2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum I Used to Support Bernie, but Then I Changed My Mind --- TOM HAYDEN in The Nation
I have a variety of concerns about both candidates campaigns. But I intend to vote for Hillary Clinton in the California primary for one fundamental reason.https://www.thenation.com/article/i-used-to-support-bernie-but-then-i-changed-my-mind/
Voting on June 7 is a personal responsibility for myself and other Californians, just as it is for my friends and colleagues in New York on April 19. ...... I intend to vote for Hillary Clinton in the California primary for one fundamental reason. It has to do with race. My life since 1960 has been committed to the causes of African Americans, the Chicano movement, the labor movement, and freedom struggles in Vietnam, Cuba and Latin America. In the environmental movement I start from the premise of environmental justice for the poor and communities of color. My wife is a descendant of the Oglala Sioux, and my whole family is inter-racial.
What would cause me to turn my back on all those people who have shaped who I am? That would be a transgression on my personal code. I have been on too many freedom rides, too many marches, too many jail cells, and far too many gravesites to breach that trust. And I have been so tied to the womens movement that I cannot imagine scoffing at the chance to vote for a woman president. When I understood that the overwhelming consensus from those communities was for Hillaryfor instance the Congressional Black Caucus and Sacramentos Latino caucusthat was the decisive factor for me. I am gratified with Bernies increasing support from these communities of color, though it has appeared to be too little and too late. Bernies campaign has had all the money in the world to invest in inner city organizing, starting 18 months ago. He chose to invest resources instead in white-majority regions at the expense of the Deep South and urban North.
Bernie comes from a place that is familiar to me, the New York culture of democratic socialism. From the Port Huron Statement forward, I have believed in the democratic public control of resources and protecting the rights of labor. My intellectual hero is C. Wright Mills, a Marxist who broke with what he condemned as the stale labor metaphysic of the communist and socialist parties, embracing instead an international New Left led by young middle-class students around the world. Mills was fresh, honest, and always searching. The 1962 Port Huron Statement declared that we needed liberals for their relevance in achieving reforms, and socialists for their deeper critique of underlying systems. We did not declare ourselves for socialism but for a massive expansion of the New Deal, combined with an attack on the Cold War arms race. We called for a basic realignment of the Democratic Party through the force of social movements, but not through a third party. We even went part of the way with LBJ in the face of the 1964 Goldwater threat. From there the Democrats divided over race and Vietnam, eventually leading to Nixon. Even in the 80s and 9os, our campaign for economic democracy chose not to identify as a socialist movement. With the coming of the 2008 Wall Street crash and Bernies campaign, our political culture has changed profoundly in its tolerance of socialist ideas. But is it enough after this truly divisive primary season? ..... So here we are, at the end of one generation on the left and the rise of another. Both camps in the party will need each other in Novembermore than either side needs to emerge triumphant in the primary. We still need the organizing of a united front of equals to prevail against the Republicans. It will take a thorough process of conflict resolution to get there, not a unilateral power wielding by the usual operatives. Its up to all of us.
There's too much in the article for a couple of snips to do justice --worth a read.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)CLASSIC!!
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)The choice between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in 2008 was difficult for many Democrats. Clinton in 2016 should not be. What is at stake is another chance to make history by electing a woman president, to assure an independent judiciary, to advance the interests of working people and maintain a continuity of citizen access to government against the waning, raging Right. At this point, Clinton alone can mobilize a movement base and raise the hundreds of millions necessary to secure a high-turnout victory for a coalition seeded with thousands of progressives.
Yes, it is true, unfortunately, that Clinton is decidedly hawkish on military policy, the primary policy reason that many Democrats supported Obamas challenge in Iowa. Not much appears to have changed since then. Clinton crossed Obama and sided with Petraeus in the internal White House debates over Afghanistan (see Bob Woodwards Obamas Wars). She was tepid in supporting the popular overthrow of the Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak. She wanted the war in Libya.
The task for the peace and justice movement, then, is to spend the next four years creating a pro-peace climate strong enough to deter Hillary-as-hawk and smart enough to convince her that the old Hillary-the-dove was right in her instincts. Unlike the Sixties, we live in a time when all but the craziest neo-conservatives realize that its time for some nation-building at home, and there is no one more qualified than Clinton to move the agenda in that direction.
http://tomhayden.com/home/hillary-clinton-in-2016.html
I notice how the love to have Bernie (aka closet Clinton supporters) come out for Clinton. Is there anything that is true about the Clinton campaign? Smoke and mirrors, smoke and mirrors....
4
onehandle
(51,122 posts)heh... kidding, of course.
MADem
(135,425 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)Really.
How about that?
MADem
(135,425 posts)Fact.
http://tomhayden.com
MADem
(135,425 posts)But feel free to try to deflect attention from that three-egg omelette on your face, y'hear?
MADem
(135,425 posts)The one doing the "nose rubbing" is you--and it's not a good look. Harrrrumph!!!!!!
Thank you for the link--even though you couldn't be bothered to link directly, and made me look for it. That passive aggressive shit reflects on you, not me...!
For anyone else interested, here is the DIRECT LINK to the material:
http://tomhayden.com/home/tom-hayden-for-democratic-national-committee-endorsements.html
bvf
(6,604 posts)Oh, did you hurt your finger scrolling?
Too many big words to scan?
Sorry about that.
smh.
bvf
(6,604 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)There's just no "there" there!
bvf
(6,604 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Does the op ever get tired of getting pwned?
bvf
(6,604 posts)or accusations to be leveled, he's on the job.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I expect a gish gallop or a blind link to something that he'll insist proves you're wrong and when you debunk that assertion it will quickly devolve into a "I know you are but what am I" style tit for tat sub-thread.
He really needs a new schtick.
bvf
(6,604 posts)Last edited Wed Apr 13, 2016, 09:34 PM - Edit history (1)
on usenet. Same approach. One claimed to be Joseph Farah.
I'll leave it to the OP's prodigious Google skills if he needs to look that one up.
pantsonfire
(1,306 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)instruction.
And the unwritten rule now is you do not piss off the party (leadership). There is an effort underfoot to bring the troops in line. From what we have observed, not that successful with particular demographics
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Wow!
monmouth4
(9,708 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)hobbit709
(41,694 posts)dogman
(6,073 posts)"not a unilateral power wielding by the usual operatives" ? Ok then, why join the usual operatives?
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)The choice between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in 2008 was difficult for many Democrats. Clinton in 2016 should not be. What is at stake is another chance to make history by electing a woman president, to assure an independent judiciary, to advance the interests of working people and maintain a continuity of citizen access to government against the waning, raging Right. At this point, Clinton alone can mobilize a movement base and raise the hundreds of millions necessary to secure a high-turnout victory for a coalition seeded with thousands of progressives.
Yes, it is true, unfortunately, that Clinton is decidedly hawkish on military policy, the primary policy reason that many Democrats supported Obamas challenge in Iowa. Not much appears to have changed since then. Clinton crossed Obama and sided with Petraeus in the internal White House debates over Afghanistan (see Bob Woodwards Obamas Wars). She was tepid in supporting the popular overthrow of the Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak. She wanted the war in Libya.
The task for the peace and justice movement, then, is to spend the next four years creating a pro-peace climate strong enough to deter Hillary-as-hawk and smart enough to convince her that the old Hillary-the-dove was right in her instincts. Unlike the Sixties, we live in a time when all but the craziest neo-conservatives realize that its time for some nation-building at home, and there is no one more qualified than Clinton to move the agenda in that direction.
http://tomhayden.com/home/hillary-clinton-in-2016.html
I notice how the love to have Bernie (aka closet Clinton supporters) come out for Clinton. Is there anything that is true about the Clinton campaign? Smoke and mirrors, smoke and mirrors....
frylock
(34,825 posts)Does this guy know how the internet works?
bvf
(6,604 posts)Nor do some here, evidently.
BlindTiresias
(1,563 posts)But it does help if you actually read the author's previous arguments before you use it to score points.
GeorgiaPeanuts
(2,353 posts)Keep up darling
MADem
(135,425 posts)behaving in that manner?
Can't you ever be subtle?
18. This was posted and debunked hours ago...
View profile
Keep up darling
And PLEASE-- I WILL WAIT--explain what you mean by that bullshit "This was debunked" remark. You're saying this isn't true? What ARE you saying "darling?"
smh--you couldn't be more obvious if you tried.
GeorgiaPeanuts
(2,353 posts)And that same link from 2012 was posted in multiple OPs like your that link to this new fake Bernie supporter astroturfing pieces.
MADem
(135,425 posts)this article from the NATION?
Hmmmmm?
This isn't a link from 2012. It's a link from 2016. From ONE DAY ago.
I Used to Support Bernie, but Then I Changed My Mind
I have a variety of concerns about both candidates campaigns. But I intend to vote for Hillary Clinton in the California primary for one fundamental reason.
By Tom Hayden
YESTERDAY 11:17 AM
https://www.thenation.com/article/i-used-to-support-bernie-but-then-i-changed-my-mind/
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Bless your heart!
MADem
(135,425 posts)John Poet
(2,510 posts)Of course, Tom Hayden joined the establishment a long, long time ago,
when the whole world wasn't watching.
pantsonfire
(1,306 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)snowy owl
(2,145 posts)I think Bernie is attracting a lot of Republican votes. The more they try to destroy him, the more transparent their fear of him becomes. I'm not so worried about it. Bernie attracts trust and a lot of tea party republicans are on his side. They are tired of the establishment.
pantsonfire
(1,306 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid