It’s Not About Bernie

[LWolf]

From my facebook feed today:

MAY 4, 2016
It’s Not About Bernie: Why We Can’t Let Our Revolution Die in Philadelphia
by KSHAMA SAWANT

Why Demands to Endorse Hillary Must Be Rejected

A growing chorus of voices is declaring the Democratic Primary over, and calling on Sandernistas to dutifully line up behind Hillary.

Unfortunately, the pundits are right about the mathematics. Sanders would need more than 64% of remaining delegates to take the lead. It would require a political bombshell to turn things around, especially with so many closed primaries where independents are shut out of this rigged process. And even with a majority, Bernie would still face the undemocratic brick wall of the establishment’s hand-picked crew of superdelegates.

But while the media establishment may be right about the numbers, they’re dead wrong about Sanders supporters flipping for Clinton. To throw our support behind Hillary’s corporate campaign would be to sabotage our political revolution.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/04/its-not-about-bernie-why-we-cant-let-our-revolution-die-in-philadelphia/

I'm behind Sanders all the way to the convention and beyond, but she's right, and he's said it all along: it's not about him.

[Trust Buster]

1. This, folks, represents exhibit A as to why Trump has a legitimate chance to be our next President.

Here's the problem: "I'm behind Sanders all the way to the convention AND BEYOND". This demographic is Trump's most important demographic. This demographic will attack Hillary all the way to November. This demographic offers Trump an avenue to victory.

[LWolf]

6. No. And Yes.

I'm behind Sanders beyond the convention, because he is a leader of that revolution, whether he becomes president or not. "Beyond the convention," as far as supporting Sanders goes, means that I will also support his return to the Senate, should he not win. But nice job trying to spin it into something else.

MY demographic? Quite frankly, I have been a vocal critic of both Clintons since the early 90s. That's not going to go away, so yes. I'm a vocal critic, and it has nothing to do with any election. Electing HRC is not on my agenda at all. Of course, neither is electing Trump, so I probably won't have anything to say about Clinton or the presidential election at all during the GE should she win the nomination, which I think is a monumentally stupid thing for my party to do, but hey; I'm just one.

That's the real problem. It's not that a certain demographic within Sanders supporters will attack Clinton during the GE. It's this:

First of all, we already know she has "historic" unfavorability ratings.
Second, we know that the nation is angry, and that the anger is directed at the corrupt establishment in both parties.

The Republicans have nominated the anti-establishment candidate that benefits from that. The Democrats seem determined to nominate the establishment candidate that is the target for that anger. Illogical, to say the least.

Sanders, as well-demonstrated just in the primaries, draws in all kinds of crossover voters, which will be needed in the GE. Clinton gets stronger support from within the party, but is also almost universally hated across the aisle; her nomination will bring her opposition to the polls, while depressing the energetic masses working for political revolution, because she doesn't, and won't, represent that revolution. That's probably why she doesn't poll against Trump nearly as well as Sanders does.

You are correct to be worried, but you seem unwilling to look at the real source: the nomination of a weaker candidate in a season in which the usual fear cards aren't working.

[justiceischeap]

9. "The Democrats seem determined to nominate the establishment candidate..."

If by "the Democrats" you mean voters it kinda goes against your assertion that the majority of the Democratic Party wants this Sanders revolution.

I wholeheartedly agree the system needs to be changed. I think lobbying should be illegal, I think all politicians should have term limits, I think corporate money in political races is bad for our country but my bigger concern is what will happen if the Democratic Party doesn't unite behind the nominee of the General if that happens to be Hillary.

The biggest issue facing this election, whether you believe it or not is the fate of the US Supreme Court. The decisions the court makes has longer lasting effects than the President that nominates the Justices to the bench. If you think Wall St. is the bigger issue, you're wrong because look at what happened with Citizens United. Citizens United enabled (and will continue to enable for years to come) corporate money in politics. Think about all the cases from recent years that has done damage to our political process.

The Republican party, with their success in gerrymandering, has stacked the lower courts with conservative judges and look how that is going nationally. We've lost some protection when it comes to voting rights because of cases before the courts. If you really want to enact change at the national level this time around, you need to think about who is nominating the next 2-3 Supreme Court justices and think about how their decisions and time on the bench (Scalia was a Justice on the Supreme Court for close to (or more than) 30 years). Now imagine the USSC with 2-3 more justices further to the right than Scalia. A woman's right to choose will become a thing of the past for sure. They may even find some way to invalidate marriage equality. Any positive steps forward we've taken with the current court could possibly be in jeopardy if people don't put more thought into the consequences of a conservative Supreme Court.

That said, vote how you will be keep the consequences in mind.

[LWolf]

10. By "the Democrats

that seem determined" I mean the neo-liberals in power, the neo-liberal Democratic voters, and those that, like you, feel more comfortable with an establishment candidate making incremental changes, or explaining why we simply can't change things, no matter how much we want to.

I've heard from many, many Democrats who crave more fundamental change but don't have the hope, the determination, the will, to make that happen. They've allowed the incremental conditioning that shaped them into lesser evil voters to prevail.

And, of course, there are the much larger contingent of conservative and neo-liberal Democrats within the party than there used to be.

The Supreme Court argument is trotted out every single time the Democrats nominate a candidate to try to make sure voters get in line. While there is a point in there, it's not an argument that carries the power that those who use it to bludgeon dissent into line think it does.

I always vote how I will. It's always a vote based on issues, not personalities. But thanks.

[YouDig]

2. It's also about Trump.

[LWolf]

3. The revolution is not about Trump.

It's about the 99%.

[YouDig]

5. I hope not, but sometimes it looks that way.

[Renew Deal]

4. Bernie all enthusiastically endorse Hillary

He already has in many ways.

[LWolf]

7. I'm not sure what you're saying.

If you are trying to say that, if he loses, he will endorse Clinton, I think you are correct.

If you are trying to say that his endorsement will mean something to the revolution? Probably for some members. Not for all, and not for that revolution itself.

That revolution is not about Sanders, Clinton, nor Trump, and that energy and determination is not simply going to be picked up and plopped down in the HRC campaign. It doesn't work that way.

[Tarc]

8. It will mean something for most, who will vote for her right alongside him

This same sentiment was expressed for Hillary against Obama in 2008. It fades in time, don't worry about it.

[JaneyVee]

11. Im voting with Hillary's broad, diverse coalition.

[MuseRider]

12. We're with us

all the way. Sounds awkward that way but it is not about him it is about all of us.

I don't think he will run as an Independent. I just don't see him doing that but that does not mean the revolution dies.

Vote for policy not party is exactly the way to get out of this mess given the 2 party system that does not even follow it's own rules and platform.

Thanks!

[LWolf]

13. Yes.

It's about all of us.