Hillary 2016: How she transformed Democrats into “new” Republicans

[NorthCarolina]

While there seems little doubt that the entire Donald Trump campaign is based on hype, hysteria, and sensationalism; it’s worth noting the very real ways that the Hillary Clinton campaign has also been dominated by binary thinking, irrationality, and panic.

First of all, the number one reason that Bernie Sanders supporters are told they should vote for Hillary is to stop Trump. Nowhere is there an argument about the merits of her platform. If the primary argument to vote for Hillary is out of fear—then the Democrats have now joined with the GOP in promoting a politics of hysteria.

And for what it’s worth, some voters today think that the lesser evil is still plenty evil. They’d rather sit it out or vote green. The Hillary camp simply has no counter-argument for that.

Second of all, there is a real allergic reaction to truth in the Clinton camp. If Hillary had joined with Bernie and called for investigations into the many, many, many reported cases of election fraud, the political environment on the left would be drastically different. But rather than deal with the facts, the Hillary camp chose to ignore the rights of voters and describe the calls for fairness as the ravings of lunatics searching for a conspiracy..... (more at link)

http://www.salon.com/2016/06/14/the_unexpected_side_effect_of_hillary_2016_how_she_transformed_democrats_into_new_republicans/

Pretty good reflection of the campaign being waged right here on DU.

[LexVegas]

1. ...

[stevenleser]

4. Move over...

[BootinUp]

18. rofl

[Octafish]

28. Panda. Monkey. Banana.

You didn't read the article, did you?

Don't worry, thinking about what it means to be a Democrat isn't hard. Give learning a try.

[BootinUp]

43. Of course not. Why would I? It was written to get clicks from sad Bernie supporters. nt

[Octafish]

47. To learn.

Otherwise, why discourage others from learning?

Personally, I like the Democratic Party that worked to make life better for ALL Americans, not just the rich.

[BootinUp]

53. The title of that article identifies it as nonsense... IMHO.

Now, you are free to share your opinion in this thread as well. See how that works?

[Octafish]

56. You shared your opinion without reading the article, though.

That's not my opinion. That's what you said.

[BootinUp]

58. THat's correct, lol. Oh, stop it please.

[Hortensis]

85. Willful or inborn,

Last edited Tue Jun 14, 2016, 04:04 PM - Edit history (1)

I came to DU to get away from the pushing of this kind of stuff by the right wing. Of course, they wouldn't try to insult me by accusing me of being one of them.

Two more days, and the hostile elements who daydreamed about "purging" Democrats from the Democratic Party, or in some cases knocking Hillary out in the primary before voting for Trump in the general, will need to take it elsewhere.

[Hekate]

123. Tick tock. Meanwhile...

Survival rations.

[tex-wyo-dem]

138. It's called self reflection of the party...

A very admirable trait, BTW, and what makes us different from the GOP. Unfortunately, the sense I get from Clinton supporters on DU is to laugh at such calls for self-analysis and change and bully anyone who disagrees.

Like it or not, the party is transforming away from the neo-liberal big money sickness that has infected it for decades now.

[Sheepshank]

69. OMFG...and DUers, desperate to demolish the Dem nominee, buy this shit and propogate it's message

fake impressions vs. actual long term data is document that the OP is false.

[Hekate]

121. Sould I bring extra butter?

[tallahasseedem]

144. The clock is ticking on this shit...

even the PUMAs weren't this bad.

[redstateblues]

2. Tick tock

[stevenleser]

5. Seriously. Can't wait for this nonsense to end. nt

[Octafish]

33. What nonsense? Talking about how Democrats and Republicans are the same?

Enlighten us.

[metroins]

55. SCOTUS

If you want to find one difference, look there.

Anybody complaining about guns today, in the wake of Orlando, can directly look at an R SCOTUS for the reason their gun bans will fail.

There is a difference for you.

So please get out of here with the bullshit line that they're the same.

[Octafish]

59. Like Elena Kagan? Friend of Tony Scalia? Sides with Karl Rove over Don Siegelman?

With the notice being paid to the late Associate Justice's sportin' life:



Scalia and Kagan have a history shooting stuff together.

Justice Kagan and Justice Scalia Are Hunting Buddies—Really

"I shot myself a deer," Elena Kagan said of a recent big game hunting trip with the conservative justice in Wyoming.

by GARANCE FRANKE-RUTA
The Atlantic, JUN 30, 2013

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan bagged herself a deer on a hunting trip to Wyoming with Justice Antonin Scalia last fall. You heard that right: Despite finding themselves on opposite sides of major court decisions, the liberal Obama-appointee and the conservative Reagan-appointee have become hunting buddies since Kagan was confirmed in 2010 as the fourth woman in history to sit on the highest court in the land.

"I shoot birds with him, fairly -- you know, two or three times a year now," Justice Kagan said during a wide-ranging and delightful Aspen Ideas Festival conversation with Jeffrey Rosen, president of the National Constitution Center, on Saturday. "And then he um, at the end of last year we had been bird shooting four or five times. I'll tell you how that came to be. But before I do, before I -- he said to me, 'It's time for big game hunting.' And we actually went out to Wyoming this past fall to shoot deer and antelope. Uh, and we did."

"You're getting some hisses from the audience. I hope you were a better shot than Dick Cheney," Rosen interjected as a smattering of hisses emerged from around the room at the mention of hunting in Wyoming.

"I shot myself a deer," Kagan continued. "The way this started, I'll tell the story. You know the NRA has become quite a presence in judicial confirmations, and that means when you go around from office to office, from chamber to chamber, I met with about 80 senators individually and quite a lot of them, both Republicans and Democrats, ask you about your views on the Second Amendment. But because you don't say anything about your views on anything, when they ask you well, they'll try to figure out what your views on the Second Amendment are likely to be and they'll say, 'Well, have you ever held a gun? Have you ever gone hunting? Do you know anybody who's gone hunting?' And you know me, Jeff, I grew up on the Upper West Side of Manhattan and this was not something we really did, you know.

CONTINUED...

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/justice-kagan-and-justice-scalia-are-hunting-buddies-really/277401/

Scalia knew her, even before she got to be somebody.

Scalia once lobbied Obama advisor to have Elena Kagan nominated to the Supreme Court

BY CNN WIRE, FEBRUARY 15, 2016

When the shocking news of Justice Antonin Scalia’s passing hit Saturday night, my mind raced back to a White House Correspondents Association dinner seven years ago, when we were seated together.

We bantered about my hometown of Chicago, where he had taught law before ascending to the bench. He opined on wine and music and generally lived up to his reputation as a man who told and enjoyed a good story.

And then our conversation took an unexpected turn.

Justice David Souter, Scalia’s longtime colleague on the court, had just announced his retirement, creating a vacancy for President Obama to fill. Scalia figured that as senior adviser to the new president, I might have some influence on the decision — or at least enough to pass along a message.

“I have no illusions that your man will nominate someone who shares my orientation,” said Scalia, then in his 23rd year as the court’s leading and most provocative conservative voice. “But I hope he sends us someone smart.”

A little taken aback that he was engaging me on the subject, I searched for the right answer, and lamely offered one that signaled my slight discomfort with the topic. “I’m sure he will, Justice Scalia.”

He wasn’t done. Leaning forward, as if to share a confidential thought, he tried again.

[font size="5"][font color="red"]“Let me put a finer point on it,” the justice said, in a lower, purposeful tone of voice, his eyes fixed on mine. “I hope he sends us Elena Kagan.”[/font color][/font size]

CONTINUED...

http://wtkr.com/2016/02/15/scalia-once-lobbied-obama-advisor-to-have-elena-kagan-nominated-to-the-supreme-court

I wonder how Scalia felt about keeping Gov. Don Siegelman in the pen? Rove Just Us lobbied to keep him there, too.

Unlike the Big Time "movers and shakers," Gov. Don Siegelman must not be one of The Aspens.

ETA: Don't put words in my mouth. There's a difference between Kagan and Sotomayor.

[Sheepshank]

72. The ridiculous assertion by so called purists, requires that public officials live in a bubble

and the best way to promote full discussion, get the opposition to stop demonizing differences of opinions, and to change minds is not by friendly and open discourse and building relationships, it's by "bludgeoning" the "enemy" with dictatorial requirements and nothing else.

You seem to completely misunderstand the nature, need and concept of building professional relationships. It appears you are following Bernie's long term method of treating peers like idiots and fools who have no merit to their governing styles...this has utterly failed. Bernie has built no relationships at all amongst his peers and this election cycle clearly brought home that lack of support.

Good luck with you purist raging. You will be doomed to a mountain of impotent rage until you figure out how to work with people (especially those with opposing points of view in life and politics), rather demonizing them for their process in negotiations.

[Octafish]

78. I'm not demonizing anybody, not even you, Sheepshank.

"Building professional relationships" seems to always benefit the wealthy. That's why I like the Democratic Party, we stand for the Little Guy. At least, until the "New Democrats" took things over, we used to.

[Sheepshank]

82. You clearly attempt to demonize Kagan

...it's too bad you don't read your own words before you hit "send"

[Octafish]

83. Demonize by stating the facts about her association with Scalia?

Gee. You certainly know your demons, Sheepshank.

[Sheepshank]

86. Oh damn, that creepy made up, pretend problem of association.

you are nothing if not dogged and busy with that silly chew toy of pretend meat.

[Octafish]

90. Nothing made up, otherwise you'd show it, Sheepshank.

Here's the association that matters: Scalia knew her, even before she got to be somebody.

Scalia once lobbied Obama advisor to have Elena Kagan nominated to the Supreme Court

BY CNN WIRE, FEBRUARY 15, 2016

When the shocking news of Justice Antonin Scalia’s passing hit Saturday night, my mind raced back to a White House Correspondents Association dinner seven years ago, when we were seated together.

We bantered about my hometown of Chicago, where he had taught law before ascending to the bench. He opined on wine and music and generally lived up to his reputation as a man who told and enjoyed a good story.

And then our conversation took an unexpected turn.

Justice David Souter, Scalia’s longtime colleague on the court, had just announced his retirement, creating a vacancy for President Obama to fill. Scalia figured that as senior adviser to the new president, I might have some influence on the decision — or at least enough to pass along a message.

“I have no illusions that your man will nominate someone who shares my orientation,” said Scalia, then in his 23rd year as the court’s leading and most provocative conservative voice. “But I hope he sends us someone smart.”

A little taken aback that he was engaging me on the subject, I searched for the right answer, and lamely offered one that signaled my slight discomfort with the topic. “I’m sure he will, Justice Scalia.”

He wasn’t done. Leaning forward, as if to share a confidential thought, he tried again.

[font size="5"][font color="red"]“Let me put a finer point on it,” the justice said, in a lower, purposeful tone of voice, his eyes fixed on mine. “I hope he sends us Elena Kagan.”[/font color][/font size]

CONTINUED...

http://wtkr.com/2016/02/15/scalia-once-lobbied-obama-advisor-to-have-elena-kagan-nominated-to-the-supreme-court

Maybe he heard of her through her work for Goldman Sachs.

GLENN GREENWALD: Yeah, it was mostly a cursory position, but it reflects the fact that she’s where she is. She’s one of the elites who Goldman Sachs touted, and she was happy to take their money in order to serve on a sort of symbolic panel. I think that tells you somewhat about who she is.

SOURCE: http://www.democracynow.org/2010/5/10/progressives_divided_over_obamas_nomination_of

You may know, money does make for some interesting associations, like at UBS, where the guy who pushed for repeal of Glass-Steagall hired the guy who signed the repeal into law -- and the guy who bailed out the banksters in the WEALTH MANAGEMENT department. Ha ha. Small world.

[vintx]

165. Well look at that - the meaningless excuses and whitewashing stopped !!!!!!!!

What a shock

[Octafish]

169. PR bailout plan will pay Wall Street and make Puerto Rico live in utter austerity.

Sotomayor and Ginsburg opposed the corporate welfare plan; Ms. Kagan joined with Roberts etc. in the ruling which says the Commonwealth can't restructure its debt.

http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/283249-supreme-court-puerto-rico-cant-restructure-debt

[vintx]

171. What a shock. Neo-liberals are as utterly bereft of morals as neo-cons.

It's now a war between the haves and the have-nots, and most people seem so satisfied with the dog and pony show they don't even notice.

[Octafish]

172. 'Dollar Phil Gramm' and Bill Clinton @ UBS

They don't even bother to hide it anymore, it's all legal like.

Dollar Bill Phil" Gramm, The senator who's raising bundles of cash from Wall Street in his bid to be the Republican presidential nominee, likes to tell audiences how tough he is on those who commit "crime in the streets." But when it comes to "crime in the suites," ol' Phil turns into a bleeding heart, knee-jerk defender of corporate muggers.

-- Jim Hightower in 2000

http://www.alternet.org/story/8198/hightower%3A_dollar_bill_phil_gramm

FTNTTS: Phil and Bill now work in Wealth Managenent at UBS.

After his exit from the US Senate, Phil Gramm found a job at Swiss bank UBS as vice chairman. He later brought in former President Bill Clinton to the Wealth Management team. What a coincidence, they are the two key figures in repealing Glass-Steagal. Since the New Deal it was the financial regulation that protected the US taxpayer from the Wall Street casino. Oh well, what are a few hundred million in speaking fees compared to a $16 trillion bailout among friends?

It's a Buy-Partisan Who's Who:

President William J. Clinton
President George W. Bush Heh heh heh.
Robert J. McCann
James Carville
John V. Miller
Paula D. Polito
Anthony Roth
Mike Ryan
John Savercool

SOURCE: http://financialservicesinc.ubs.com/revitalizingamerica/SenatorPhilGramm.html

Why DUers and ALL voters should care about Phil Gramm.

[vintx]

173. At the old DU, this would have been an issue for most.

Sadly...

[MariaThinks]

127. i'm disgusted with kagan.

[Lord Magus]

93. Yes, that's right.

Naderite nonsense does not belong on DU.

[Octafish]

97. Really? Vox is not Nader, it's KOS and cronies.

Here's the other sources I used above:

The Atlantic
CNN
Huffington Post
War Is A Crime

As you can see, Lord Magus, none of them are from Nader.

Why do the facts bother you?

[Lord Magus]

98. Claiming that Democrats and Republicans are the same is the essence of Naderite "thought." -nt-

[Octafish]

99. Where did I claim that? As you can't, you're just smearing.

That's what it's called when you attribute to me something I did not write.

[Lord Magus]

120. The OP's article specifically says that the Democratic Party has become the Republican Party.

That's what this entire discussion is about.

[Octafish]

122. Which is different from me saying that, though.

Which is what you were saying.

[Hekate]

124. You said it all right. You just disingenuously phrased it as a sort of question, sort of quote...

But I think it's pretty clear where your mind is.

[Octafish]

145. No, it's what I asked stevenleser, then I got ''answers'' from you, Lord Magus, Sheepshank...

Here's where my mind is at when it comes to the question of Buy Partisanship:

Where the money is.



How Corrupt Is the American Government?

See For Yourself

Posted on January 5, 2016 by WashingtonsBlog

Government corruption has become rampant:

Senior SEC employees spent up to 8 hours a day surfing porn sites instead of cracking down on financial crimes

Nuclear Regulatory Commission workers watch porn instead of cracking down on unsafe conditions at nuclear plants

SNIP...

A high-level Federal Reserve official says quantitative easing is “the greatest backdoor Wall Street bailout of all time”

SNIP...

Congress recently told the courts that Congress can’t be investigated for insider trading

SNIP...

The Bush White House worked hard to smear CIA officers, bloggers and anyone else who criticized the Iraq war

CONTINUED...

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/01/corrupt-american-government.html

[vintx]

168. Once again the whitewashing and excuses are silenced

You are a treasure

[rjsquirrel]

37. One more day

and it's over.

At last.

Bernie Sanders went from hero to loser in my household this year.

[libdem4life]

132. Yes. To some, truth is nonsense. To others is it a little bump in the

25 year road to the Presidency. Why should she be honest, clear things up, admit to mistakes, secrecy and paranoia. It's been working for years. No one said she was a dummy.

Make a case for her...other than the usual "get over it" or "tick tock" or "___ more days." from the frantic and grateful. Oh, those and "nonsense". It only "works" here on this little blip of Democratic comments.

[stevenleser]

134. Nope, nonsense is nonsense. No melodramatics from Hillary haters will change that. nt

[libdem4life]

143. And no nonsense from someone who hasn't a clue if I "Hate Hillary".

In fact if you checked before posting, my opinion is that she come clean...you know, tell the truth...clear it up. There is no reason for all of this drama. She is a Very Powerful Person and could put this to rest with just some honesty. Now do I think it sucks that she's offering up her aides...you betcha.

But Dude, I don't hate anyone. You do realize it is possible to hate what one does and not hate the person. It's called emotional maturity. Enough of this "hater" nonsense for everyone that wants the truth. That's pretty ugly right there, if you ask me.

Up is down. White is Black. In is out. ad nauseum.

[Scuba]

3. No, no, no. There's no election manipulation going on. Just "clerical errors" or so I was told ...

... by a DU member who damned well knows better.

[NurseJackie]

6. Ha!

[Tarc]

7. 1 day

[Starry Messenger]

8. The fall of Salon.com

http://www.politico.com/media/story/2016/05/the-fall-of-saloncom-004551

[BobbyDrake]

19. And they're one of the dumber sites for actually paying for HA Garbageman's content.

At least HuffPo has the excuse that they don't pay anyone. Salon might as well have lit that money on fire for warmth.

[Starry Messenger]

96. +1000

[Howler]

9. Good article

Thank you NorthCarolina.

[NorthCarolina]

10. Hit home in a lot of areas for me.

A perfect delineation of exactly what is transpiring on this site.

[Howler]

14. Yes.

For any reasonable person it should.

[rjsquirrel]

46. You are free to go elsewhere

and that goes for your vote too.

I don't think we have any reason to worry about a tiny angry minority of angry far leftists, most of whom are bitter, nostalgic older white men who would be at home with Trump. And Susan Sarandon.

I welcome a coalition with reasonable educated republicans. We will only make progress in this country by separating them from the mouth breathers. Then the BernBots can make common cause with their natural allies on the Tea Party White Nationalist far right and let's get it on, Mofos.

[Scootaloo]

63. Wow. This is really what you're going to go with, huh?

[socialist_n_TN]

87. That "tiny angry minority of angry far leftists" are not really so tiny.........

And they're DEFINITELY not "...bitter, nostalgic, older white men...". One of the biggest narratives of the Sanders' campaign was the massive support of younger people. It's a pretty solid bloc of voters that are currently unrepresented by either party.

[AgingAmerican]

91. You're the one whose transparency page is showing

Perhaps you should take your own advise?

[arcane1]

100. You're just jealous.

[TheKentuckian]

110. You are free to go elsewhere with that retrograde, conservative enabling and assimilating

bullshit worldview too.

I should have voted to hide this garbage, I missed that little chestnut at the end. You are vile and full of fetid shit.

[arcane1]

141. Conservative crap is allowed on DU now as long as it's not directed at a Clinton.

[QC]

157. Bingo. n/t

[-none]

11. What is posted in the OP is reflected in the responses.

Rule changes on DU will not in any way change the facts or the reality of the current on going current problems.

[LoverOfLiberty]

29. Right here

in the draft rules

Don't bash Democratic public figures
Do not post disrespectful nicknames, insults, or highly inflammatory attacks against any Democratic public figures. Do not post anything that could be construed as bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for any Democratic general election candidate, and do not compare any Democratic general election candidate unfavorably to their general election opponent(s).

[-none]

65. Posting facts is not bashing.

"Don't bash Democratic public figures "
That goes two ways. Bernie Sanders is in fact running as a Democrat.
It is a fact that he consistently draws much bigger crowds than Hillary.
Also, it is a fact that he has not lost because Hillary still does not have enough delegates to win the nomination. Regardless of the fact that the Hillary supporters here keep trying to say he had already lost, every since the Southern states held their primaries months ago.

[LoverOfLiberty]

70. He lost

get over it.

And what you call "fact" is nothing more than opinion, and one that will most likely be construed as detrimental to the Democratic party.

[KPN]

101. IRONIC ISN'T IT?

But not unexpected.

They are in denial.

[-none]

146. Denial is only a symptom of the real problem.

It takes a special kind of denial.

[Trust Buster]

12. I see threads from Sanders supporters who claim that Hillary supporters are ungracious winners.

They claim the we need to reach out to Sanders supporters. Will any of the authors of such threads speak out against the Sanders supporter that authored this thread who is essentially calling our nominee and her supporters, Republicans ?

[hobbit709]

22. Ungracious winner would be a step up in class.

[Trust Buster]

23. Deflection. This thread calls Hillary and her supporters Republicans. How is this acceptable ?

[hobbit709]

24. No more deflection than your comment.

[Trust Buster]

27. This OP refers to Hillary and her supporters as Republicans. This is wrong. We don't need a

June 16 imposition to tell us this is unacceptable.

[hobbit709]

35. Q.E.D.

[Trust Buster]

36. You are acting childish IMO. Good bye.

[hobbit709]

45. ...

[Octafish]

38. No, it doesn't. The article shows Hillary's candidacy transforming the Democratic Party rightward.

The fact that Clinton is now the favorite of many on the right, with endorsement after endorsement pouring in, should be evidence enough of a real merging of the right and the “left.” What we have more clearly on view is a breakdown between the political elite and the people.

One of those being Robert Kagan, PNAC big wig and warmonger.

[Trust Buster]

41. Enjoy your final day of irresponsibility.

[Octafish]

49. Wrong: I won't abide by the Democrats becoming Republicans.

One case in point: Social Security Privatization through incrementalism, an example of New Democratic thinking at odds with traditional Democratic thinking.

The author was a Chicago Boy helping implement the scam for Pinochet:

President Clinton and the Chilean Model.

By José Piñera

Midnight at the House of Good and Evil

"It is 12:30 at night, and Bill Clinton asks me and Dottie: 'What do you know about the Chilean social-security system?'” recounted Richard Lamm, the three-term former governor of Colorado. It was March 1995, and Lamm and his wife were staying that weekend in the Lincoln Bedroom of the White House.

I read about this surprising midnight conversation in an article by Jonathan Alter (Newsweek, May 13, 1996), as I was waiting at Dulles International Airport for a flight to Europe. The article also said that early the next morning, before he left to go jogging, President Bill Clinton arranged for a special report about the Chilean reform produced by his staff to be slipped under Lamm's door.

That news piqued my interest, so as soon as I came back to the United States, I went to visit Richard Lamm. I wanted to know the exact circumstances in which the president of the world’s superpower engages a fellow former governor in a Saturday night exchange about the system I had implemented 15 years earlier.

Lamn and I shared a coffee on the terrace of his house in Denver. He not only was the most genial host to this curious Chilean, but he also proved to be deeply motivated by the issues surrounding aging and the future of America. So we had an engaging conversation. At the conclusion, I ventured to ask him for a copy of the report that Clinton had given him. He agreed to give it to me on the condition that I do not make it public while Clinton was president. He also gave me a copy of the handwritten note on White House stationery, dated 3-21-95, which accompanied the report slipped under his door. It read:

[font color="green"][font size="5"]Dick,
Sorry I missed you this morning.
It was great to have you and Dottie here.
Here's the stuff on Chile I mentioned.
Best,
Bill.[/font size][/font color]

Three months before that Clinton-Lamm conversation about the Chilean system, I had a long lunch in Santiago with journalist Joe Klein of Newsweek magazine. A few weeks afterwards, he wrote a compelling article entitled,[font color="green"] "If Chile can do it...couldn´t North America privatize its social-security system?" [/font color]He concluded by stating that "the Chilean system is perhaps the first significant social-policy idea to emanate from the Southern Hemisphere." (Newsweek, December 12, 1994).

I have reasons to think that probably this piece got Clinton’s attention and, given his passion for policy issues, he became a quasi expert on Chile’s Social Security reform. Clinton was familiar with Klein, as the journalist covered the 1992 presidential race and went on anonymously to write the bestseller Primary Colors, a thinly-veiled account of Clinton’s campaign.

“The mother of all reforms”

While studying for a Masters and a Ph.D. in economics at Harvard University, I became enamored with America’s unique experiment in liberty and limited government. In 1835 Alexis de Tocqueville wrote the first volume of Democracy in America hoping that many of the salutary aspects of American society might be exported to his native France. I dreamed with exporting them to my native Chile.

So, upon finishing my Ph.D. in 1974 and while fully enjoying my position as a Teaching Fellow at Harvard University and a professor at Boston University, I took on the most difficult decision in my life: to go back to help my country rebuild its destroyed economy and democracy along the lines of the principles and institutions created in America by the Founding Fathers. Soon after I became Secretary of Labor and Social Security, and in 1980 I was able to create a fully funded system of personal retirement accounts. Historian Niall Ferguson has stated that this reform was “the most profound challenge to the welfare state in a generation. Thatcher and Reagan came later. The backlash against welfare started in Chile.”

But while de Tocqueville’s 1835 treatment contained largely effusive praise of American government, the second volume of Democracy in America, published five years later, strikes a more cautionary tone. He warned that “the American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.” In fact at some point during the 20th century, the culture of self reliance and individual responsibility that had made America a great and free nation was diluted by the creation of [font color="green"] “an Entitlement State,”[/font color] reminiscent of the increasingly failed European welfare state. What America needed was a return to basics, to the founding tenets of limited government and personal responsibility.

[font color="green"]In a way, the principles America helped export so successfully to Chile through a group of free market economists needed to be reaffirmed through an emblematic reform. I felt that the Chilean solution to the impending Social Security crisis could be applied in the USA.[/font color]

CONTINUED...

http://www.josepinera.org/articles/articles_clinton_chilean_model.htm

Good luck with the cat food.

[NorthCarolina]

64. With Hillary at the helm

you can expect proposed legislation with regard to Social Security to be along the lines of chained CPI, raising the retirement age, and means testing at a minimum.

[Octafish]

67. I hope so. Is that what she told Pete Peterson?

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said that when it comes to fixing Social Security, “putting everything on the table is not an answer. Raising the retirement age is not an answer. Cutting benefits is not an answer.” This article incorrectly summarizes her as saying cutting benefits or raising the eligibility age were “off the table.”

(You have to read that passage a few times to see that although cutting benefits and raising the retirement age each by themselves might not be “an” answer, taken together they might be “the” answer. See how easy?) Anyhow, one shouldn’t allow the evident glee the Journal’s writer took in composing that correction to detract from the fact that you always have to parse the words of Clintons very, very carefully. They are, after all, like Obama, lawyers trained at top schools.

SOURCE: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/10/hillary-clinton-on-social-security-expansion-words-are-wind-a-cold-wind.html

[NorthCarolina]

68. That's primary season rhetoric. Kind of akin to when

Obama rousingly supported a Public Option during the campaign, but then neglected to take to the bully pulpit for it, or ever really mention it, post-election. Campaign rhetoric is just that, rhetoric, no substance just fodder for the masses to consume.

[Octafish]

71. Rhetoric is the art of persuasive speaking.

You might enjoy "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintainance: An Inquiry into Values" by Robert M. Pirsig.

“As a result of his experiments he concluded that imitation was a real evil that had to be broken before real rhetoric teaching could begin. This imitation seemed to be an external compulsion. Little children didn’t have it. It seemed to come later on, possibly as a result of school itself.

That sounded right, and the more he thought about it the more right it sounded. Schools teach you to imitate. If you don’t imitate what the teacher wants you get a bad grade. Here, in college, it was more sophisticated, of course; you were supposed to imitate the teacher in such a way as to convince the teacher you were not imitating, but taking the essence of the instruction and going ahead with it on your own. That got you A’s. Originality on the other hand could get you anything – from A to F. The whole grading system cautioned against it.”

SOURCE: http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/564269-as-a-result-of-his-experiments-he-concluded-that-imitation

Propaganda, now, is something else.

[JudyM]

76. +1

[PufPuf23]

66. Hillary Clinton supporters appear "scorched earth" regards other good Democrats

of long standing here at DU and in general.

The Democratic party as reflected in Hillary Clinton as a POTUS nominee have fully embraced neo-liberalism and neo-conservatism as guiding political philosophies.

See rjsquirrel post #46

"I welcome a coalition with reasonable educated republicans. We will only make progress in this country by separating them from the mouth breathers. Then the BernBots can make common cause with their natural allies on the Tea Party White Nationalist far right and let's get it on, Mofos."

Wants a coalition with Republicans over other Democrats.

Claims Sanders supporters are "natural allies" with "Tea Party White Nationalist far right" which is ridiculous as the criticism of Clinton is from the moderate anti-war liberals that care about social justice as well as identity politics.

The article is descriptive unfortunately.

[coyote]

13. These Clinton supports are so blind of how right wing they have become.

These are the highlights from the 1956 Republican Party platform

1. Provide federal assistance to low-income communities;
2. Protect Social Security;
3. Provide asylum for refugees;
4. Extend minimum wage;
5. Improve unemployment benefit system so it covers more people;
6. Strengthen labor laws so workers can more easily join a union;
7. Assure equal pay for equal work regardless of sex.

If that was the Republican platform today, I would vote Republican over Democrat

[BobbyDrake]

17. You're just like those Republicans who call modern Democrats "the real racists" because of the 50s.

Why embarrass yourself so badly by revealing that you also don't know the history of the party re-alignments of the 1960s? Pre-Civil Rights, the Republican Party was liberal and the Democratic Party was conservative. All you did was prove that the modern Democratic Party, as a vehicle for liberalism, is consistent with its policies over time.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

No more doubt about you here.

[Octafish]

42. What do you think about New Dem economics that help the RICH first and foremost?

Phil Gramm united Democrats and Republicans @ UBS Wealth Management.

Thanks to Phil, who once was a conservative Texas Democrat before switching over to the then-better grea$ed Republicans, these two former Presidents have found kinship and jobs in Wealth Management at UBS.



Before their days at UBS, they worked in Washington on opposite sides of the aisle. But ol' Uncle Phil Gramm helped them find a shared passion for financial deregulation.

In the early 90's, Sen. Phil shepherded the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act through Congress. Miraculously, he found philosophical kinship with President Bill Clinton, who signed the law that repealed the pesky New Deal protections that had kept Wall Street from using the taxpayers as unwilling $16 trillion co-signers for their big "losses" at the big Wall Street casino.

About UBS Wealth Management



It's a Buy-Partisan Who's Who:

President William J. Clinton
President George W. Bush Heh heh heh.
Robert J. McCann
James Carville
John V. Miller
Paula D. Polito
Anthony Roth
Mike Ryan
John Savercool

SOURCE: http://financialservicesinc.ubs.com/revitalizingamerica/SenatorPhilGramm.html

And THAT spirit of Buy Partisanship is why the rich are getting superricher and the rest of us have to settle for Austerity.

[emulatorloo]

81. You got any dirt on Donald Trump? Because I'd be very interested

Always enjoy your posts even if I sometimes disagree w your conclusions.

[Octafish]

88. Guy's in it up to the gills.

Exposing Trump's Decades of Deep Ties to Organized Crime

What gets The Mouth hot and bothered.

Exposing Trump's Decades of Deep Ties to Organized Crime

Trump's real estate empire and casinos have mob roots.

By Steven Rosenfeld / AlterNet May 23, 2016

The first decades of Donald Trump’s career as a New York City builder and Atlantic City casino magnate are filled with lasting and documented ties to organized crime—including mobsters who went to federal prison, according to a recent series of detailed investigative reports.

“No other candidate for the White House this year has anything close to Trump’s record of repeated social and business dealings with mobsters, swindlers, and other crooks,” wrote David Cay Johnston for Politico.com. “In all, I’ve covered Donald Trump off and on for 27 years, and in that time I’ve encountered multiple threads linking Trump to organized crime.”

“Well, to be a developer in New York City, to be fair, you had to, in those days—this is talking about the late ’70s and 1980s, early ’90s—you had to brush up against the mob,” Tom Robbins, who covered organized crime, labor and politics for decades for The New York Daily News and Village Voice, told Democracy Now, when talking about his report for TheMarshallProject.org. “They were a force both on the employer side and particularly on the union side. But despite that problem, Don Trump seemed to keep running into them over and over again. They bought apartments in his Trump Tower, in Trump Plaza. You know, they kept showing up as people that he was carousing with.”

Robbins, who called Trump, “the slickest con-man out of New York City,” said the Republicans had no idea who their presidential nominee was. But as he reported for the Marshall Project, which covers criminal justice issues, and Johnston, a Pulitzer Prize winning business reporter wrote for politico.com, Trump knew he wanted to make a fortune soon after graduating from the University of Pennsylvania in 1968 and found a role model in one of the sleaziest lawyers in America—Roy Cohn. In the 1950s, Cohn helped Wisconsin Republican Sen. Joseph McCarthy persecute Hollywood figures for allegedly supporting Communism. Years later when Trump met Cohn, he had moved to New York City and was advising the city’s leading organized crime figures.

“Trump’s mentor on issues of politics and business was Roy Cohn, a lawyer whose other clients included a passel of mobsters, among them the bosses of the Genovese and Gambino crime families,” wrote Robbins. “Cohn… operated out of a townhouse on East 68th Street where clients Anthony ‘Fat Tony’ Salerno and Paul ‘Big Paul’ Castellano were regular visitors. Besides getting advice on their legal problems, as a former secretary later recalled to (Village Voice reporter) Wayne Barrett in his 1992 book, “Trump: The Deals and the Downfall,” the visits by the mob titans to their lawyer's office allowed them to talk shop without having to worry about FBI bugs. Cohn told a reporter that Trump called him ‘fifteen to twenty times a day, asking what’s the status of this, what’s the status of that,’ according to Barrett’s book.”

CONTINUED...

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/exposing-trumps-decades-deep-ties-organized-crime

If the Corporate Owned News were more interested in actually doing what the Constitution says they should do, The Donald would be history.

[valerief]

73. The Democratic Party that brought Social Security, which the Republicans fought?

That kind of conservative?

What rubbish!

[seabeckind]

108. You're being too kind. n/t

[pampango]

31. Of course republicans of that era voted more for the Civil Rights Act than Democrats did.

Their party has changed much more than ours has.

[seabeckind]

107. Someone else who's geographically challenged.

Take a look at the vote and try to map it.

Not by party but by location.

See what's different?

[pampango]

112. Conservative Southerners used to be Democrats. Many Northern republicans were liberal.

Northern Democrats were mostly liberal too.

What's your point? My point was that republicans used to be more liberal largely because conservative Southerners were almost exclusively Democrats. Without many Southerners in their party were much more 'moderate' than they are today.

Calling someone a 1960's republican is not the same as calling them a 21st century republican.

[seabeckind]

113. You're fixated on the label, aren't you?

I also notice a little chronological weakness which seems to have affected your historical perceptions.

[Lord Magus]

94. All of those are in the Democratic Party platform NOW. -nt-

[seabeckind]

111. If you look from a historical standpoint,

they have been since the great depression. The point where the republican party became the party of the entitled.

FDR was the champion of the downtrodden and worked very hard for labor and opportunity.

The republicans might have been to the right of the democrats before the 60s but they were still to the left of where the democrats are today.

They went way to the right and the democrats shifted with them, trying to regain the south. It was a mistake.

So that's where we are today.

Batshit crazy conservative party and the moderately conservative party from an ideological viewpoint.

Anything else is just a label.

[harun]

125. +1

[CrowCityDem]

15. Salon's garbage. Her platform is the most progressive for a nom possibly ever. That's not enough?

[JudyM]

80. Whew. Never saw such communicable blindness. Most progressive?! There are no words.

[CrowCityDem]

95. Her platform is slightly left of Obama, which was slightly left of Clinton. So yes.

[leveymg]

154. Not on war or peace issues. She's even to the Right of Trump.

Not a reason to vote for the Donald, but still an important issue, isn't it?

[CrowCityDem]

156. To the right? She's continuing Obama's policies. Remember, he was President for Syria, Libya, etc.

[leveymg]

158. HRC and Petraeus left after the first term. Remember? That's no coincidence.

It's been Hell trying to clean up the mess they left behind. They made Israel and some of the worst Cold Warriors happy. But, they created a problem that simply spread and metastacize for generations. I doubt if Obama really is happy he agreed to her terms to install her at State. Petraeus was a disaster and was shown the door in the starkest of terms.

[840high]

118. Surely you jest.

[LoverOfLiberty]

25. There was no room to say anything

your side was screaming as loud as they can that Clinton was cheating you.

[Herman4747]

20. "there is a real allergic reaction to truth in the Clinton camp."

Well, Hillary herself has repeatedly shown that she believes honesty is not the best policy.
This below shows how her integrity got shot down by invisible sniper fire:

[arikara]

153. The truth is as relevant now

as it was in the last campaign 8 years ago. To some of us at least.

[leftofcool]

21. Did HA Goodman get a job at Salon?

[Dem2]

26. "Nowhere is there an argument about the merits of her platform"

Stopped reading there, I'm not an idiot so I don't read articles written by idiots.

[left-of-center2012]

30. Get it out of your system - times running out

Time to focus on winning the Presidency and Congress.
Stop the hate.

[ucrdem]

32. You know if Skinner changes GD:P to GD:Creative Writing

we can just keep posting the same ol' stuff . . .

[Triana]

34. . . .

[Pastiche423]

152. Perfect.

[peace13]

39. Ut oh....

Will DU need a name change? Not sure The New Republican Underground sounds good. NRU....hmmm.

[jack_krass]

170. "DU need a name change?"

onepercentwannabees.com

[wyldwolf]

40. "Progressive" group-think.

[Arazi]

44. I believe the slide to neoliberalism occurred before Hillary

She's just the finished product and the most obvious example

[seabeckind]

106. Yep, long about 1985 when the DLC decided to shift right.

They decided that the best way to move forward was to continue the movement started by Reagan.

So much easier to go along with the big money than hang out with the people who shower in the evening. After all, they don't pay, why should they get to play?

[Stellar]

48. I'm sure that argument has been made since the beginning of the parties...

may the best man win. I voted for Bernie and wished that he had won. But it appears that more people voted for Hillary. Sour grapes to the person that wrote the article, that's all it is, sour grapes.

[wyldwolf]

50. Meanwhile, Clinton Widens National Lead

[Juicy_Bellows]

51. This post and the responses to it, illustrate the giant rift in the party.

Bridges being burnt before they're ever built. I hope the GOP doesn't slip someone halfway sane on the ticket...

[TwilightZone]

52. DU is not remotely representative of reality.

And neither is Salon. Salon sold out to clickbait years ago.

The "giant rift" is a fabrication of places like DU and Salon. In the real world, the vast majority of supporters on both sides understand that the primaries are over and are focusing on the threat, Donald Trump.

[Juicy_Bellows]

54. Well lets hope he remains the opposition. Nt.

[KPN]

103. True.

It is a giant rift. He/she who has the power controls the outcome as they say. In the party and here at DU.

[Jester Messiah]

57. It's true, the merits of HRC's policies are seldom discussed.

More often it's just an appeal to fear of the big orange boogeyman.

[valerief]

75. More war doesn't earn one a merit badge. nt

[KPN]

104. The merits at this point are meaningless since she

is constantly triangulating. Let's wait till after the convention to see relative to merits going into the GE. Fair enough?

[Marr]

115. Very true. /nt

[workinclasszero]

60. Salon is a joke

[Proud Public Servant]

61. We're not there yet, but...

We do have to consider the very real possibility that Trump will drive Susan Collins/Mark Kirk-type Republicans out of there party...and into ours. I already know many, many friends and family who will be voting Hillary in the fall after a lifetime of GOP membership; I'm happy to have their support, but if they actual were to join our party and help shape its policies, I'd be much more ambivalent.

And if you don't think a wing of one party bolting and joining another can transform that party, then you need to look harder at what happened to the GOP once the Dixiecrats climbed on board.

Still, it's hard to pin any of that on Clinton per se; she represents a legitimate, large, well-established wing of our party (it's much easier to imagine Truman and Kennedy voting for her than for Bernie). But it is entirely possible to envision a Trump-led GOP imploding or withering away like the Federalists or the Whigs, and them the Dems splitting in two in that vacuum. Perhaps not likely, but possible.

[socialist_n_TN]

92. Agree. In fact this election the largest unrepresented bloc of voters.......

will be the Sanders style social democratic ones. It probably won't be a majority bloc, but it will be a large plurality. And yes, I do think that the Democratic Party will split simply BECAUSE a significant voting bloc that's unrepresented won't stay unrepresented for very long.

[Faux pas]

62. Kickin' for the truth!

[valerief]

74. Two more days for truth and then...

[pkdu]

77. This seems fitting....

[Herman4747]

128. This seems more fitting:

[pkdu]

136. Let it all out, all of it...but hurry. Nt

[William769]

79. June 16th 2016. nt

[Arugula Latte]

84. The day the propaganda can be catapulted unhindered.

[William769]

89. The day Baghdad Bob cease to exist.

At least on Democratic Underground.

[Kurovski]

102. Octafish forever!

Love the guy.

[Dem2]

105. I saw this lefty wingnut shit at the top of /r/politics

Anything that tops there is complete hogwash 99% of the time.

[seabeckind]

109. Ahh, so you agree that this article represents a liberal viewpoint?

And that it is in opposition to the current rightward shift of the democratic party?

Thank you.

[Dem2]

114. No, wingnuts means it's people that are trying to destroy the party

Thanks for considering my viewpoint.

[seabeckind]

129. You mean they make you uncomfortable about your definition?

I think it's more that.

That you think you are the one who gets to decide what is liberal, what is progressive, and what those ideas mean in your party?

I had a sister who was like that about her "parties". Pretty soon she found that her only allies were imaginary.

Look on the bright side.... there'll be a fantastic purification process in just a couple days and you won't feel threatened anymore.

Won't that be grand?

[Dem2]

135. How utterly ironic coming from the "my way or the highway" crowd!

I'm perfectly capable of judging the character of people without bullies attempting to twist my arm into their way of thinking. You're using logical fallacy/a (lame) psychological trick to project YOUR issues onto me.

Not gonna happen.

[seabeckind]

137. You have these delusions often?

Just where was your arm twisted? And where did you get this my way or the highway idea?

Because someone disagreed with you? Did they give reasons?

Perhaps some introspection might be in order.

You're the one who started this by saying it was a LWNJ piece.

[Dem2]

139. OK, later

You're boring me.

[seabeckind]

142. Make sure you tell everyone you were bullied.

I need the rep.

[MisterP]

116. the real danger is that this leaves a party experienced in defeating only one sort of foe: Dems

lost an election? those durn lefties musta stayed at home again!
independents leaving both parties? good: we don't need 'em and can skim off some of the Republicans--keep the elections within the remaining 49% of voters
if they can't discipline the Dems into voting blindly and marching straight home without asking their betters for anything, they can cut off the deadweight that only turns out when they think it'll matter
eventually they'll be left with those voters who'll vote for you even if you send their jobs abroad and pile them with debt and jail, left with those voters that are mobilized by fear and guilt and fingerwagging

so with Orlando Trump is as always firing loose-cannon onto every side of the issue
meanwhile a dozen Clinton handlers carefully sifted the polls and balancing whether "radical Islamism" will get more votes than maintaining the careful PC facade that lets her get away with very un-PC policies, while Frank says we gotta go after "some" Muslims with nary a peep from the fist-shakers

[Buzz cook]

117. The grapes, they are sour.

For an article that long there is very little information in it. Very few truth claims to either challenge or agree with.

For people who think Clinton is evil I'd suggest they listen to her speech in Pittsburgh about the Orlando shootings.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

I just did and was impressed with the lack of evil.

If you investigate her policy positions you also find a lack of evil.

If Hillary had joined with Bernie in calling for investigations of voting irregularities how many wolfs would have been imaginary.
If Sanders really believed in election fraud he could have sued, He didn't.

Here's the author's money shot.

The fact that Clinton is now the favorite of many on the right, with endorsement after endorsement pouring in, should be evidence enough of a real merging of the right and the “left.” What we have more clearly on view is a breakdown between the political elite and the people.

Or it could be people recoiling at the horror that has revealed itself as the republican party.

[Orsino]

119. To be fair, the bland ineffectuality of the Republican side...

...seems poised to let her coast to victory on a platform of simply Not Being Trump.

The bar may never have been set lower.

[seabeckind]

133. I can't help feeling that Trump won't be the opponent.

That the gop will just shrug off the trump faction and put forth a totally different candidate. There's a really big not-Trump faction among the conservatives, too.

One who also runs on the not-Trump. One who is not a severely social conservative, a true neoliberal who is proud to admit it, an open libertarian.

What would happen to the race then?

The disapproval rating and the reasons for it will get to be pretty uncomfortable.

[Orsino]

159. Well, I've been predicting he'd quit (again) since last summer...

...and I keep being wrong.

I still can't picture his actually moving to DC, or deigning to work crowds who don't adore him. The general is going to be too much like work for what I believe is his taste, and that he's likely to lose should mean that he won't even try.

But if I'm right and he finds a way to quit--by blaming others and insulting us all, no doubt--a hasty GOP replacement candidate is just going to lose harder.

[seabeckind]

160. lose harder?

Maybe. I think you might be underestimating the not-Hillary crowd. They don't get much play since Trump is playing on the buffoon stage.

Get rid of Trump and all of a sudden the lesser of 2 evils might change.

Based on what I've seen of the fantastic tactical moves of the DNC they'll probably be left with nada.

They abandoned the labor base during the 90s and might have a hard time getting them back.

Interesting times.

[Orsino]

161. I think we'll find that a great deal of his support doesn't exist.

As with his wealth, his qualifications and his business successes.

[seabeckind]

162. That's very true.

Irrelevant but true.

All you are doing is reiterating the not-Trump argument.

I think we'll find that a lot of the arguments on the democratic side are emphasizing that POV.

Take it away and then what? Trump has monstrous negatives. He's not the only one. And that will roll downhill.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141490001

I'll throw a conspiracy theory at you... what if all this posturing had the intent of making Hillary the nominee? What if that was the goal all along?

Not by the democrats. By the republicans. They can't run on a not-Obama, why not run on the next best thing?

[Orsino]

163. But Trump always folds.

His threatened lawsuits never materialize, or he settles though he vows not to, his investigations come up empty, his school teaches nothing, and he doesn't pay his bills or finance his campaign. He's not just the Potemkin's candidate; he's a Potemkin's person. This history is tbe only personal information that is relevant to his success as a "candidate."

We ought to keep in mind, though, that many people do fall for hucksters, and some people will fall hard for Trump. Even those who see what he is may stick around just to avoid admitting they were taken in.

[seabeckind]

164. Again... not-Trump.

What if when the bell starts to start the contest in earnest...

he's not the opponent?

You're throwing some excellent arguments against a guy who isn't in the ring.

[Orsino]

166. Not-Trump is going to be a true loser strategy for the GOP

Hoping the base will turn out for the wrong candidate, particularly one who won no states? I almost feel sorry for them if they try it. Trump, for instance, will laugh and laugh.

[stonecutter357]

126. tick-tock..

[seabeckind]

130. The purge is coming.

Maybe we can have a special icon placed on the unclean ones so they will be readily identified.

[imagine2015]

131. K & R

[erlewyne]

140. I WILL VOTE FOR BERNIE SANDERS !!!!

There is no difference between Hilary and TRUMP !!!

I do not want Bernie as VP. Stupid ...

I want Bernie to go Independent ... come hell
or high water.


GO BERNIE !!!

[JoePhilly]

147. A myopic and misleading analysis.

The paragraphs you picked declare "beliefs" that Bernie supporters hold, which they claim are "facts" that others should accept as "facts."

[PowerToThePeople]

148. DUrec

[Bill USA]

149. move over Ann Coulter. Never have I read such tendentious, non-sequitur fucking bullshit and lies

I'll site just one huge glob of excretia:

"the number one reason that Bernie Sanders supporters are told they should vote for Hillary is to stop Trump"

This is patent bullshit.

The number one reason cited by Hillary supporters to vote for Hillary over Sanders has ALWAYS BEEN that She can get things done. - And that their policy positions aren't really all that different - but that his are less achievable - by anybody. But certainly that Bernie, while being a well intentioned guy, is not equipped to get things done - if he were elected to the WH.

I could go on, but I won't waste time on such crap.

Slate has put itself on a level with Fucks News by putting this shit on their site.

[RufusTFirefly]

150. She's like a human austerity measure

We're being told that we have no choice but to settle for less.

[Pastiche423]

151. Oh, that is so right on!

One of the reasons I feel a horrible dread at Her presidency.

[bleever]

155. Methinks the record is corrected too much.

This Mark Penn/David Brock scorched earth politics does division well, but at what cost?

[andym]

167. I think the idea that Hillary converted Democrats into New Republicans is silly

The Democratic Party has moved rightwards economically since Reagan, and indeed many Democrats hold economic ideologies that reflect something similar to what liberal GOPers held in the 70's. Presumably many of these supported Hillary. That's not to say that many progressives supported her as well. OTOH, many more progressives supported Bernie, including myself.

Hillary won because the Democratic party has a lot of moderates. She also won because the Primary system was setup to help the establishment candidate-- that is no secret. The current superdelegate system was instituted in 1984 after the Party nominated George McGovern in 1972, and Jimmy Carter in 1976, and 1980 with no superdelegates. In fact it was George McGovern himself in 1970-1 who helped institute the most Democratic primary system, which helped the most liberal nominee ever get the nomination. Superdelegates was the establishment's answer.

That Barack Obama, who many of us saw as the great progressive hope, could win the nomination in 2008 against the establishment candidate, shows the system does have sufficient integrity for potential upsets.

[NorthCarolina]

175. The fly in the ointment there

is that Obama was also the establishment candidate. We had a choice, establishment candidate Obama or establishment candidate Clinton. They din't really care which one of the two was elected as both were palatable to all controlling interests involved. That's why the level of voter suppression was nowhere near what we saw in this primary, because the establishment had to fight like hell against a candidate that is absofunckinglutely unacceptable to them.

[vintx]

176. This exactly

[andym]

177. I would distinguish between an establishment candidate and an insurgent who ended up supporting

the Democratic establishment. Barack Obama's campaign was fueled by a very large grassroots effort, unlike Clinton's who had the Party establishment behind her. I think a lot was unknown how Pres. Obama would govern, perhaps even by he himself. I remember reading quite a few fearful articles from the corporate establishment/Wall Street in early 2009 who were afraid that the President would do things like nationalize the banks. It caused panic among some investors. So certainly they were not certain he supported them.

I still remember the President requesting that his supporters apply pressure on him and the establishment to help get things done that we wanted, and I think that we more or less failed to exert much pressure. Where were the big protests in support of the public option? Meanwhile on the Right the tea party was getting (bad) things done.

[NorthCarolina]

178. The thing is

post election Obama never took to the bully pulpit even once to rally support for a public option. In fact, the only public mention of it he made was during the campaign. It was more a product of run left, govern right, which is the credo of the neoliberal crowd.

[andym]

179. He rarely took the bully pulpit for anything

including the ACA-- and he did that only a few times and weakly. That was the biggest disappointment-- not using the bully pulpit effectively. It's clear that he saw the passage of the ACA as being the "revolutionary change", and didn't realize how the lack of a public option would hamstring it.

In fact, in his first year he did not really use his political capitol as much nor as forcefully as he could. President Obama wanted the ACA and then looked for consensus-- he allowed Lieberman and Nelson to push him around in the Senate. Pres. Obama always looks for consensus-- which is both practical and very limiting at the same time-- his desire to get things done sometimes moved the arrow in the wrong direction-- we're very lucky that the GOP has been so intransigent and mostly refused to engage him.

His biggest problem was that the one person who could actually have exerted pressure on both him (the President) and the Senate died too early-- Ted Kennedy. I am convinced that Obama's fist term would look very different if Kennedy did not die in such an untimely fashion. Kennedy with all his faults, was really the liberal lion that I hope Bernie can become.

[bobthedrummer]

174. K&R n/t