyme]

119. 1. You start a negotiation asking more than what you need. 2. Double if it's a hostile negotiation.

Double. Not half and hope they'll "be nice." Double.

3. And *all* negotiations are hostile.

Example: co-worker's daughter wanted to buy house in foreclosure.

Bank's asking price $80,000.

Think of the Bank as extreme rightwingnut GOP, because for all practical purposes, they are. And they were asking nearly double what they were willing to take.

Mother's advice to daughter -- offer them $40K.

She did. She bought what had once been a $200K+ house for $50K. Not the $80K the bank asked for. $50K.

I don't need to "look at" the congress he was dealing with. Because it was a hostile congress. That's not a reason to ask for half what you need. It's a reason to ask double.

[uponit7771]

120. Hmmmm, ok... I'll give you the negotiations tactics could've been improved I'm not seeing how

... in the end that mattered when in the case of the bank the GOP (the bank) has no incentive to get rid of the house in the first place.

The bank doesn't have to do anything...

Either way, regarding the rest of Obama's dealing with congress they didn't care about settling on deals, they didn't have to. They shut down the government costing 24 billion based on some stupid shit and gained seats.

[OrwellwasRight]

122. And yet Krugman is now basically stumping for the candidate

who sets lower horizons.

Just don't get it.

[magical thyme]

128. read elsewhere that he's angling for a cabinet slot

and that he's a neoliberal at heart.

Iirc, there was also a point in time when he supported single payer, medicare for all. Now he doesn't.

[Broward]

8. Very well said. NT.

[retrowire]

9. Exactly, that's what the Political Revolution is all about!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511030951

To find out how Bernie's plan is more practical and based in reality than people think, go there.

[SoapBox]

30. K & R to your post, retrowire!

And I had missed it...thank you for the link.

Go Bernie!

[CaliforniaPeggy]

10. Exactly right.

Thank you!

[cali]

12. Thanks, Peggy

[litlbilly]

11. Right on the money cali. I dont know of any Bernie supporters who are blind followers.

Ive been aware of Bernie since his Brunch With Bernie on Thom Hartmanns show many years ago. Its always about character and substance. It's about us not him. I trust he will do everything he can to get stuff done for us, and he knows we will have his back all the way. We all know if he gets elected, that is the beginning of a huge fight and I think we are all ready for that.

[MoonRiver]

13. Well, you may say he's not talking about revolution,

but it is a word he uses very frequently, in reference to his campaign. If he miraculously were elected president I would be just fine with that, albeit with few expectations about what he could accomplish. But I believe most of his current supporters would be bitterly disappointed, when the promised revolution was not forthcoming. Not even close. I can tell you are a realist and pragmatist, cali, but his other starry eyed supporters, not so much.

[cali]

15. You really don't know Sanders supporters.

[MoonRiver]

18. All I know is what I read here and listen to on t.v., radio, etc.

Most seem extremely excited about the anticipated "revolution."

[cali]

19. Then you should know better.

[MoonRiver]

20. I know what I read and hear. Clearly you disagree with my opinion. Fair enough. eom

[retrowire]

109. this is what the political revolution is all about

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511030951

it's a lot more pragmatic than people think.

[djean111]

17. I mean this in the nicest possible way - so what? Isn't hope better than settling

for something we do not like at all? We may be disappointed with what Bernie manages to get done, so we might as well support Hillary? That does not make any sense whatsoever.

[uponit7771]

60. A practical plan is better than hoping no? Why hope when you can move and build, why let...

... good or perfect be the enemy of adequate for right now!?

tia

[djean111]

66. I do not believe Hillary's "practical plans" will actually benefit anyone but the 1%.

I was, however, wondering when that hoary old "why let the perfect be the enemy of the good" thing would make an appearance.

Bernie and Hillary are apples and oranges, not two different kinds of apples.

[uponit7771]

86. I'm not into villainizing either candidate, it's not progressing any conversation... and why accept

... nothing when something that can be built on is available

[djean111]

88. First - this is primary season. NO ONE is the nominee, as yet, so there is no rational need for

all this "why not support Hillary" exhortation.

Second - there really is no conversation to be had. Hillary will not move even one millimeter to the left, she will be an advocate for no one except the 1%. She will not be enabling anything that would be a foundation for anything progressive to be built upon. IMO she will be doubling and tripling down on corporate domination, and will only pay attention to social issues if those issues do not cost corporations any money. That's not "villainizing", that is stating the obvious, going on Hillary's past record. Whatever she says during a campaign is just poll-driven blather, and not to be believed or counted on.

[Marty McGraw]

93. ^^That!!^^ ('-')

( '-')

[ElliotCarver]

111. Agreed! She is two shakes away from absconding with the nomination into corporate cloisters!

PS: Not sure whether anyone caught the CNN opinion piece endorsing Bernie's single-payer proposal

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/24/opinions/bernie-sanders-right-about-health-care-welch/index.html

[uponit7771]

115. Most democrats do NOT believe this at all

[djean111]

124. You do not speak for MOST Democrats.

Even if that were so - so what? When I see Debbie Wasserman supporting GOP buddies rather than Democrats - "Democrats" has gotten way too bendy to consider that I must be a Democratic sheep. And I am not alone, obviously.

[uponit7771]

130. Recent polls have though and 84% of dems have a favorable opinion of HRC, so I don't think

... most dems think that

[retrowire]

110. The political revolution is a practical plan

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511030951

read that to learn why

[HereSince1628]

14. No, and no ponies, but a Sanders victory could be magical

Probably wouldn't be an act that disappeared the New Dems,

And could lead to a serious suspension of belief that hard things can't be tried.

[Punkingal]

16. Excellent, and spot on!

Thank you for this, and for all your well thought out posts.

[Live and Learn]

21. K&R nt

[valerief]

22. Right, but the anti-Bernies just LOVE to claim otherwise. Like we're stupid because

we want the same basic standard of living as much of the developed world.

[TryLogic]

23. Agree! For me it is about integrity and good judgment (versus political scheming and

multiple serious lapses in judgment). It is about integrity versus quid pro quo politics. It is about the 99% versus the 0.1%. It is about the well-being of the nation versus the well-being (wealth and power) of a few.

[Agony]

24. Crystal clear, you are.

[dpatbrown]

25. Thank you Cali

I've been a student of politics since Ike's second term, waiting and waiting for someone like Sanders to run for president. The character of this man is amazing. No one can touch it. His beliefs are a spitting image of mine.

I feel the same way as you. Thanks again.

[draa]

26. K+R!!!

Thanks for speaking for me.

We are One. We are Bernie.

[SoapBox]

27. He has made it very clear...he cannot do it alone and that is why we need a

broad based Political Revolution.

Not just in D.C. but at all levels of Federal, Stste and Local governments.

It's time to return AMERICA to the 99%.

This journey is simply the beginning.

[Paka]

28. It is about his integrity,

and his moral compass. I also happen to like where he stands on the issues, and knowing that stand won't change when winds shift.

[senz]

29. You said what needed to be said, cali.

For me, it's knowing that the president of the United States places the interests and needs of the American people above those of concentrated wealth and power.

The foundational idea of our system is that the people elect our representatives. A president whose primary loyalties are to the wealthy few does not represent the people who elected him or her.

We know exactly who Bernie represents.

[MisterP]

31. Obama's The Phantom Menace, Sanders The Force Awakens

with Obama everyone expected things like sheer, fountaining, perfect health, the GOP dissolving itself in 2009, permanent employment, and instant world peace; soon enough the party flacks damned anyone who asked for anything for actually believing any of the lines they'd used in '08

now we know better, got bitter--thousands threatened friends to get them to vote, turned out by the millions, were almost Jonestown in their levels of sheer ecstasy, wanted to feel the hem of the Great One who'd fallen to earth; it was like giving up one's soul

instead the movement was dismantled, demobilized, veal-penned; the same glory-hogging "activists" with their mouse-turd mouths and disappointed little headshakes were put in charge; Rahm and DWS were put in charge and lost election after election, careful always to blame the voters ahead of time even as they promised staggering victories and sabotaged campaigns

Sanders' campaign is a reaction to this, and has to keep its promises to a party membership that 1. has felt its strength with the Obama sweep and 2. is extremely wary after their ecstasy was so betrayed

[NRaleighLiberal]

32. Exactly right.

[jwirr]

33. Exactly.

[Uncle Joe]

34. Well said, cali.

Thanks for the thread.

[Vattel]

35. Wow! Awesome, awesome post!!

[hopemountain]

36. making an integral stand

for what is just, fair, equal and right means more to me than oogieboogie reactions to fear mongering by the establishment & those protecting the status quo. well said, cali!

we are already hurting & we have been hurting and we are sick and tired of it.

ain't gonna let nobody turn me around (no more)

[Lage Nom Ai]

37. Well said

My father had JFK's speeches on vinyl and we would listen to them and discuss them. He was a teacher and a union rep. I want his party back.
Cali you spoke for me perfectly, thank you

[Ferd Berfel]

38. True.

And I trust Hillary to fight for Corporations and the 1%

[libdem4life]

39. Allow me to pile on the cheers...well written.

[pa28]

40. Those claiming we want a magic wand are deliberately misunderstanding Bernie's supporters.

You've expressed my own thoughts on this fairly well. Thank you!

I expect Bernie, if elected, to be more like a doctor who will approach his job as first doing no further harm. Even with a Republican congress he can stop or block any further trade deals that will kill jobs and investment in the US. He can stop the persecution of whistleblowers, curb the growth of the surveillance state, clean house at executive branch agencies that still are filled with staff from the Bush administration. Limit the influence of pentagon contractors who make political contributions. There's more but you get the idea.

You don't need permission from congress to start enforcing the Sherman act at the DOJ. Break up big banks and digital monopolies without re-instating Glass-Steagall. A thorough trust busting campaign would probably take his entire first term by itself.

With sufficient will and support you can do those things without any legislation at all. This would be our own version of a "Reagan revolution". A transformational political revolution that would be an enduring legacy even without waving a magic wand at congress.

[MisterP]

46. we don't want X, Y, and Z, to be given to us: we want to create a system that no longer

withholds X, Y, and Z from us

[Mbrow]

41. K&R

[Duval]

42. I feel exactly as you do, cali. K&R

[humbled_opinion]

43. Excellent sums me up perfectly... n/t

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

44. Exactly. Nobody expects that if Bernie is elected

single payer health insurance will magically come to pass on January 21, 2017, or that the banks will divide themselves up in a happy cloud of pixie dust, or that everybody will have well-paying jobs. What we do expect, and believe will happen, is that he will do whatever he can to help those things come to pass, someday. That someday might not be for many years but the effort has to be made; these things will never happen if it is assumed they can't happen. The political will has to be there, and that's what Bernie is about. The Civil Rights Act happened because enough people finally recognized the need for it after a lot of blood, sweat and tears. The labor movement started in the late 19th century, and it took decades, during which people actually died fighting for workers' rights, for the law to recognize those rights. A couple of guys named Jack Baker and Mike McConnell tried to get married in 1971 but it took 43 years before their marriage became legal. But those things happened because enough people cared enough and worked hard enough to make them happen. If everyone assumed there could never be federal recognition of the civil rights of minorities or union workers or same-sex couples, we'd still be back in the 19th century.

Hillary's campaign says we can't have single payer or a better minimum wage or strict regulation of Wall Street because getting those things is just unrealistic and we should be content to chip away at the edges for tiny improvements to the status quo. JFK said we choose go to the moon and do other things not because they are easy but because they are hard. Bernie wants to do things that are hard, but Hillary doesn't want to even try.

I'm voting for Bernie, because fuck that shit.

[Enthusiast]

76. +1 a huge bunch!

[enid602]

45. progress

"We know that his priorities are aspirational." Finally, an admission that they are not reality based. That's progress.

[cali]

49. Sad little post.

[Kalidurga]

53. I know right

they are even making aspire a bad word.

[Enthusiast]

77. Sure is a sad little post.

[Ken Burch]

56. There is no conflict between aspiration and reality.

HRC would have just as much trouble getting her stuff passed by a Rethug congress.

If you don't aspire, you've given up.

[uponit7771]

61. There is when there's no workable plan

[retrowire]

112. there is a plan actually

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511030951

go there to learn more.

[uponit7771]

114. Keyword "workable"...

[retrowire]

116. you don't have faith

that Bernie can't encourage people to actually believe in politics again?

he's doing a much better job than Hillary.

[Nay]

131. Interesting. What every other advanced country has is only "aspirational" and

"not reality based" for this country. That realization should tell you that Bernie is more needed than ever, because it's obvious other countries managed to help their citizens without much fanfare at all. But whatevs. This country is so special that it is sending itself down a black hole, just for grins.

[PatrickforO]

47. Excellent post! I'll just add that we all know that WE are the ones who

will have to step up and put the pressure on those we elect to back Bernie's play.

Some we will win and some we will lose. Hopefully, with all of us behind his leadership, we'll win some big ones.

We all knew this going in. But you know what? Even though it's gonna be HARD, we must do it now. We have to fight for what we believe in.

[sadoldgirl]

48. Great OP, cali!Thank you very much.

I think that we can expect a different Cabinet and different
appointments from him as well.

The greatest hope I have is that he inspires the young
people to run and to serve in local and state offices, because
this is where the future leaders have to start.

Kennedy did it with the peace corps and Vista; Bernie can
do it for the government offices, like school boards and
district captains,etc. That is where all change has to start,
yet where we will find a great resistance from the old guard.

[farleftlib]

50. That's how I feel too

I'm in it for the long haul.

Thank you for a great post.

[orpupilofnature57]

51. Trust because of history, not poetry , fear and platitudes .

[neverforget]

52. Remember this from 2008?

Quote starts at 40 seconds.

Clinton Gets Sarcastic, Mocks Obama

(CNN) - A day after Hillary Clinton angrily called on Barack Obama to stop mailing campaign literature she said misrepresented her positions, the New York senator adopted a more sarcastic tone toward her rival on a campaign swing through Rhode Island Sunday.

Speaking to a crowd at Rhode Island College, Clinton said, "None of the problems we face will be easily solved," and then went on to mock Obama's message of unity.

“Now, I could stand up here and say, ‘Let’s just get everybody together. Let’s get unified,'" Clinton said to laughter of the crowd.

"The skies will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect,” she said dryly as the crowd erupted.

“Maybe I’ve just lived a little long, but I have no illusions about how hard this is going to be," Clinton continued. "You are not going to wave a magic wand to make special interests disappear."

Sound familiar?

(I used the YouTube video because the CNN one is not available anymore)

[tonedevil]

83. I knew she would...

not win in 2008 as soon as I saw that. It is making me sad to see that Candidate Clinton making a comeback.

[jeff47]

54. We've been fighting for single payer for 80 years.

To think that we'll be upset if it doesn't happen in the next two is idiotic.

[cali]

55. They think we're idiots, or they'd like to think it.

[Logical]

57. Kick

[corkhead]

58. Just Bernie's picks for his cabinet and all of the Federal courts are enough for him to get my vote

Does anybody actually think Hillary will get more done with Congress than Bernie?

If nothing else, Bernie will nudge the Overton window back over to the left a bit. Hillary won't do that.

[mountain grammy]

62. and we don't want "free stuff" either!

If I hear that one more time, I think I'll pop someone. Nothing is free, everyone pays. Some people pay and are poisoned. Some people pay and are murdered. We all pay, but only a few really benefit, mostly those at the top. The system is rigged beyond belief and we must admit that before we can fix it.
Thank you for your excellent post.

[polly7]

63. 'Integrity'! +1,000,000. nt.

[Armstead]

64. Exactly -- Aspirations are good

[sammythecat]

65. Perfect bulls eye

Right! We don't expect miracles, but we fully expect a change in direction. AND we fully expect Bernie Sanders to fight, and keep on fighting for justice and the rights of people. Just like has done his entire adult life.

[Fawke Em]

67. Ironically, the only person talking about magic wands is Hillary.

In Ames, Iowa, on Tuesday, Mrs. Clinton delivered a thinly veiled jab at Mr. Sanders, suggesting he was making big promises that the realities of divided government would make impossible to deliver on. “I wish that we could elect a Democratic president who could wave a magic wand and say, ‘We shall do this, and we shall do that.’ That ain’t the real world we’re living in!”

It was not the first appearance of the magic wand in Mrs. Clinton’s campaign-trail speech. In February 2008, she used it to to argue that Mr. Obama’s call for unity showed he was naive about the ways of Washington:

“The skies will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect,” she said archly in Providence, R.I. “Maybe I’ve just lived a little long, but I have no illusions about how hard this is going to be. You are not going to wave a magic wand and have the special interests disappear!”

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/01/12/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-magic-wand/

[dgauss]

69. Exactly, thank you.

That's why it's frustrating to hear people demand from Sanders an exact fiscal plan for how universal health care will be paid for. Then they can declare that those numbers don't add up, pretend they are really for universal health care but unfortunately those numbers just don't add up (as if they'd know..) and then dismiss Bernie's entire candidacy.

Coming up with any exact plan or numbers for something that won't happen for many years and after a huge fight is ridiculous. An exact plan right now is not the point. The point is, Bernie will fight for it and move things in that direction.

[ViseGrip]

70. No magic wand. Just a president we know is not lying to us, one we can trust.

[Bubzer]

71. Well said!

[TIME TO PANIC]

72. Nailed it!

[Enthusiast]

73. Kicked and recommended a whole bunch!

[SammyWinstonJack]

75. I don't expect Hillary to turn on her corporate backers should she

win. I trust that she will continue to do their bidding.

[lumberjack_jeff]

78. He's articulating a vision. Telling people, correctly, that it doesn't have to be this way.

This system was created by people and it can be corrected by people.

[OrwellwasRight]

79. She said the same nonsense when she was desperate to beat Obama.

It was also demeaning and insulting back in 2008 -- to both her opponent and her opponent's voters. It's rude. It's condescending. And it makes people have negative feelings toward the candidates showing such contempt for them. She is basically engaging in strategy that is designed to encourage Bernie Sanders supporters to sit out the election if she wins the nomination, because why will they want to work for the election of someone who hates and disrespects them? I don't get it. Bad strategy.

[SMC22307]

80. Of course not. And we didn't expect one with Obama, either.

It was just an idiotic meme hurled at "the left."

[DaveT]

81. You can't do anything unless you try

I'm old and cynical, but I am truly baffled by Hillary's message of "Don't bother to fight because you can't win."


Like we used to say in Texas, "Hide and watch, Hillary."

[Spitfire of ATJ]

90. I don't see anyone else even TRYING.

[pnwmom]

91. Then how come so many of you blame Obama for not being able to come through

on all his promises?

Obama has integrity but many of Bernie's supporters hate him anyway because he couldn't wave a magic wand and change the whole system.

[cali]

92. I like Obama, but he only tinkered around the edges on economic inequality

And barely tinkered, at that

[ucrdem]

96. ACA is not a tinker. It's major.

Whether it succeeds or fails depends on who wins in November. I'd much prefer to see it succeed.

[cali]

107. I'm speaking largely about economic equality

and reigning in Wall Street. I agree the ACA is significant but it is troubled. I know that dems don't want to admit that but...


Yikes! Obamacare Premiums in These 4 States Rose By at Least 30% in 2016
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/24/yikes-obamacare-premiums-in-these-4-states-rose-by.aspx

I think the ACA has been a success but I think the insurance companies are a real threat.

[retrowire]

113. ACA was intended to be a stepping stone

towards medicare for all. its not the final work.

let's go to the next step.

[Marty McGraw]

97. and let too many

people from the prior admin. keep their jobs (a good many with the Rumsfeld/Cheyney bastardization of the pentagon and other state security programs too) as well as keeping cozy with the ones that held a big part in our banking melt-down.

[pnwmom]

100. So how do you think Bernie will be able to accomplish more? n/t

[Todays_Illusion]

94. Since we need (D) U.S. Representatives and Senators, why aren't we reading

about the DNC working to register voters in red states and swing states instead of reading about how they are supporting Hillary and Hillary supporting legislators?

[Kip Humphrey]

95. all so very true but I'll sure miss those unicorns farting rainbows... sounds pretty & musical too!

[bvar22]

99. Thank You, Cali.

I'm standing with Bernie...not because he is the End,
but because he is the Beginning.

It took Reagan, Bush, Bill Clinton, and Obama to move us as far right as we have become...that is 35 years. Bernie will not be able to fix everything at once, but he WILL get the ball rolling,
and convert Americans once they learn that Hillary is more of the same.

[cantbeserious]

105. When We Stand Together - No Citizen Need Settle For The Lesser Of Two Corporate Evils - Go Bernie Go

eom

[JDPriestly]

106. K&R.

[George II]

108. Looks like another concession speech.

[tazkcmo]

126. I wanna big ol' honkin pile

of friggin' PIXIE dust!!! Hell yeah! I'd roll around in it AND whoop and yell and snort a bunch and then ride my unicorn to the castle where I'd eat a cotton candy cloud and grab my Princess and ride off in the sunset!!!!!!!!

Or integrity. Which ever.

[stage left]

127. K&R

I know that Bernie Sanders isn't a magician. I don't believe in unicorns. Rainbows are an optical illusion produced by light and water vapor. I'm too big for a pony and too old to expect miracles. I've never worshipped any political figure and I'm not going to start now. I support Bernie Sanders because his postions on the issues align with mine and he won't change them to get elected.

[cali]

133. I'm kicking this because I keep reading, this morning

that Hillary is lacking an aspirational, overarching message. I think that's right.