2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumTicked off millennials are taking on the Democrats
ERIC KRUPKE
ABC2 Baltimore
Can you feel the Bern yet?
With the California primary less than a week away, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders continues to battle frontrunner Hillary Clinton despite a clear deficit in delegates. The longtime independent has staked his campaign on grassroots support from middle-class and working-class voters but it’s a different electorate that has kept him afloat: millennials.
This week on the podcast, host Jimmy Williams and Scripps politics reporter Miranda Green dig into the growing millennial support for Sanders on college campuses. Why are these millennials such fervent supporters and what does this mean for the Democratic party moving forward?
Audio at the link.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
hill2016
(1,772 posts)I think the answer is obvious
portlander23
(2,078 posts)Sahil Kapur
Bloomberg
October 19, 2015 — 5:00 AM EDT
It has become a familiar Republican refrain. Senator Marco Rubio on Wednesday called the first Democratic debate a contest over “who was going to give away the most free stuff.” New Jersey Governor Chris Christie quipped Friday in New Hampshire, “There's gonna be more free stuff for more people than you can even imagine sitting and listening to Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton and the rest of the crew up there.”
Last month, Jeb Bush characterized Democrats' message to African-American voters as “get in line and we'll take care of you with free stuff.” A few days earlier, Senator Rand Paul mockingly accused Sanders of promising voters “free stuff.” In 2012, Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting Mitt Romney told a voter, “If you're looking for more free stuff, vote for the other guy.”
LWolf
(46,179 posts)to adopt that Republican obsession.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Posting articles from Judicial Watch and the Wall Street Journal.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)I care that she doesn't always tell the truth, she's untrustworthy, and she's a neo-liberal. Those are the reasons that she can't earn my support.
What do you think the chances are that she will come out with a speech to the nation decrying neo-liberalism, rejecting it, apologizing for helping spread it, offers a plan that clearly goes down a path to benefit the 99%, and then actually works her ass off to implement that plan?
I say it's a 0% chance.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I was just making the point that some Bernie supporters seem to be agreeing with Republicans who attack Hillary just like some Hillary supporters seem to be agreeing with Republicans who attack Bernie. Just nothing that it works both ways.
CorporatistNation
(2,546 posts)e.g., MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...
Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...
Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"
Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"
Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Because Joe bashes Hillary and Rachel supports her?
That seems to be how some Sanders supporters view the media these days.
Anyone who bashes Hillary, from any side of the political spectrum, is telling the truth. Anyone who supports her is lying.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)LWolf
(46,179 posts)
pinebox
(5,761 posts)beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)
alc
(1,151 posts)free tuition is useless for many if room and board and books are unaffordable
it's bad if the best colleges raise tuition until the government can no longer afford it
it's bad if too large a percentage of students get majors without jobs available. I know plenty of parents who say "If I'm paying you're getting an employable education". We don't want to get to where industries actually need H1Bs given how much they abuse it when they don't need them.
There are solutions to all potential problems but there need to be "limits and qualifications" and not just an open checkbook that schools can sign themselves whenever they want and provide whatever majors student are interested in.
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)I suggest that you watch Michael Moore's CD "Where To Invade Next" because it might very well give you a different perspective on what YOU call free. I DO NOT know ion it still exists, but when I graduated from HS military dependents had access to THE G.I. Bill for College. I was all set to go to The University of Colorado, BUT what I did sounds CRAZY now except that somehow it worked out. I had a friend that I went to school with and knew since I was 14, we were always friends but I never had a romantic interest in him. About 6 months before I graduated we started dating and it turned into something more than friends. I graduated at 17 and when he came back from Korea he got orders to go to Ft. Bliss! I wanted to stay back but it wasn't an option given that my wonderful father thought that girls shouldn't leave home at that age.
So I went 600 miles across TX to El Paso, but this guy came and visited me several times. Because of circumstances that will take too long to explain, he got a DRAFT notice and I just happened to turn 18 right before it. Soooooo, he asked me to marry him because if you were married they wouldn't take you at that time. At 18 I married this guy and 50 years later we're still married!
So I didn't get to use a basically "free" college option, but there was free college back then and other options. I have two grandkids who have HUGE college loans, and my daughter & son-in-law decided to better themselves and got masters degrees in their occupational fields, so they too have loans! Way too much money for ONE family!
Too much WAR and everything else that has almost brought this country to it's knees is where we're at!!! We MUST CHANGE the course we're on and I don't know ANY Bernie supporter who doesn't understand EXACTLY what he's saying! He says it all the time... this will take ALL OF US and CAN'T be done over night! It's going to take time and the CITIZENS of this country need to stand up to the corruption and THE PEOPLE who are bleeding us dry. A seed has been planted in the minds of these kids and it MUST continue if we are going to become the NATION we ONCE were!
OLIGARCHY means NOTHING GOOD that I can see! So I'm glad they've been awakened, times change and those of us who want to see things get better support Bernie... NOT THE STATUS QUO! I can only HOPE & WISH they will push back should we get the HILLARY so many of us know right now!
For me she's a crap shoot... pray that she will FINALLY find the way! Her checkered past scares me to no end! Them that's got, don't want them to get! Just how it is right now. A country must share and share alike! NOT HAPPENING NOW!
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Germany, Sweden, France, Denmark, et al.
All I can tell ya is this; my kiddo lives in Germany. He has both free health care and free EDU. He doesn't pay for books either & even if he had to, he'll know what it's like to be enslaved with student loan debt which is much more important issue and reality.
I'm sorry but honestly you sound a like lot a Libertarian with your talking points here. You're repeating the common Libertarian talking point of "people should get a degree in economics, not basket weaving" essentially. IMHO education is a human right and not only the rich should be allowed it and it shouldn't be a luxury.
"Limits and qualifications" such as? You're segregating people based on what they want, hope and dream of? No thank you.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)Those that qualify and deserve help should receive help ..
Marr
(20,317 posts)You do know what an argument is, right? I'd love to hear you explain why the kind of access to higher education that's prevalent in the more advanced European countries is such a bad idea.
Yurovsky
(2,064 posts)only rich kids should go to college. They don't want the gardner's daughter or the maid's son rubbing elbows with little Farnsworth when he's off at college.
Elitists and corporatists within our Party just want the status quo maintained. Poor people stay poor, and keep voting Democrat. Real progressive reforms - that would actually help poor and working class Americans - are not going to get anywhere if they can help it. Heaven forbid their taxes go up or a poor family uses housing assistance to move into their neighborhood.
They see things much like Republicans do, although they might be pro-choice or support LGBT rights. It's GOP-lite, 3rd Way bullshit, and unless Hillary gets indicted, we're probably going to sit and watch as the monied interests who've invested in Hillary close on their deal, and progressives are purged from the Party.
Marr
(20,317 posts)entire political philosophy is basically "whatever dear leader thinks". They can deduce where their 1%er idols stand on most issues (it isn't hard, of course), and they just 'believe' the same thing.
I think it's why they never talk policy, and seem to think that just repeating their declarations at a higher volume is the same thing as making an argument. They haven't actually considered the policies, because they don't really care about that.
Yurovsky
(2,064 posts)discussed just how she's going to improve the lot of working-class and poor folks, other than to say it'll be better. And when push comes to shove, anyone with 1/2 a brain realizes HRC will side with her benefactors, not the great unwashed.
But she's got the brand name, and the Party big shots made sure that everything was structured in her favor, and well, if you don't like it too fucking bad. Hopefully Bernie wins in California and at least makes the establishment sweat a little.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)Entitlement means any one..that won't happen...that is commonsense thinking that is missed by too many....and before anything else college cost... professor salaries all need a closer look at as its the runaway cost on that end I have never heard Bernie Sanders ever discuss....just make it all free.. what pure bull
All in it together
(275 posts)Public Universities are run by the states and that's what Bernie has been talking about.
Students would still have to pay for room and board and books, etc. even if college tuition was free.
CobaltBlue
(1,122 posts)You should be thinking about that.
And really absorb that fact.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)conjunction with talking about his free tuition plan? I have heard his stump speech at least 50 times, and I have ALWAYS heard him say that it would be available to those that work hard in school and have the grades necessary for entrance. So obviously he intends there to be sensible "limits and qualifications" based on what I have heard time and time again.
If you have access to a speech or comment Bernie has made wherein he intends his plan to be implemented "without limits or qualifications", please provide a link or send me a copy offline because I would really like to see it.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)had the opportunity for essentially free college. The first two years were totally free Jr. Colleges, the last two years were NDEA loans that were paid back a percentage with each year of professional service.
I know because it worked for me and millions of others. I was even able to go to a Liberal Arts private college. Others went to the State Colleges...which were very cheap.
Then there was Reagan and the world will never be the same
yawnmaster
(2,812 posts)Promising free tuition for the sole purpose of gaining a voter base is also a bad thing.
Marr
(20,317 posts)You guys really are basically Republicans, aren't you? I mean, you hate their logo or something-- but on the real, defining issues of government; economics and foreign policy, you're on the right.
I think it's time our political parties had a realignment. We simply don't have the same goals.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)CobaltBlue
(1,122 posts)Last edited Sat Jun 4, 2016, 04:14 AM - Edit history (2)
And that is why you get socially liberal people as Ds who, otherwise, are in line with Rs on economic, justice issues (and such).
By doing that, it can be more about branding than anything else.
I think the realignment is overdue for today’s Democratic Party. The Republicans are an ideologically right-wing party. Just for the sake of an overall different platform, the Democrats need to be an ideologically left-wing driven party.
On issues like the military and national security … that is where they don’t seem to distinguish from each other. And, in that case, what does it matter? If anything one should want from both Republican and Democratic parties—one should want them to be very different from each other on military and national security.
This is key to why I’m not willing to settle for the mythical center or centrist or moderate modifier of a breed of Democratic leader. If the Republicans can have their Ronald Reagan and their George W. Bush, from the Republican presidential realigning period of 1968–2004 (7 of 10 cycles won), the Democrats (2008–20xx realigning period) should have their counterpart of a president (and Barack Obama was never it) who actually leads and delivers as a one genuine liberal. I think a hell of a lot of Democrats want it; but even more, the independents who are Lean Democratic, absolutely want it. Nominating Hillary, rather than Bernie, has wasted a golden opportunity.
Larkspur
(12,804 posts)Big Money and Milli-national corporations, the folks whom both Republicans and Clinton Democrats serve.
And of course, allowing corporate execs to write trade laws that favor Big Money over working Americans is not just FREE STUFF for them, it is ceding POWER to them in exchange for campaign contributions and retirement perks for politicians after finishing their terms in office.
appalachiablue
(41,103 posts)a decaying nation filled with problems, corruption and few opportunities for the young who've been robbed of their futures. And young Americans are fighting for what is right and just. Bravo!
~ Young Lions, Show Me Your Teeth, John Steinbeck.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)The ones saying "Bernie or Bust" are not going to be taken seriously. Nor should they be.
appalachiablue
(41,103 posts)how they choose, it is their right. Your opinion is just that.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)right thing in helping defeat Trump give the party reason to pay attention to them.
Those who flatly refuse to be useful are giving the adults in the room zero reason to give a fug about them. If they're not bringing anything to the table, they don't get a seat.
appalachiablue
(41,103 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)deciding to stay home means they don't count
if people are going to make themselves irrelevant, they're going to be treated as irrelevant
appalachiablue
(41,103 posts)your statements are having little impact. But carry on, some way to spend a day.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...and making them feel like their votes don't count makes them stay home.
That's what is known as a vicious circle.
Who will be the "adult in the room" and break the circle?
We'll see...
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Like that comment will help ........interesting..........
Nothing like condescending and patronizing which is why
they and many have problems with your opinions.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)there's really not much reason to care what they think
their right to stay home out of pique, and it's our right to have absolute zero interest in their opinions or feelings
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...they, and the rest of us Bernie supporters, are not being treated as allies. Not at all. So now you may need us, but you're still treating us like vermin.
Sorry, that will not have a positive effect.
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)By the same powers that be but not Sanders.
They know your ... stop Trump shit for what it is vs real change, real hope.
Sure Trump is like Hitler, and the Clinton and Trumps were 'once ' good friends and supporters of each other and hang with the same crowd. Clinton loved the Bush family we know that..... Oh but they are different!! Big banksters friends both of them.
They are not the cows you think or hope they should be.
I know many with high degrees including my kids that know what the facts are and how corrupt the system is.
The reason this toon has such an internet meme following
world wide because
There is a new consciousness among the world's population
that will not support your reactionary ideas anymore. A Paradigm has been broken and you can't stop it even if you want to say the world or whoever revolves around your candidate or sun.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)the reason that meme has such currency is that people have a cartoonishly simplistic view of things.
the party of John Lewis and Raul Grijalva and Elizabeth Warren is not the same as the party of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz and Scott Walker. Anyone who maintains that they are is willfully ignorant of reality.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)
You are not a supporter of Warren........ I know your posts so don't try to that shit on me.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)who doesn't support Warren's agenda
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Including your support the the trade agreements and fracking.
I've seen your stuff in the environmental forum.
Who knows what they will do if they are not acknowledged as the future of the party or the nation or planet. only ''the grownups know'' what that might be Right?
Like you...
Its not an either or thing with them they will chose a path we might not ever dream of but be that as it may they are the power of the future and our only hope for our posterity...... not you, not me............ AND YOU NEED TO RESPECT THAT all that seek a different future than what our Democratic Party has corrupted itself with. Because the same bull shit an't working and they know it.
I very early did a piece on Trump and what I saw as a historian with the NAZIS.... way before anyone else did.
There is hard fascism and soft fascism.
But that's just a wedding picture of the Trumps and the Clintons right?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)right now they're not even doing that.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)That results in a significantly different perspective on the situation.
Our insistence that incrementalism and Republican-lite is the only possible way forward means Miami will be gone in their lifetime. We're now deciding if we lose New Orleans and Los Angeles. Also, the world full of famine and drought is gonna happen either way.
You're insisting that they continue this plan that has utterly screwed them over and are somehow baffled that they do not think this is a good idea.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)for 18 out of the past 22 years.
If only Democrats had demanded more action, Republicans would have gone along with it.
Back on planet Earth, Obama is regulating carbon through the EPA, which is all that can be done until there are large majorities of progressives in both houses of Congress, and at least 5 non-wingnut justices on the supreme court.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Golly, I'm sure that has absolutely nothing to do with the incrementalism and Republican-lite policy the Democrats have been pushing for the last 30 years. That resulted in the lowest turnouts in party history.
Not even in the same galaxy as enough to stop the massive destruction and upheaval the Millennials will get to enjoy. But we avoided the horrors of losing our god-given right to drive massive SUVs.
You value labels and slogans more than results. Since the labels and slogans will be long gone when Millennials live through the results, they have a vastly different perspective.
But I'm sure yelling at them more will totally change that.......somehow.....
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)1993-1994
2009-2010
The difference is that the Republican base has better voting habits than the Democratic base does. They turn out more often.
Our base also doesn't turn out as much for those boring state and local elections, with dire consequences.
our political system is designed to stifle change. The constitution itself is designed to prevent change from happening, to slow it down.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)'Cause it doesn't look like you bothered to read it at all.
You also seem to think that Democratic losses have absolutely nothing to do with Democrats.
The Republicans give a damn about their base, and work to keep their base involved and voting.
The Democrats call their base crazy liberals that need to shut up and vote for centrists.
Golly...I wonder why there's a turnout problem.....
Yet the Republicans don't seem to be all that stifled, do they?
It's almost like they are actually trying to change things instead of saying "shut up you fucking liberals", and blaming the lack of victory on those same voters.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)They're more than happy to shut the government down, to defund programs, to leave problems unsolved.
That's their entire strategy--make government fail, get people to hate government because it failed, run on hating the government, get elected, make government fail ...
So your claim is the Republican base is happy with the GOP?
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)...protecting their "purity" by not voting.
TeacherB87
(249 posts)Without calling them out for it is no better than allowing an illogical presidential candidate to be illogical all the time without calling him out for it. I'm a millenial and know plenty of people my age that have uninformed opinions about the entire election and barely give enough of a damn to make a sign. I know we're hurting, I know things are screwed up in this country, but you don't see me whining on a street corner about how it's my way or the highway. They need to get a grip. This also goes for the older Bernie or Bust crowd FYI.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)dramatic changes on all of the important issues is something no one who's actually dealt with our political system and constitutional order would embrace.
real change is hard, and it takes a lot of effort to move the needle just a little bit
BlindTiresias
(1,563 posts)People like you? You will be gone eventually.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)to incite violence and the lowest common denominator. People feeling social unrest around the world. Bernie will stand behind HRC after all is said and done. She would do the same thing.
He wants to clean up Washington DC and the relationship with big banks, so make him SOS.
SOS has to be good experience or put him in charge of the DoJ.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)People who work for the president sacrifice their own conscience to one degree or another--they take the boss's policy positions, not their own.
Hard to believe anyone takes the GOP seriously--one giant clown car from Christie to Rubio to Cruz.
J_J_
(1,213 posts)are not listening and will not take responsibility for the nation they leave their children.
Seems more like the GOP mentality.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)YouDig
(2,280 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)the ones chanting "Bernie or Bust" aren't adults yet and will be properly ignored
MillennialDem
(2,367 posts)If you say fuck it, they're not adults, who cares...
they won't cancel out this idiot's vote.
Kall
(615 posts)they're living in a world of low-paid, part-time, contract jobs with no benefits and no job security, and where an expensive education is little guarantee of anything. Whereas the generation that came before them grew up with strong unions, cheap tuition, no free trade with countries with slave wages (to undercut said strong unions), and where a decent education was a pretty reliable ticket to a full-time job with benefits that couldn't be offshored on a whim. And they recognize that both parties have green-lighted this, particularly the Hillary Clintons of the world.
thucythucy
(8,039 posts)is a little rose-colored.
"...low paid, part time, contract jobs" sounds like the first two or more decades of my adult life. Strong unions? I worked mostly in human services--there were NO unions. Now there's the SEIU (of which I'm a proud member) organizing state and private human service workplaces. Back then there were NO benefits, including no sick time, no health insurance, no paid vacation time. I spent several years working in a residential facility (I won't honor the place by calling it a "school"
for severely, multiply disabled kids. Staff--paid minimum wage or just over--often had to bring in at their own expense items like toilet paper, shampoo, soap, deodorant, or see the kids do without.
"...decent education was a reliable ticket..." Hardly. I had a BA magna cum, my first four jobs were minimum wage, sometimes more than one job at a time to make ends meet. My degree still counts for shit...glad I went to college though.
Add in that gender discrimination was legal, sexual harassment at the workplace almost a given (with no legal recourse), a well locked closet for LGBT folks, intense racism... Racism remains I think the most intractable problem, and yet Bernie has had the most trouble, it seems to me, enlisting support in the minority communities.
Finally, as a person with a disability myself, I wouldn't trade today for the pre-ADA world for anything. That was a real revolution. Prior to the ADA, wheelchair access, braille signage, interpreter services for Deaf people -- all were either nonexistent or provided at the "charitable" whim of an employer or agency. Imagine being Deaf, unable to speak or read lips, and finding yourself in an emergency room trying to understand what was happening. Imagine using a wheelchair and being absolutely unable to leave your own home for lack of access, or being twenty-something and having to spend your life in a nursing home because outside access was non-existent.
I'm not saying younger people today don't have significant problems, and that older generations don't bear any responsibility (just as the generations that preceded mine were derelict in their own ways). But to imply that life back then was a bed of roses for the majority of people--especially non-white, non-able-bodied, non-straight non-males--is simplification to the point of dangerous distortion.
Not to mention, if you or anyone else thinks any of your problems will be addressed by a Trump presidency, well, what can I say? Delusions like that have a very nasty way of biting one in the proverbial ass.
Best wishes.
djean111
(14,255 posts)But we sure as fuck know that Hillary is not going to address them beyond "looking into it". And thereby hangs the tale - millennials may feel no need to vote for either one.
Thinking that everyone will vote for A or B - the "who else they gonna vote for" bullshit - may just bite one in the proverbial ass, too.
thucythucy
(8,039 posts)since the future is impossible to predict.
I recall some of my Green friends telling me that Gore would be just as bad as Bush II. Since we never had a Gore presidency, it would be impossible to say, but my strong sense is that under Gore we wouldn't have had 9-11, the Patriot Act, the Iraq invasion...and we would have made a hell of a lot more progress on global climate change.
Similarly, I'm old enough to remember people telling me a Reagan presidency would be fine--certainly no worse than Carter. Again, this turned out to be a hugely unfortunate belief. It was under Reagan that the true assault against unions began (remember PATCO?). It was under Reagan that we first heard it was a grand idea to "drown government in a bathtub" that "you've seen one redwood, you've seen them all" "that a primary source of air pollution is trees." The Contra war, arms for hostages, the war on drugs and "just say no"--ignoring the AIDS crisis--pandering to the NRA--stuffing the Supreme Court with wingnuts like Thomas and Scalia--all that began under Reagan.
And I've read enough history to know that in 1932 the left in this country was arguing there was no difference between Hoover and FDR. Just as, in Germany, it was argued that Social Democrats were actually "social fascists" and a Hitler regime would be just what the German left needed as a shot in the arm for the real revolution.
To make the "lessor of two evils" argument in a winner take all system means that you're at least tacitly supporting the greater of two evils. Not that I'm comfortable really with the whole notion of "evil"--which tends I think to mix religion with politics.
I'm sure there are Bernie supporters (and BTW, I voted for Bernie in my state's primary) who will sit this one out, just as there were progressives who sat out Reagan vs. Carter, and, by voting for Nader, Bush II vs. Gore.
I notice you only addressed the very last statement I made. Any thoughts on the rest of my post?
djean111
(14,255 posts)I do not want to perpetuate those things, and I do not have the attitude that well, we had it tough, so deal with it. I think things are worse, and the TPP and perpetual war and unchecked ACA costs and unchecked college costs will make things exponentially worse - and there is no need for that. The money is there, the will to use the money for other than war and corporate subsidies is not. The millennials know that.
thucythucy
(8,039 posts)I don't think we're that far apart (I did vote for Bernie, after all).
And I'm not saying, or at any rate don't mean to say "we had it tough, so deal with it." I just am very wary of viewing the past through rose colored glasses. For very many people, the past wasn't at all the easy ride that this poster seems to imply. And if you don't have a more realistic view of the past, it's impossible to gauge the progress that has been made, and therefore impossible to move forward with strategies that will work to affect change in the future.
One or two further points: perpetual war. I grew up (as you did, I'm sure) in the shadow of the Vietnam War as the "hot war" and the cold war of mutually assured destruction, duck and cover, MIRVs, etc. As they used to say, "It takes only one hydrogen bomb to ruin your whole day."
"Unchecked ACA costs...." I see this as quite an improvement over millions of people--including very many friends of mine with disabilities--who had little or no health coverage at all.
College costs--that's huge. I was able to go to undergraduate school for a pittance of what kids have to pay today. That's not an accident--I think the right identified the universities as hotbeds of social change, and starting under Reagan to work to close off higher education to anyone but the rich. This, by the way, was how the system worked before the GI Bill of 1944--which is what created the state college and university systems as we know them today, and opened the world to working class people. I think the Clinton criticism of Bernie's idea is not only tone deaf, but also politically near sighted. Without radical reform of the way we pay for higher ed., to make it accessible to all who can benefit, the progressive movement in general and Democrats specifically will be closing off a major source of future activism and progress.
One other issue that's far worse today is the environment, particularly climate change. This is every bit, perhaps even more, as threatening and disheartening as the prospect of nuclear war was to us. Clinton's support of fracking was one of several deal killers for me--since I think what we need is an all-out effort to move away from all fossil fuels.
Here too, though, it's important to note that Trump has said there's no such thing as climate change. That there's no drought in California. That sticking our heads in the sand is a viable way to preserve the planet.
Here's a thought I've had for a while now:
Presidential politics are rarely about moving us forward. That happens from the bottom up. Civil rights, LGBT rights, disability rights, environmentalism, antiwar and anti-imperialism, women's rights--we've made progress on these by organizing at the grass roots, and forcing the national agenda to pay attention.
BUT--presidential politics can very definitely impede such grassroots organizing. That's what Reagan did by destroying PATCO, what Bush II did by launching his invasion of Iraq, and tilting the Supreme Court to give us Citizens United. (Quick side note: as a person with a disability I noticed how Bush II abolished the President's Committee on the Employment of Persons with Disabilities--which was established under Truman. Hardly a whimper from progressives--but hugely important to the people I know and love, and something Gore would NEVER have done).
I'm at the point now where I feel the best I can hope for is for presidents and national parties to stay the fuck out of my way. I think Hillary is far more likely to do that than Trump. Another reason why I think Trump would be an absolute disaster.
Sorry to be so longwinded. Best wishes to you and yours.
Kall
(615 posts)with increases in productivity since 1968, it would be $21 today. I don't doubt that you did work for minimum wage back in your day, but back in your day (whenever that was), the minimum wage bought a lot more than it does today.
That's quite a sleight of hand, making it seem like Bernie is in some way inferior to Hillary on social issues of race because he got less of the black vote without having decades-long connections in the Democratic Party apparatus, being the spouse of a southern Governor, or being the clear preference of the first black President (unfortunately not Jesse Jackson, who *he* endorsed (and got slapped for) back in *his* day. Apparently that wasn't enough though, the Clinton campaign had to go out and plant the idea that his Civil Rights record getting arrested protesting segregation was fictitious, while Hillary Clinton was always there.
We're all familiar with the modern Democratic Party's method of papering over economics with social issues, and while those certainly matter, it's exhausting to watch the rationale be limited to that for progress, as NAFTA, MFN for China, CAFTA and the "gold standard" TPP get pushed. Since you brought up LGBT issues, he's been better on that too anyway, voting against DOMA and not opposing marriage equality until 2013.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)Old Economy Steve is the meme for this
BootinUp
(47,085 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)Ya that will surely help your candidate a great deal won't it, considering how Hillary's numbers are awful.
BootinUp
(47,085 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)and walk into the year 2016.
Twitter, God it's so irrelevant that all the candidates on both sides have campaigns for it. I mean my gosh, revolutions have literally been fought on it like Arab Spring. Every single day POTUS speaks on it.
Awful I tell you. Do you own a rotary phone too? Possibly a portable B&W tv?
BootinUp
(47,085 posts)of disinformation.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)BootinUp
(47,085 posts)Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)That doesn't seem accurate to me.
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)hopefully by November they will be able to see the stark choice in front of them.
portlander23
(2,078 posts)Are you saying stomaching voting for Clinton to stop Trump is "stark"?
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)I'm sure most will do the right thing, if they truly are people who feel so strongly about the future of their country.
thucythucy
(8,039 posts)Look through this thread and you'll see I'm disputing some of what our younger advocates and activists are saying.
Even so, I respect their passion, their commitment, and see them as a valuable resource for the Democrat Party to acknowledge and court.
Then again, old as I am I voted for Bernie, and still would like to see him nominated, though, as you'll see if you read my other posts, I prefer ANY Democrat to Trump.
Being patronizing is never a winning electoral strategy. Just saying.
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)There is something about summer that is conducive to such behavior. Passion is one thing, violence another.
thucythucy
(8,039 posts)And maybe you didn't intend for your post to sound as off-putting as I found it.
Up thread I talk about Carter vs. Reagan, Gore vs. Bush II--how my more lefty friends argued then that electing a Republican then would make no difference in the long haul. I'd say in both instances that notion was wildly, disastrously mistaken. Perhaps an even better example--though slightly before my time--was Humphrey vs. Nixon. Humphrey was seen as a war monger kiss-ass to LBJ, and if Nixon wins who cares?
In retrospect, it's clear to me anyway, from my own idiosyncratic reading of history, that Nixon's election was a disaster of the first magnitude.
Anyway, to get back to your point, I don't think violence of any form will help at all, so I'm hoping it doesn't come to that.
Best wishes.
forjusticethunders
(1,151 posts)From there, we can work on getting more progressives at all levels of government and gently bringing the moderates in our coalition to our side.
We gotta play the long game and not get sucked into "feels over reals" politics like so many young generations have in the past.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Your rhetoric here is what has been happening for decades. "First we defeat that....then we can have this".
No, it enables the system which currently is killing the poor and working class. We stand and we FIGHT for what is right, right NOW! None of this "later on" bullshit! We've heard that for decades. The time has come to take back our damn Gov't and have it represent the damn people and not corporate puppets who are busy speaking with bankers and got us into this very mess to begin with.
forjusticethunders
(1,151 posts)All those progressive Democrats we elected at all levels of government from dogcatcher to Senator have already gutted functioning government in places like Michigan, Kansas and Louisiana, in service to unchecked corporate pow--oh right, it's Republicans sitting in those seats.
And no matter how much you wish it, Democrats being defeated because they weren't progressive enough to vote for will move the political center RIGHT, not left. And in the end, it's YOUR POLITICS that has helped fuck over the poor and working class. When you sit out elections and get reactionaries elected, then that leads to policies that hurt the marginalized, AND robs them of allies because the people who are supposed to care about them decided they were too pure for politics, or wanted to fight a quixotic "fight" that fed their own ego and self-righteousness but won no actual gains for the working class.
WhiteTara
(29,692 posts)to change the dynamics of the country. Local elections are the most important as that is where we live. Good Luck
forjusticethunders
(1,151 posts)I'm not sure where to start really other than a vague "Join the local Democratic Party" and I'm actually really awkward in person due to various mental disorders but dammit I want to try.
WhiteTara
(29,692 posts)usually they are in the phone book. Becoming a member of the central committee is an elected or appointed position. You might find the committee in the DNC directory. ALso, it may be online. Lookup you county name+central committee and start there. Also, another way to begin is to look at county board seats. These are often unfilled and are a good way to begin. Che k with the county supervisors (or whatever they are called in your state for a list) Good Luck
icecreamfan
(115 posts)The Clinton's have a lot of billionaire friends. They should spend lots and lots of their money to get those over-45 voters this time.
Tarc
(10,472 posts)Somehow it just doesn't have the ol' ring.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)This rhetorical trajectory will surely be a winning strategy.
demosincebirth
(12,530 posts)a chance.These so-called millennials do not know what politics is really about. They think if sanders gets elected and "poof," every problem solved.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Samders
Gee and unions support that stuff on education.......
what an interesting handle you have
almost like your twin
demosincebirth
(12,530 posts)
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)I know, because I went then, all it required was a "B" average and state residency. Were we so rich then, and so poor now?
Instead of making you guess, I'll tell you, three key things were different: one, most state universities were state-owned and therefore held all college costs down competitively, since then most have been privatized; two, we had a very high top tier tax rate, like 80% and that's why there weren't ridiculously high salaries then, creating needless billionaires, and instead we had a very large, very strong middle class; and three, we were in a space-race with the Russians, and the PTB figured they (temporarily) needed to develop all the talent we had. Those with grades in the top 3% of the graduating class were courted and recruited like sports stars are now, I'm now even kidding.
Funny, what can be done when there's a desire to do it.
Because going to college wasn't dependent on MONEY, those who were there really belonged there, and you didn't have wealthy dipshits from all over the world taking up the openings, buying their way through and driving up the cost for everyone else to be paying off for a decade or two.
I won't even go into the over-blown administrators' salaries today and the price of sports facilities for teams to cater to the betting public driving up tuition for no reason.
This college mess today is nothing but another malignant bubble which needs to pop. Young people today deserve free college as we had before, and those already in debt from it need some major government-funded relief. Most of all it should be super easy and cheap for anyone who has some college to finish their degree.
Today, most of those people are blocked from continuing, by the debt they acquired while getting some of the needed credits, without having the higher paying job a degree would give them, to pay it off. It's not a bit fair. And just wrong. Banks are keeping peoples' lives on hold for years and years, for no good reason. It's like indentured servitude today. It's total bullshit.
I'm 66, and I'm sick and tired of watching the useless money machine devouring everything and everyone else. It's time to knock these overbearing "giants" back down to size, and there are techniques which have worked in the past for doing just that. We don't even need to reinvent the wheel, all we need is the will. Bernie is the focal point of that will. His ideas would give us a much better quality of life, and they are not bullshit they are real and doable.
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)Nothing.
Response to portlander23 (Original post)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Bernie or Bust!
#HillNo
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)BlindTiresias
(1,563 posts)They may throw out platitudes but the people advocating for ignoring millenials would be perfectly OK with the democratic party withering away if it was on their own terms.
Response to portlander23 (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)falsely promising them. As they mature, Millenials will understand more about what Sanders was actually doing and probably come to resent him for it.
portlander23
(2,078 posts)Sahil Kapur
Bloomberg
October 19, 2015 — 5:00 AM EDT
It has become a familiar Republican refrain. Senator Marco Rubio on Wednesday called the first Democratic debate a contest over “who was going to give away the most free stuff.” New Jersey Governor Chris Christie quipped Friday in New Hampshire, “There's gonna be more free stuff for more people than you can even imagine sitting and listening to Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton and the rest of the crew up there.”
Last month, Jeb Bush characterized Democrats' message to African-American voters as “get in line and we'll take care of you with free stuff.” A few days earlier, Senator Rand Paul mockingly accused Sanders of promising voters “free stuff.” In 2012, Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting Mitt Romney told a voter, “If you're looking for more free stuff, vote for the other guy.”
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)portlander23
(2,078 posts)Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)forced to pay for. How can one support Sanders if they don't even know his basic policy positions ?
Response to Trust Buster (Reply #109)
portlander23 This message was self-deleted by its author.
portlander23
(2,078 posts)Andrew Kaczynski
BuzzFeed
“Now you can have some government, we all need government,” the Kentucky senator said while discussing Thomas Paine and the role of government at the local public library. “Thomas Paine said that government is a necessary evil. What did he mean by that?”
“I’m for paying some taxes,” continued Paul. “But if we tax you at 100% then you’ve got zero percent liberty. If we tax you at 50% you are half slave, half free. I frankly would like to see you a little freer and a little more money remaining in your communities so you can create jobs. It’s a debate we need to have.”
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)for tuition ?
portlander23
(2,078 posts)The American Legion Magazine
By Alan Keyes
March 2, 2002
The reversal of that wisdom came during the "progressive" era at the beginning of the 20th century. A mentality of class warfare prevailed at the time; a first flush of socialism in American life, and the income tax movement was one of its results. Setting farmers against industrialists, urban folk against rural, poor against rich, everyone was led to expect than an income tax would hit the other group harder. Chiefly, of course, the argument was that the rich would pay a disproportionate share. What they didn't tell us was that in this socialist scheme, everyone with a private dollar is suspected of being too rich.
We ought to have realized that the income tax is utterly incompatible with liberty. It is actually a form of slavery. A slave is someone the fruit of whose labor is controlled by somebody else. A slave is not somebody with nothing. Rather, he has only what the master lets him have.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)those receiving the service continue to pay. We subsidize colleges enough already.
portlander23
(2,078 posts)
David__77
(23,334 posts)I also think that even if tuition were made financially free, it should not be totally free. The financially free tuition should perhaps be linked to agreements to perform various socially-useful work for a number of years and under certain terms, with the tuition becoming payable in the event that such agreements are broken.
bigtree
(85,977 posts)...one of the first and most important lesson for this generation is that our democracy demands participation at all levels of government, not just at voting time.
Success in advancing your ideals requires that you not only compete, but develop coalitions of like-minded individuals to generate the numbers necessary to advance those ideas and initiatives through the political system.
I think they made a good showing in this primary, but if their own campaign's message and attitude to the outcome of this election is little more than an epic pout, their participation will have been wasted.