The fringe left problem

[liquid diamond]

Abraham Lincoln once said that a house divided against itself cannot stand. After a divisive primary campaign and losing the 2016 presidential election, we see that his words are true.

Obviously, the 2016 primaries were bitter and drawn out. Bernie refused to concede earlier even though it was clear he was not going to surpass Hillary’s lead. He gave his supporters false hope and continued to solicit tens of millions of dollars in donations. Donations that went to waste. I could understand why his supporters were angry and disappointed. What’s worse is that there wasn’t enough time to heal those negative emotions since Bernie took the primaries to the very last state.

Here is the fringe left problem. All throughout the primaries some of Bernie’s supporters threatened that they would not vote for Hillary if she won the nomination. Even if she won fairly. We read their posts. Bernie or bust (BOB) they said. You need us to win they said. They would and did burn down our house if we did not vote for their candidate even though he lost handily.

So how do we deal with such political blackmail in the future? In this primary contest we rejected Bernie by approximately four million votes. Generally speaking, the Democratic Party is not extremely liberal. LIFELONG and popular democrats such as Hillary, Obama, and Biden are centrists. We are likely going to nominate someone with similar political views which is going to piss off the fringe left.

Suppose they run Bernie again or someone like him in the 2020 election and we reject that candidate? They are a minority, but as we experienced last month there are enough of them to cost us another election if they to sit out.

Do you have any ideas to prevent this tragedy from happening again?

One more thing. I do not believe the BOBs are the only reason we lost this election. There are plenty of others, but I am just focusing on the divide in our party that helped lead to the fuhrer’s election.

[duffyduff]

2. There aren't enough of them out there to worry about.

There are bigger fish to fry now.

[HassleCat]

66. Exactly

There is no fringe left problem. Except as food for complaining about perceived deviants.

[TDale313]

3. Nearly half the party wanted Bernie.

I was not Bernie or Bust, but I supported Bernie because I felt, and still do feel, he was our best shot at beating Trump. Many Bernie supporters ended up supporting Clinton in the General, but if some didn't, and if so many are pressing the party establishment to do some serious soul searching and go in a different direction (since it's clear what we've been doing is not working- and I'm not talking just Presidential level- we've lost so many seats in congress and on the state level)

You can whine all you want about the "fringe left" but that's not gonna help bring us together.

[duffyduff]

4. Bernie wouldn't have won anything outside of Vermont.

The vast majority of the supporters were actually Democrats who supported Clinton, a Democrat.

The BoBs were strictly a fringe minority.

They aren't worth bothering with.

[friendly_iconoclast]

5. "The BoBs were strictly a fringe minority. They aren't worth bothering with." The OP disagrees.

[duffyduff]

7. The OP is wrong on that score.

Rehashing the primaries is pointless now.

We have bigger fish to fry, as I said.

[duffyduff]

6. We gained seats in the House and in the US Senate.

Hillary Clinton won the popular vote handily.

Just to correct your post.

[Garrett78]

10. While I don't really agree with the OP, I must point out that the Dem Primary wasn't close.

Caucuses, which are disenfranchising, gave the appearance that Sanders was in the running, but the race (as I said at the time) was over by mid-March.

Caucuses are not an option for many with jobs, kids, disabilities, etc. They should be done away with, and the WA Primary vs. WA Caucus demonstrates that Sanders would have been severely crushed if there were no caucuses.

[Joe941]

11. Bernie for 2020!

[Demsrule86]

77. NO

We need someone younger...time for the new generation to assume the leadership...Bernie would be 80...too late.

[Joe941]

88. You are discriminating on age - just as bad as race.

[Demsrule86]

89. That is not true...I want to win.

I simply don't think a person as old as Bernie can win...the point of running is to win after all.

[Joe941]

92. Employers might say...

"That is not true... I just need someone that can do the job." Ageism.

[baldguy]

24. Nearly half is not more than half. Clinton won. Sanders lost.

The nomination was settled long before he conceded. Attacking the Democratic party after the nominee was selected helped Trump & the GOP.

[bettyellen]

38. Nope. Hillary won Dems almost 2::1, only when you add Indies does it get close....

And that includes the droves of GOPers that crossed over because they wanted him as a spoiler.

[KittyWampus]

46. You are peddling false information. No, not half of the party wanted Sanders.

[CajunBlazer]

78. Nope, - that's just plain wrong

Bernie lost among registered Democrats in almost all if not every primary. Far left independents who rarely vote for the Democratic and kids to whom he offered government handouts (which he could have never produced) supplied the rest of the his support and he still lost by 4 million votes.

While Sanders supporters who were not in the BOB crowd might have voted for Hillary, but they weren't very helpful. Most of them neither volunteered their time or opened there wallets. Nor were they asking their friends and neighbors to vote for Hillary. Unfortunately for the rest of us, they got what they deserved.

[WhiteTara]

85. More than half wanted Hillary.

He didn't win the primaries and he wouldn't have won the general.

[TDale313]

94. No, that just doesn't follow.

Primaries are very different animals than generals. And sometimes the primaries don't actually select the strongest general election candidate.

I'm willing to concede Bernie might still have lost- but this argument that he lost the primaries so he definitely would have lost the General? Faulty logic, especially in a case where he seemed to do better with independents than she did whereas she did better among Democrats.

[BainsBane]

86. 3.8 million fewer votes

Is not nearly half. It's not even close.

[liquid diamond]

8. Thank you

Admin for approving my appeal to have my thread reinstated. We will not be silenced.

[asuhornets]

9. Many of the Bernie supporters were not even Democrats; just like Bernie

But they had the nerve to demand that we choose Bernie over Hillary. They(including Bernie) wreak havoc over the Democratic primaries. I say ignore them and Democrats should focus on the other half of the country that did not vote.

[liquid diamond]

12. My old boss once

told me that a little power in the wrong hands is a terrible thing. These people had the power to save millions of lives and our planet, but they sat out the election just because we rejected their candidate. As a result many US citizens will die due to lack of health care. Some may be their own friends or relatives. But hey! At least they voted with their conscience!

Hillary lost key states by very slim margins. There aren't many BOBS but there are enough to tip the scales in a tight election. Hence they are a problem.

[asuhornets]

13. They act as if Hillary Clinton personally showed up at their homes and insulted them to their face.

She would have been an excellent president.

[liquid diamond]

14. Agreed.

Their posts about were so full of hate.

[TCJ70]

16. And yet, they were willing to vote for Democratic Party ideals in the hands of...

...someone they viewed as an honest broker. It would be foolish to disregard that and it also ignores the fact that the overwhelming majority of Bernie supporters voted for Clinton. Wreaked havoc on the primaries? You mean with comments like "A special place in Hell...", insinuating women who preferred Bernie were only in it for the boys, false narratives about chairs being thrown and people shouting "english only"? Oh wait...that wasn't the Bernie campaign...

[asuhornets]

17. She lost they got what they wanted. Many of them did not vote for her...nt

[baldguy]

25. Thank you for the short summary of the RW propaganda used against the Clinton campaign.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028352213

[TCJ70]

31. Tell me which part of what I wrote is a lie?

Those things were said. Chairs were never thrown. No one shouted "english only". Yet those things were bandied about by the Clinton campaign and surrogates as if they were absolute truth.

[baldguy]

33. You think propaganda needs be be a lie?

Successful propaganda uses small facts, taken out of context, being used to reinforce false stereotypes.

Saying Sanders was an "honest broker" falsely implies that Clinton was not. Saying that the "overwhelming majority of Bernie supporters voted for Clinton" may be technically true, but it doesn't address asuhornets point or the point of the OP: that a crucial number of Sanders supporters continued to attack Clinton repeatedly & publicly, even after she won the nomination, even up to Nov 7, which was a big factor in skewing the results to Trump.

[TCJ70]

35. Small facts...what a joke.

Implying that women only support Bernie because they're boy crazy...did the Russians make the Clinton campaign do that?

Implying women who don't support Clinton are going to Hell...did the Russians make the Clinton campaign do that?

Pushing the thrown chair story...did the Russians do that?

And on and on and on. None of these things is out of context and if they are, please explain to me the better context. I don't doubt collusion between Russia and Trump, but you can't write off everything as Russian interference if there is no evidence of it. Some Clinton supporters here were so quick to write off Sanders yet now think they had some huge impact on the election outcome...amazing double-think there...

[baldguy]

36. Therefore Clinton is untrustworthy - we get it. Sanders supporters have been shoveling it for a year

Only it still completely follows the GOP/Russian narrative, and has nothing to do with the reality of the situation, and still doesn't address asuhornets' or the OP's points.

[BobbyDrake]

30. When you say "honest broker," are you really referring to the person

from the Democratic Primary who repeatedly lied about when he'd release his taxes? And who ultimately never did release them, despite all of his many and repeated promises to do so?

Perhaps your definition of "honest" is also outside of the mainstream?

[TCJ70]

32. I've always thought he should have released his tax returns...

...even though I doubt there is anything interesting to see. It's custom. Not required, but a show of transparency that should be respected. If that's your only beef with the "honest broker" comment, it's pretty weak, though...

[BobbyDrake]

39. He said he would release them, repeatedly, and then ran out the clock.

That's not "honest" by any definition of the word with which I'm familiar.

[bettyellen]

42. That chair was about to be thrown by a drunk bro and that whole incident was ugly --

people surging at the barricades in a threatening manner. As well as the shouts of English!! And worse, bitch. Saw that all with my own eyes.

Sorry but you guys had some ugly disrupters who were obviously never Dems and you guys let them put on a show for the media. The antics at the DNC? Embarrassing and about three months past their sell date.

[TCJ70]

45. Saw it with your own eyes?

You were there? A chair was lifted, but about to be thrown? There has not been one shred of verified evidence for thrown chairs or people shouting English only.

[markpkessinger]

50. That may be true, but here's the thing . . .

. . . Neither a Democrat nor a Republican can win an election by appealing only to members of his or her respective party. They must draw significantly from unaffiliated voters in order to win. Bernie clearly had the ability to do that. Hillary never had any appeal outside of the party.

[asuhornets]

74. That is not true. Bernie did not appeal to African-Americans or Latinos voters. In both cases

Hillary receive more votes than Bernie and trump..

[grossproffit]

15. Great OP. I won't forgive these f'ers for helping elect Trump. We're posting w/ some* of them now.

*pinebaggers = jack pine radicals.

Some of them are on record over there stating that they were voting for Trump. They're selfish, evil maggots.

[liquid diamond]

19. They are worse

than trump supporters. At least those assholes are upfront about who they are. They don't pretend to embrace liberal values only to help elect a right wing shithead.

[TrekLuver]

22. I can't even read that trash. They think they are so high and mighty over there.

They are really a very hateful bunch....just like their counterparts. Full of vitriol ...ALL THE TIME!!!

[el_bryanto]

18. Do you think there is any legitimate reason why a liberal would not have wanted

to support Hillary Clinton?

Bryant

[Crunchy Frog]

20. You do know that the Hillary supporters did exactly the same thing in 2008

don't you? I'm not saying that all of them did, but a sizeable chunk. Remember the PUMAS? Obama was a good enough candidate and campaigner that he still won handily, in spite of their negativity, lack of support, and lack of votes (even some of them voting for the Repugs). I don't think that this is a left/right/center thing. I think it's just bad blood over one's preferred candidate not being handed the nomination on a silver platter.

With a really good candidate (Obama) a strong primary challenge will only make them better.

If the party decides to veer sharply to the right with the next candidate, there will be a loss of some liberal and leftist voters. Their best bet is to accept that political reality, and incorporate it into the campaign calculations, or we can expect to lose again.

You'll never win by simply acting like you're entitled to everyone's vote. Obama certainly didn't.

Disclaimer: I was neutral during the primaries. Post election, I think I'm retroactively gravitating towards the Bernie Sanders camp.

[Pholus]

27. Exactly. The OP would do well to think about this.

[TrekLuver]

21. The fringe left needs to understand that the country is certainly not ready for very progressive

ideas....they must be realistic! I mean I would think that's pretty obvious...even outside of this election.

[liquid diamond]

53. The election

of trump proves that.

[TSIAS]

59. The "fringe left"

We were for gay marriage when everyone dismissed us as "wanting a pony". We were against the Iraq War when the centrists thought it was the best idea since sliced bread.

[Nictuku]

62. Yea, who needs clean air/water, good education, saftey nets for our elders?

/sarcasm off

[kentuck]

23. Seriously?

You think Hillary would have gotten 65 million votes without Bernie supporters?

[Coventina]

26. If you think Bernie and his supporters are "the fringe left"......

You need to do a lot more study and research about politics.

[DonViejo]

28. Exactly. The "fringe left", e.g., Trotskyites, don't believe in elections and therefore do

not vote. They do a lot of squawking but don't participate in elections.

[Coventina]

49. I guess "The Nation" is fringe left now.

Seeing as how they endorsed Bernie and all.

[DonViejo]

54. What? Did I say that or, even imply that?...

What are you talking about?

[Coventina]

56. Sorry! I was actually agreeing with you! About the silliness of defining "fringe left" as

anyone who supported Bernie.

It's all good!!

[DonViejo]

63. Ah! We're in agreement...

I keep seeing Sanders supporters referred to as fringe left; I believe the folks that do that would run with their hair on fire if they met and actually spoke with folks on the fringe left, e.g., Trotskyites, members of the Spartacus League or INCAR (International Committee Against Racism) Btw, INCAR is credited with the destruction of SDS.

[Coventina]

67. Agree completely. Anyone who thinks Bernie or his supporters are "fringe left" is either vastly

ignorant or is adopting that meme from the GOP.

[Orsino]

29. I guess this is the new framing for the same old made-up Bernie-bashing.

Had plenty already, thanks.

[Yurovsky]

34. This post might be the biggest steaming pile of BS ever deposited on DU...

we are not "fringe". We are the very heart and soul of this party. We are the direction in which the party has been moving for nearly 100 years. And despite the fact that nearly HALF the party preferred Bernie in the primaries, the overwhelming majority of us voted for HRC in the GE, rather than Jill Stein. We did what we could... don't try to pin HRC's loss on us.

And the OP still wishes to scold and demean the progressive wing of the Democratic Party? Yeah, that will strengthen the party, taking shots at the people who actually do most of the heavy lifting for progressive causes. If you want to be a corporate-sponsored party that gives nominal support to progressive social positions like gay marriage or reproductive rights, you're probably much closer aligned to Northern Republicans than you are to the heart and soul of the Democratic Party. Perhaps you need some time to reflect upon your core values and determine if the "fringe" is just too damn "fringe-y" for you, because WE ARE NOT GOING AWAY. We will continue to consolidate our control over the party at all levels, so fighting progressives within the party is not going to end well for the establishment milqtoast centrist 3rd-way types.

And besides, your peeps did such a GREAT JOB running against the biggest piece of shit the GOP ever crapped out of their convention. Do you really think we should listen to the folks who fucked this up? I sure as hell don't. We are on a leftward course. Don't try to yank the wheel back to the right, you'll only run the ship aground.

[BobbyDrake]

40. The "heart and soul" of a party doesn't throw a tantrum and threaten to go independent

just because they lost one primary. Clinton's voters are the Democratic base, not Bernie's. Our support for the party is reliable, not emotional.

ETA: And the side who deployed "neoliberals" and "corporate Democrats" during the primary doesn't get to whine now about bashing. Seems they can dish it, but not take it, huh?

[Arazi]

37. Millennials overwhelmingly identify as Independent

Bernie Sanders reached them. Even if they don't see themselves as Democrats, they were prepared to vote Dem which will only help us going forward.

These aren't "fringe left".

These are the future, our future. The fact is the Democratic party is shrinking and we need to reach "new" voters.

I realize this isn't a solution, just some thoughts.

Furthermore, I completely disagree with your evaluation of Bernie Sanders’s role in the primary. Just like Obama had to win over the PUMAs in 2008, it was Hillary's job to win over the BOBs. If you can't even admit that fact - that the candidates job is to win over voters, not just expect and demand voter fealty - then you're never going to get solutions because you're seeing every suggestion thru a flawed lens.

[BobbyDrake]

41. The difference there is that when Obama reached out to Clinton's voters, we listened.

The people who closed their minds to anything but Bernie don't get to complain that they weren't courted enough, when no amount of courting at all would have reached them anyway.

ETA: there is a prominent member of the Bernie wing of the party who routinely goes around DU saying what Clinton should have said to win him over. Skinner embarrassed the shit out of him when he posted a suggestion about what Clinton should have said, and the Berniecrat said, "Yeah, that's the stuff!" only to have Skinner turn around and reveal the text was from Clinton's convention speech. So the Berniecrat had to move the goalposts and say, "Well, she didn't say it enough then," failing to realize how thoroughly he was exposed for what he really is.

[bettyellen]

43. Yep- such was the misogyny that her policies and statements are totally unknown to most of those who

Villify her here. Have seen it time and time again.
All this energy to tear her down and they did not even know who she was. Or what she said and did.

[Arazi]

44. Then prepare to not gain them as Democratic voters

Hillary failed to reach them. Period.

You keep blaming them - yeah that's somehow going to persuade them to like us lol. Independent voters don't owe any candidate their vote. They just don't. Shaking your fist at them and hollering about how they didn't fall in line behind Hillary is ridiculous (and counterproductive at this point imo)

How WE reach them going forward is what we need to figure out because the Independent block of voters is closing in on 50% of the electorate

[BobbyDrake]

51. "You keep blaming them - yeah that's somehow going to persuade them to like us lol"

The side who began the primary by calling anyone not for Bernie a "neoliberal corporate shill" doesn't get to lecture anyone else about positive outreach.

[Arazi]

55. Ah, ok. I get it. You're not really interested in dialogue

Good luck. There's a reason Schumer appointed Bernie, an Independent, for that outreach. We'd be smart to think about that

[BobbyDrake]

61. Right, because exposing how progressives don't even practice the outreach they preach

must not be the kind of dialogue that you want to face then. Hardly surprising.

Good luck trying to persuade more Democrats to support your candidates by insulting their core values and personalities!

[Arazi]

69. Whatever

It's a stupid tactic to keep rehashing the primaries at this point, especially as Bernie has been chosen by the Dem leadership for outreach, and 2018 is coming fast and we need those voters.

Carry on fighting tho. I'm not interested

[BobbyDrake]

70. Yea, the repeat replies really do a good job conveying your disinterest.

[Garrett78]

47. The vast majority of "independents" are party loyalists who just like the term "independent."

Numerous studies confirm that most "independents" are actually very partisan. That said, those in their late teens and early twenties tend to have less loyalty toward a particular party, and it so happens that's a large bloc of the electorate at this time. But, as people get into their late twenties, they tend to become more loyal toward a party.

[Arazi]

52. Yup, and we want them to join us

That seems to be part of what the OP is asking imo.

They're going to settle into a party. Soon. Right now there's a large number of Dems and Dem leaning Indies who we need to choose us. They may very well have been Bernie supporters or so apathetic about Hillary they stayed home. At this point tho, going forward we need to get them to join us.

How? Well, I would recommend we don't start by telling them they suck

[Garrett78]

64. My point, though, is you're making too much of the whole "independent" thing.

Again, most "independents" are partisans (i.e. loyal to a particular party) who simply like the term "independent."

But of course it's not a good idea to suggest young people suck.

While the Clinton campaign clearly made tactical errors, the result was less about the message and more about the messenger (not to mention the FBI, the Shelby County v. Holder decision, etc.). Clinton's politics aren't really any different than Obama's, but Obama was young and new. Clinton was victimized by 25+ years of vicious slander, which motivated the opposition and probably somewhat suppressed the youth vote.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

48. young people often identify as idependent before they pick a party

millennials are not as special as we seem to pretend they are.

[Arazi]

57. Yup and we want them to pick us

So yeah, they are special if we want them as long term party members going forward.

So we can't/won't pick off moderate Repugs. I think seeking new voters who can become reliable Dems is wise

[La Lioness Priyanka]

60. people become reliable dems when they live through a GOP administration

many of the people who voted for stein/johnson, will stop saying trite things like 'R and D are just the same. I won't vote for lesser of evils' etc. when they actually experience GOP rule.

[Arazi]

65. Maybe. But outreach will also work

There are more than a few Boomers who lived thru Reagan who are tge most enthusiastic Republican voters now.

People vote against their best interest all the time

[La Lioness Priyanka]

68. there is a reason third party votes are highest after 2 consecutive dem terms

and that is young people do not remember an actual republican president

[Arazi]

72. That's not true.Iirc, 2000 had some small % of 3rd Party votes

4% iirc, same as this year.

2008 had @ 2% Third Party voters following Ws two terms

[tonedevil]

71. You are expecting them...

to fall in line? That's been working out real well lately.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

73. i am expecting them to realize how wrong they are. nt

[tonedevil]

75. Good luck with that /nt

[Demsrule86]

82. If they remain 'independent' than they will reap the negative nconsequences ...

at some point, they will learn. You have to have loyalty to one of our two parties...it is the only way to advance you ideas.

[immoderate]

58. I think Democrats should stop running 'Republican Lite' candidates.

No more Reaganites for president.

--imm

[Demsrule86]

79. If you are calling HIllary a Reaganite...you have crossed the line in think.

[Joe941]

76. Bernie would have beat Trump.

The real problem is Bernie was cheated out of the primaries.

[Demsrule86]

80. Bernie was not cheat out of anything...he did not get enough people to vote for him...so stop saying

that. It is untrue...and an attack on Democrats.

[Joe941]

83. The media shares a huge blame in that.

[Demsrule86]

91. Does it matter...it was not cheating is the point...the idea that the DNC

rigged the election which they did not...is bad for the Party.

[NewJeffCT]

84. I liked Bernie a lot, but

I don't think he would have held up well in the general. He was never really attacked for some of his past statements or positions ("I'll raise taxes on everybody" or his honeymoon in the Soviet Union, etc) - once those got out to the general electorate, we'd have been looking at a Dukakis/Willie Horton moment, only amplified by Fox News, CNN, RW talk radio and so on and so forth and it would have been a McGovern or Mondale type loss.

[Demsrule86]

90. He would have lost....there was a reason they wanted him.

[azmom]

98. That's what we thought about Trump.

There was a reason we wanted him.

[BainsBane]

87. And right there is the problem

That you continue to believe he was cheated with absolutely no evidence. It is comments that yours that demonstrate how his rhetoric about rigged elections ultimately benefited Donald Trump. And of course Trump picked up on that very same rhetoric.

Bernie got 3.8 million few votes. He trailed in the polls. There is absolutely no evidence that he was "cheated." Now I understand certain segments of the population believe they have a birthright to rule over the rest of us, but that's not how it works. Candidates must EARN votes, and Bernie couldn't pull it off.

[TeeYiYi]

81. Seriously, Melania...

...did you write that yourself?

TeeYiYi (7,950 posts)

83. Hillary's supporters need to examine...

...the part they played in her loss and consider what might have been done differently to change the outcome.

Overly confident after winning the Primary, Hillary's campaign lost sight of the goal. Her supporters became openly hostile toward Bernie's supporters and condescendingly dismissed the need for their votes; creating an irreparable chasm in the party.

Where they should've been embracing and converting displaced Bernie democrats, they chose, instead, to vilify and alienate them. That failure to heal the deeply fractured Democratic base, led to apathy and low voter turnout. Too many democrats decided to stay home or vote third party.

'A house divided against itself, cannot stand.'

That's the difference between previous elections and this one. Obama's supporters didn't torch the losing team and burn the house down. They quickly mended fences, merged teams and worked together to put a Democrat back into the White House.

Complacency cost Hillary the election.

TYY

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2648244

Anything fresh to add?... I mean, on top of jacking my post, twisting it fit your narrative and presenting it as an original thought process...

TYY

[rainy]

93. What a joke the "fringe" left

You mean the left? This country has moved so far right, our glorious democrats keep aiding in the drift to the right, that there is no left group with any power to fight the monied interests etc... The left, not fringe at all, has no representation or power. When Democrats stop being right of center and we have the power to stop a Trump presidency then we can have a real conservation about who abandoned who.

[Rex]

97. Centrists are a poison to the Democratic Party.

It is quite obvious by now.

[bowens43]

95. You can stop this from happening in the future

by not nominating someone as unlikeable as hillary. There was never a chance for her to win, but if by some miracle she could have pulled it off it would have been 4 years of deadlock.

she was a terrible choice, granted not as bad as trunp (I did vote for her of course) but still a terrible choice.

As soon as you said 'fringe left' you alienate the people you needed the most......

[Rex]

96. So HRC lost the popular vote? I missed that part.

Even without the group you hate so much, she still won the PV...but I guess facts don't matter to those that hate on their own party.

What a winning strategy.