What Bernie Sanders Proved. And Why I still Believe His Message Remains Critical

[cali]

He demonstrated that democrats can divorce big money and still raise enough to compete.

That is a big deal.

Before he achieved it, the assumption, across the board, was that it was impossible to do.

You can say that this is unimportant or that corporate/big money has no or minimal impact on democratic politicians, while decrying it in republicans, but that's demonstrably untrue.

How campaigns are funded is a substantial part of the fight for economic justice, something I wish we could all agree, is important. I've said it repeatedly and I'll say it again: Economic justice is inextricably linked to social justice. For example, you can't achieve racial justice if schools in poor minority communities remain so woefully underfunded. Environmental degradation impacts poor and minority communities, far, far more than it does middle class white communities, let alone in wealthy communities. This isn't merely opinion, it is easily verifiable FACT. I have provided links because this isn't something that can be argued.

To forestall the inevitable, let me make it clear that I'm not saying that all racial injustice can be fixed by economic justice. But I will say this: Some shop clerk wondering if Oprah could afford some astronomically priced handbag, is not on the same level as millions of minority children getting a subpar education in crumbling buildings. I don't take lightly the horrific practices of institutional racism that are not connected to economic justice. I don't discount for a minute the struggles of LGBT folks that have had little to do with economic issues (and some LGBT issues certainly are connected to economic injustice), but most social justice issues are linked to economic justice.

Reducing the impact on policy that the wealthy and corporations have on Democrats is something wish we could all agree on. And it starts with campaign finance reform.

Hillary has barely mentioned CFR in recent months. She pledged to appoint Justices who oppose CU. I hope her base thinks this is an important issue and are willing to hold her feet to the fire if she becomes President.

My intent in writing this is not inflame or to bash HRC, but to keep in the forefront an issue I believe is critical. Economic injustice is crushing millions of Americans.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/public-school-funding-and-the-role-of-race/408085/

http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2014/02/22/let-eat-cake-inequality-school-finance/

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/people-poor-neighborhoods-breate-more-hazardous-particles/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/04/15/pollution-is-substantially-worse-in-minority-neighborhoods-across-the-u-s/

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/5/1/racism-environmentchemical.html

http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/is-america-an-oligarchy

[rjsquirrel]

1. I agree with a lot of this

And respect Bernie for foregrounding these arguments.

[Hortensis]

39. We too. Bernie's achievement in that respect

was truly inspiring--and enlightening. I just hope and intend that we don't need this lesson for long. If I could reform campaign financing, the rule would be "not a damned dime," no plastic pens, no free weekends at resorts run by "friends" a la Scalia (WHAT was he there for!?), no employers "inviting" employees to donate. Just a low limit for each voter to be able to donate once.

We NEED to put the elections industry and their permanent election seasons out of business. 2 for 2 used to mean 2-minute contractions every 2 minutes and you knew the baby would be born soon. Now it means 2-year-long campaigns every 2 years and you know it means you're being screwed all the time.

I suggest an upper limit of $27 in honor of what Bernie showed can be done. (No need to examine the books or talk about Super-PACS, please--it's symbolic of a very real phenomenon.)

[Fumesucker]

2. Hillary's "base" "hold her feet to the fire"?

Have you perchance visited the HRC group?

[cali]

3. I have, but honestly, I feel like I need a shower afterwards

so I stopped perusing that group. I'm sorry to say that. I know there are DU HRC supporters who don't engage in some of the shit on display there, but it's pretty ugly.

[Fumesucker]

5. I think the whole feet holding thing is sheerest fantasy

Once they are elected politicians are basically impregnable from the will of the voters until the next election by which time 75% of Americans have forgotten whatever it is they might have done to hack them off.

[rhett o rick]

6. Hey! I thought you were promoting subtlety?

[laserhaas]

4. And those of U.S. who suffer ...greatly..from injustice

Manifest....are all too aware Hillary gives little hope.

Real simple math in my case v Romney & Goldman Sachs

With Bernie we have a 99% chance for justice

And of HRC who took Sachs $$$ ..we have near zero

http://crooksandliars.com/2015/01/mitt-romney-slapped-racketeering-lawsuit

[rhett o rick]

7. Let's be honest here. We have a long way to go before we regain our democracy.

At this stage in our country, I believe Sanders would be neutralized before the Powers That Be would let him become president. Sen Sanders knows this as he said when he launched his campaign that he knew he would be a personal risk as well as his family.

The election was rigged because those with Big Money can do it and do it with impunity.

What is sad is that we have DEmocrats that seem to hate the Left. Why? They won't say. I think their authoritarian leaders tell them they should and they do.

[laserhaas]

10. Your " let's be honest here" wreaks of haughtier

Change will not even begin to start..with her

But it will dam sure start..with him

[rhett o rick]

44. Change has started. The Powers That Be and their minions are running scared.

[laserhaas]

46. The thing is, will the D powers that be, properly see that the best (exact polar opposite) of Mitt

is Bernie?

[laserhaas]

47. Did you see my other 2 threads that Romney's gal & guy are now RNC Rules Committee Co-Chairs

Trump is thumped....

[Adrahil]

17. " regain?" When was this golden time you want to regain? NT

[laserhaas]

19. I think we are in the age - best.

We see and know more now - that use to be behind closed doors.

Without social media, Bernie would have been but a blimp dot, on the stage large.

What hurts is how we see what the oligarchs know all too well. Despite obvious flaws, extraordinary, the masses can be pushed into any direction - what will - for the bitter ends.

It truly is, a very sad state of affairs.

[rhett o rick]

24. Do you think we live in a democracy?

[Adrahil]

27. Not completely. But have we ever?

That's my point. Your "regain" comment suggests that we did. If you think so, tell me when that was.

[bvar22]

40. I'll give it a try, but I believe you have already closed your mind.

FDR started the ball rolling with his New Deal:

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be[font size=3] established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.[/font]

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

[font size=3]America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.[/font]

Please note that the above are stipulated as Basic Human RIGHTS to be protected by our government,
and NOT as COMMODITIES to be SOLD to Americans by For Profit Corporations.

JFK picked up that ball, and started running, but was killed before he covered much ground. Before he went down, he lateraled to LBJ, who was unstoppable.

No, things weren't "perfect" in the 60's, but we were making progress...and NOT incrementally , but with leaps and bounds. The Programs of the Great Society, Medicare/Medicaid, the War on Poverty, the Civil Rights Act of 1964....tremendous progress TOWARD a better country and democracy that could be shared by ALL.
WE were moving in the right direction.

Since 1992, we have watched the NeoLiberals steadily chip away and even ridicule these cornerstone Democratic Party Achievements. We are now moving on the WRONG direction, and seem to be accelerating.

I would LOVE to "regain" the Democratic Party of the 60s combined with the Social Advancements of the current times.
That is a very thin outline, but hits most of the important facts.


Unless you want to argue that Republic vs Democracy BS.
Then we really have nothing to talk about.

[Adrahil]

41. No, not doing the bullshit "republic" argument.

A nation can be both a republic AND a democracy.

I guess I have a different point of view. I do not like the romaticization of the past. FDR did great things. He also interred Japanese-Americans without due process. He permitted the "deportation" of American citizens of Mexican descent. He presided over a segregated Army.

Now, I'm not going to condemn him. He was a man of his times, after all. But rather than say we want to "regain" that, I'd rather be more forward-thinking. I would love, for example to leverage his plans and methods in a modern sense and have a massive national infrastructure program. But I'd rather leave aside some of the stuff he proposed like this one:

"The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;"

That sounds like price supports and subsidies to me. Not really a big fan of that approach.

But obviously, I support a LOT of what is listed there, and guess what? So does every other Hillary supporter I know. And believe it not, I think Clinton supports those goals as well.

Now.... all that being great, none of that has to do with actual democracy. Our electoral system has always had a significant weaknesses from a democracy point of view. I can't think of any time in the past where we were actually more little "d" democratic.

I am not close minded, so if you have more to say, I'd be glad to hear it. I may not agree, but I think it's important than we always challenge ourselves and our assumptions.

[bvar22]

45. Obviously, I disagree with most everything you said.

And you were stretching it too far when you stated,
"I think Clinton supports those goals as well. "
Having watched Hillary for decades now, I can NOT recall a single time when she advocated for anything listed in the 2nd Bill of Rights.
When Bernie brought up those basic human rights during the debates,
Hillary's response was:
"NO. WE. CAN'T".

[laserhaas]

50. We have a better (for worse, it seems) informed public, than ever before

And, IMO, it means we have progress - that can (should) be made

[rhett o rick]

43. If you have a point, go ahead and make it. I am not going to argue over semantics.

I will say that the 99% have had it better and the worse part is that many don't recognize that it's been getting worse for the last few decades and we can't continue in this direction.

[bettyellen]

8. I thought the tight budget he ran with hurt him and he would never make it to the GE.

Not sure how things would work with all the money that HRC raised and the super PACs. I think that all would be spent before Novemer whether SBS approved or not.

[MattP]

9. Tight budget? He blew 200 million and outspent everybody

And still got blown out. He ran a bad campaign, overspent in states he already had and spent 0 in states he needed to represent better. Seems like somebody was getting a ad revenue cut and no ground operation in ca only ads. Thank god he lost his general election strategy would be shit

[cali]

12. Most analysts and pundits completely disagree with your analysis.

and with good reason.

He ran a very effective campaign. He started in the single digits. He ended up with over 12 million votes.

Crazy claim. I can only assume your bias blinds you to reality.

[Adrahil]

18. I heard a segment on NPR about....

The cost of all those big rallies. The expense is, forgive me, yuge. Now you are right that his campaign did much better than many (myself included) predicted, but there is a real question about the effectiveness of such rallies, especially late in the race. For example, instead of organizing a massive rally in Oakland, imagine that effort and money being put into GOTV efforts. For whatever faults she has, the Clinton campaign organized early and deep to mobilize their supporters.

[Live and Learn]

22. Bernie supporters did massive GOTV activities, phone banking, tableing, canvassing, etc.

Hillary supporters did very little. Hillary ran on name recognition, DNC favoritism being a woman.

Nearly all new Democrats were registered by Bernie supporters.

[cali]

30. what I'm finding really frustrating and sad is that it seems impossible to

have a substantive discussion about the topic the op addressed.

Hillary Clinton has been running for President for decades. She had YUGE advantages in that she had the support of nearly the entire democratic establishment.

But forget that quibbling. How about the issue of economic justice?

[Adrahil]

34. It's a deeply important issue to me.

But I felt Bernie's solutions represented a deeply unrealistic approach to solving the problem. His policy proposals were not only unlikely to ever get passed, but if they were passed, were unlikely to be affordable or effective, IMO. I know there are disagreements on that issue (my wife disagrees with me, for one), but that's why we have the primary process. I was also bothered by Bernie's almost sole focus on his central issue. I'd listen to speech after speech (yes, I DID listen to him, because a part of me really wanted to support him) where he would talk about the issue at hand for 5 minutes, and then pivot right back to his usual stump speech. That, IMO expressed a certain inflexibility which bothered me.

I think Economic Justice is a very complicated issue. I don't think it can be boiled down to "Wall Street," or breaking up big banks, or the 1%. In the end, I think the policies have to make sense. Anyway, I do not want to re-litigate the primary. I DO want to try and incorporate what I Like about Bernie's approach, without being saddled with what I don't like.

[cali]

35. Thank you for responding to the issue.

His policy proposals- and he made this clear- were a starting point, and could only be achieved by changing the composition of Congress.

Of course economic justice, like most political issues, is complex. The point of the op was not to re-litigate the primary, but to emphasize the importance of the issue.

I suggest you read Cassidy's piece and read the Princeton study. It's really eye opening.

[Adrahil]

37. Thanks! I appreciate the point. NT

[rhett o rick]

48. I get a kick out of the argument that he didn't run a good campaign because he

didn't win. He started from scratch and, in many people's minds, defeated the Powers That Be's chosen candidate. And he did it without any quid pro quo Big Corporate money. He/we did everything we could but couldn't beat a corrupt system. But we are just getting started and the Powers That Be and their minions best look out.

[Adrahil]

54. Well, there is no doubt he enjoyed some element of success.

I think it would be hard to argue he ran a bad campaign, per se. But I think the rallies, as an example, do do suggest a focus on a kind of campaigning that may or may not have been cost effective. Of course, we'll never know. I'm the kind of person who would never go to a huge political rally, and knowing about them doesn't sway me either. So for someone trying to win me over, that kind of thing is not productive. Maybe it is for other folks.

I leave the pejoratives for someone else to deal with.

[bettyellen]

13. I totally agree, but had read that when he underspent it was because he was unwilling to get into

Debt. So as much as he spent, it was constrained by that concern.

[rhett o rick]

25. If you define "good campaign" as the one run by Hillary and the Billionaires

filled with illegal activities, then Bernie ran a bad campaign. Bernie ran an honest campaign and scared the crap out of the Powers That Be. Why does honesty scare the non-progressives so much?

[bvar22]

49. Hardly a "blow out".

He kept Hillary from achieving the required number of delegates by winning them himself.
Had they been playing on a level field, Hillary would be an "also ran".

I remember when posters like yourself were laughing and ridiculing Bernie when he entered the campaign, predicting that he might win one state...maybe.

[cali]

11. that's claim is factually totally false.

[bettyellen]

14. It's doubtful he could have handled a GE contest on his budget....

I don't get why people assumed he would do better against Trump than Hillary. It's going to take a grounded policy wink to cut through Trumps bullshit and Sanders was never that. He is too emotional and reactive to be effective against DT- he showed that when he responded to minor jabs from the Clinton campaign.

[cali]

28. I'm not assuming he would do better or worse against Trump.

I make assumptions based on evidence. The evidence is there to make the assumption that he could have competed financially against Trump.

I don't let my biases blur my perspective. You do.

[bettyellen]

31. But so many people here made that assumption. Due to their own biases I assume...

Since there are no reliable polls at this point.
I agree he made a good point about financing, but do not see how he'd ever raise enough on his own to be viable in the general. But I think it's kind of dishonest to speculate because the DNC would be helping him finance his candidacy anyway. So much for that idea.

[cali]

32. It's fairly obvious. The point has been made by many analysts

and pundits: Whether Sanders approved or not, there would have been democratic super pacs spending on his behalf.

There is really very little doubt that he would have been financially competitive with Trump. It's not rocket science, bettyellen.

[bettyellen]

38. He'd only be competitive because he'd take the money he disproved of- so it's unicorn magic

More than rocket science. The money would not be there if he had his druthers.
Despite all that I agree he raised some good issues, as well as spreading foolish ideas

[bvar22]

52. All the legitimate polls indicate that Bernie...

...would defeat Trump by double digits.

[bettyellen]

53. Polls don't mean anything till after ten convention.

Sanders was not even vetted, between his tax filings, views on abortion and desire to raise taxes he was never going anywhere.

[Octafish]

15. CFR?

Oh, THAT CFR. Pete Peterson doesn't like that CFR.

[laserhaas]

21. An entity with designs that make me soul cringe

[dmosh42]

16. Bernie represented all the ideas I was hoping for in a candidate, but also showed how hard......

it is to beat the hacks who can swing ideas so that although one candidate voted to send our troops
to die in a phony war was not too important, but a vote against the gun control was a 'world class
mistake'. Bernie is only a few months senior to me, so I doubt I'll ever get to vote for someone like him
again. Once again my choice will be a 'lesser of two evils'!

[laserhaas]

20. It ain't over - till its over. Even if the worse day comes

We'll need to be united, with him - all the more.

[rhett o rick]

23. I see a lot of wishful thinking here.

" I hope her base thinks this is an important issue and are willing to hold her feet to the fire if she becomes President. " IMO her base didn't vote for her because of her positions on issues. They will defend whatever she does. It's authoritarian adulation.

"I'll say it again: Economic justice is inextricably linked to social justice." It won't do any good to "say it again". One either get it or not. I could find zero non-progressives that agree or are willing to say they agree with your statement, even when it's pointed out that MLK Jr. said it. They recognize that their candidate isn't for economic justice so they rationalize that it's not necessary for social justice. Or maybe they "irrationalize it".

[cali]

29. Yes, I know I'm being hopeful here. And I'm trying to

reach out to Hillary supporters here, to find common ground.

It's frustrating.

[rhett o rick]

42. I get the frustration and I am being to think there is no common ground.

When our founders wanted to fight the British Aristocracy there were a lot of Americans that didn't want to fight for freedom. They were more than comfortable living under Aristocratic rule. I see similarities today.

[Uncle Joe]

26. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, cali.

[Trajan]

33. I do not cede to pessimism ...

There is always hope ... It isn't worth living without it ...

Even in the worst of times, a human being NEEDS to focus on how to turn around what they can turn around, and figure out the rest ASAP .... It's the only way, in my own eyes, to continue to move forward ...

It isn't faith ... It's persistent determination ...

EVEN with Hillary winning ... The groundswell is still there, and raring to go ...

I am SO optimistic that Bernie and his supporters will remain a force to reckon with ...

Those youthful Bernie supporters - the hugely lopsided support for Bernie in younger age brackets - looms mighty ...

We are not letting go of this .... That youthful energy is going to change the world for the better ...

[cali]

36. +1. I am hopeful that this movement can continue.

[Overseas]

51. K&R.

[arcane1]

55. We were endlessly told that only Super-PAC money could save us. It was a lie then, and now.

And we are going to learn it the hard way

[Agony]

56. RE: Report: America’s poorest minorities at highest risk of chemical accidents

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/5/1/racism-environmentchemical.html

Environmental injustice runs long and deep here…as usual however, the third world has it even worse.

"An Unreasonable Woman"
http://www.chelseagreen.com/unreasonablewoman

this issue cuts across racial lines...

Thanks for focusing on important stuff, cali.