2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumCan Bernie Sanders Win the Love of a Party He Scorns?
By MICHAEL KRUSE and MANU RAJU
August 10, 2015
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-2016-democrats-121181.html#ixzz3jBORfYo7
"You don’t change the system from within the Democratic Party.”
“My own feeling is that the Democratic Party is ideologically bankrupt.”
“We have to ask ourselves, ‘Why should we work within the Democratic Party if we don’t agree with anything the Democratic Party says?’”
Bernie Sanders, everybody—the same Bernie Sanders who is running to become the Democratic Party’s candidate for president of the United States.
The most surprising thing about the independent Vermont senator’s surprisingly successful campaign so far is not that he’s doing it as a self-described democratic socialist. It’s that he’s seeking the nomination of a party he caucuses with in the Senate but is not a part of, isn’t a registered member of and has never been a registered member of—a party he’s spent his 40-year career beating at the polls and battering in the press.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-2016-democrats-121181.html#ixzz3jBPCcvkJ
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)If I understand the rules in the Granite State, a candidate will not qualify and may not be added to the ballot as a Democrat or Republican if said candidate is not a registered member of that Party.
And although the New Hampshire Democratic Party has said that they've accepted Bernie Sanders (I) as a Democratic contender, there is a process that he has to go through and the N.H. SoS, William Gardner, has not committed to putting Sanders on the ballot just yet.
The process:
The Sanders campaign will file a declaration of candidacy — which will declare his registration with the Democratic Party in the state — to the New Hampshire Secretary of State’s office, which is tasked with certifying his candidacy. New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner has not committed to putting Sanders on the ballot, previously citing that Sanders isn’t yet a registered Democrat.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bernie-sanders-battle-to-get-on-the-new-hampshire-ballot-119251.html
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)You always hear these "technicality" stories before elections, and they always fade into nothingness.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)John Poet
(2,510 posts)a good-sized portion of it...
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)
Fearless
(18,421 posts)Nice try though.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)identification. per polls it is not a huge percentage of identified dems, anyway. he keeps addressing repugs in his crowd by name, such as.... and republicans, lets set those wedge issues to the side and discuss your family.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)It's not about party, it's about livelihood. If there are Republicans voting for Bernie, I welcome them with open arms. I would be more than happy to bring them into the fold. It isn't through seclusion from them that we win, but by exposing them to liberal points of view. It is, for instance, the exact reason why the LGBT movement in the US has been so successful. If you know one, and care about one, then you have a vested interest in their livelihood. It's easy to push away those who we disagree with and dismiss them. We win when we model the behaviors we believe in and show them the benefits of being liberal. If someone wants to join us in fixing this nation then they should be allowed to. It will only help us all in the long run.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)i do understand sanders intent and how he is running his campaign and his focus. i get it. i get the message across the nation, no party.
i do not agree with him, .... well. i do not disagree. actually what he says i agree. but i do not agree with the priority structure. and i do feel that will follow him into the whitehouse.
here is kinda a fun thing. if sanders wins? though he is not the one i am supporting for my very real reasons, it will be fun to watch what he does in the whitehouse, so not like i will become bummed or anything.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)He's speaking to the LEFT of Hillary and O'Malley. It's attracting conservatives, which you've give no data showing, and this is a problem?
If conservatives want to vote for the most liberal candidate in the race, so be it. Us liberals will vote as well. And then we win. And we get Bernie-freaking-Sanders in the White House and not a third way hack or a Republican.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)that both of them are right there with sanders on most all of it. and the parts that they are not right there, they have their own ways addressing the issues, which i probably agree will be more doable.
i feel i will get more out of the other two. i feel i will get most out of omalley
and no, ... stating at a rally that we can applaud our advances in racism, womens issues and gays issues, now lets put that aside, republicans, and let look at your family and how they are doing, .... simply does not work for me.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)and no, ... stating at a rally that we can applaud our advances in racism, womens issues and gays issues, now lets put that aside, republicans, and let look at your family and how they are doing, .... simply does not work for me.
It is quite literally untrue.
Response to seabeyond (Reply #14)
Name removed Message auto-removed
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)so to heck with reality.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Assuming one ever took place.
It's hilarious that a politician that DU pretty much universally approved of before he mentioned the possibility of running for President is now being smeared with such pathetic eagerness.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)i would like to keep him and his voice in the senate. i even like and respect the man.
third. this is fact, and fact is not a smear. i have no problem he made this deal. he is a politician. he wanted to win. they make deals
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)You say Sanders made a "deal" as if something underhanded and shameful had taken place, something voters would disapprove of and need to know about, yet fail to indicate why this "deal" was a bad thing? Yeah, that's an attempt to throw shade.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)i dont have the time. nor inclination. though i have stated it thru out this thread, one way or another.
i am not a fan of hypocrisy. and fact does not outrage me.
i have no problem with snaders making a deal. he is a politician that wanted to win. he made a deal with the democratic party. do not put in a viable candidate, manipulating the election and denying dems a democratic candidate to vote for, and he would use his vote to side with dems.
works all the way around.
a political deal, from a man that wanted to win, a party that wanted his vote.
no more or less
Response to seabeyond (Reply #62)
Name removed Message auto-removed
MADem
(135,425 posts)By "caucus with the Democrats" Sanders agrees to vote WITH the Democrats on all procedural matters--that's stuff that involves when votes are taken, basic Senate housekeeping, stuff like that--if Reid says he wants to do this or that thing PROCEDURALLY, Bernie has promised to go along with us. For this, he gets a ranking committee seat.
As far as votes go, votes on laws, I mean, his vote is his own. He is not bound to vote with the Democrats.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)turns out "the party" ain't so popular, while not being a tool of the corporate kleptocracy is.
Apparently applies to both parties.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)This is the Democratic Underground - if you can't stand "the party" why don't you go take up on a website devoted whatever ideology it is you subscribe to?
daybranch
(1,309 posts)Bernie is us. Hillary is not.
Democrats were supposed to be the party that included ideals espoused by Franklin Roosevelt. It lost its way, with the Clinton 3rd way democrats. It is returning to the ideals espoused by Roosevelt. These are the same ideals espoused by Bernie. Bernie is increasing democratic party votes where ever he goes. His complaints about the democratic party being a party of no ideas, sounds right to me. I am so happy Bernie stood up for the party of Roosevelt.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)Show me one single policy of Bernie Sanders that is in line with FDR.
How about Kennedy?
Sanders is farther left and more radical than either of those Democrats (you know actual Democrats, not johnny come lately after 50 years of talking trash about Democrats) or the caricatures of them created by the right.
To this very day he is Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
Response to Indydem (Reply #90)
Name removed Message auto-removed
NRaleighLiberal
(60,014 posts)Indydem
(2,642 posts)If he wins the nomination he will get clobbered in the general.
If he loses the nomination he has poisoned a lot of minds we need to be working for the eventual candidate - people who have now called Clinton "the lessor of two evils" (indicating she is evil).
We need everyone to be working for the eventual nominee. Once these partisan divisions within the party are established, its going to be damn hard to undo the hurt caused by the rhetoric and division.
frylock
(34,825 posts)in this election cycle, that he goes on to lose the GE. The ONLY way that happens is if PUMAs stay home.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)voters away from Hillary Clinton.
Currently, she enjoys 70-80% support among African-Americans and 73% among Latinos. In 2012, President Obama lost the White vote to Romney, but he still won his re-election because of the Black, Latino, and Asian vote, becoming the next Democratic president to win both of his elections with over 51% of the popular vote since FDR.
You wouldn't have thought that possible if you relied solely on Democratic Underground for your information. Here, it was as if President Obama was Satan incarnate.
I don't think its probable that Senator Sanders can take that make-or-break PoC support from Hillary Clinton. I really don't.
Alittleliberal
(528 posts)We don't like the current crop of morally bankrupt and corrupt sociopaths who seem to be controlling it. THIS is what politics is about. We are fighting for the soul of the Democratic party. We have real concerns about the direction the party is heading and since we are just as an important part of this party as everyone else is we feel like we have a right to criticize the things and people we believe are wrong and support the things and people we feel are correct. The party itself isn't the problem. The problem is our politicians lie to us to get us elected and then flee to the center at the request of their donors. Most of us here have been paying attention for a long time and we see what is happening. We are fighting global corporate takeover and supporting a candidate who cares about the people. Fascism never happens overnight. It creeps in slowly until it's too late to be stopped. It's not the party. It's the cancer inside the party.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)"The problem is our politicians lie to us to get us elected and then flee to the center at the request of their donors."
Or maybe because most of the country is center, that's where you can get things done.
You think Bernie Sanders is going to get republicans to vote for a 90% tax bracket?
You think Sanders is going to get republicans to vote for free college tuition?
Nope.
But maybe, just maybe, if you have a more traditionally Democratic approach, you can bend the curve towards justice.
Bernie Sanders is toxic to the party. Period.
Alittleliberal
(528 posts)Center polices make business the most money while keeping people happy enough to still go to work. Compromise is a valuable political tool but not when one party starts far right and the other starts center right. The compromise ends up solidly in the right almost always. I don't think republicans are going to support anything any democrat supports unless like the TPP it makes rich people richer and screws the populace. Naive is thinking a politician that gets corporate money will do anything except support the corporate powers that be.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Next time I'll try to note the fact that our party leadership is crap, that as a political party we suck, that our so-called leaders have sold out and sold us out over and over and over again in words that don't cause you such pain.
Perhaps Howard Dean stated it the best way possible, to paraphrase: "Bernie Sanders represents the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party".
Indydem
(2,642 posts)Bernie Sanders isn't a Democrat.
He's said a truckload of nasty things about the Democratic Party over the last 50 years.
He's never fundraiser for the DNC or any other party apparatus.
He only started caucusing with the Democrats when it looks like he would face a strong opponent in Vermont.
He is not now, nor has he ever been, a Democrat.
So perhaps the quote should have been: "Bernie Sanders represents the not-a-democrat wing of the Democratic Party."
He's running for president on the Democratic ticket because it is politically expedient for him to utilize the party infrastructure he has spent his whole
life attacking and not paying for, rather than try to develop said infrastructure as a Democratic Socialist or a Vermont Progressive or a Liberty Union- whatever it is that he's calling himself that is clearly not a Democrat.
dflprincess
(28,079 posts)and I hold a local party office. I don't know anyone at the grassroots level who isn't fed up with the DNC.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)
SMC22307
(8,090 posts)• Interacting with friendly, like-minded people;
• Sharing news and information, free from the corporate media filter;
• Participating in lively, thought-provoking discussions;
• Helping elect more Democrats to political office at all levels of American government; and
• Having fun!
Bernie's running as a Dem. What's the problem?
Indydem
(2,642 posts)I guess if Trump can't get traction as a republican, all he has to do is say "oh wait, I'm actually a Democrat."
That's what is happening here. Just from the other side of the political spectrum.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)We aren't talking about other candidates, we are talking about Sanders since he was brought up.
SMC22307
(8,090 posts)I don't know what the official policy was from up on high, but I seem to recall reading threads about it after-the-fact. Crist was supported over the Democrat Meek. Wait, here's one:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9410939#9412351
And there's a colossal difference between Trump and the Democrat-caucusing Sanders, so that was a pretty lame comparison.
DemByDefault
(40 posts)daybranch
(1,309 posts)nuff said.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)He might.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)oh my stars!
SMC22307
(8,090 posts)(Sorry, Congreve.)
The first I saw it was in a thread yesterday by MaggieD. I'm sure we'll be seeing *much* more of it...
artislife
(9,497 posts)trash a stupid thread. This one is in good hands with the replies!
iemitsu
(3,888 posts)are there only by default.
The lesser of two evils.
I can see folk, who feel this way, embracing someone, who clearly feels the same.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)They support Hillary Clinton (I'm assuming you're referring to her as one of the two evils) by huge margins.
Blacks: 70-80% - and with Bernie Sanders supporters appearing to only see #BlackLivesMatter through the prism of White eyes, that percentage will only rise.
Latinos: 73% (according to a Univision poll) support Hillary Clinton. I suspect that percentage will rise once they discover that Bernie Sanders voted against the 2007 comprehensive immigration reform bill that had a chance of passing and signed into law under G.W. Bush and with Democratic majorities in both Senate and House. Sure, he voted FOR the 2013 immigration reform act (when Republicans regained majorities in both Senate and House), but that will make him appear disingenuous since his reason for voting against the 2007 Immigration bill was language about some parts in the bill pertaining to guest workers, and yet that language was in the 2013 comprehensive immigration bill, as well. So why the change of heart?
The problem for Sanders was a guest-worker program that some immigration advocates and Democratic lawmakers begrudgingly accepted as part of a comprehensive deal — but was abhorred by labor unions and their allies on Capitol Hill.
“What concerns me are provisions in the bill that would bring low-wage workers into this country in order to depress the already declining wages of American workers,” Sanders said in May 2007. “With poverty increasing and the middle-class shrinking, we must not force American workers into even more economic distress.”
The guest-worker program proposed in the 2007 bill would bring in foreign workers for two years at a time, but force them to leave the United States for a year in between each renewal. It also offered few protections for those workers, labor advocates said.
***snip***
“Sanders was very active in trying to reduce the guest-worker parts of the ‘07 bill,” said Roy Beck, the executive director of Numbers USA, a group that calls for stricter immigration laws. “It was remarkable that Sanders went along with that in 2013.”
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bernie-sanders-and-immigration-its-complicated-119190.html
JI7
(89,250 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)it is shit like this, looking in his history and seeing the reality of sanders, the politician, that makes me challenge his 'purity' that we are suppose to blindly accept.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Thanks sea.
Gotta run to work, will talk to you later.
ismnotwasm
(41,986 posts)This man was singularly unimpressed by Sanders.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)considering exactly what he was saying, to gain their respect, when they respect no dem, or dem causes. the more i processed what he was actually saying and to who, i started researching.
it is impressive his unique way, and stalwart mentality toward a handful of issues for 40 fuggin' years. he certainly does it his way. and he does it as a politician. i lost any rosy glasses on that one.
i can respect his journey thru politics. but.... yes. it made me much less impressed.
DemByDefault
(40 posts)What, like the Iraq war, deregulation, gutting social security and Medicare? If those are Democratic party 'causes' then count me out!
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)it is such a weak outrage.
to totally ignore 2002 - 2004 and what was happening, how and why it was happening. i think to sit in 2015 and listen to duers bring up the iraq vote with such ire as shallow.
circumstance and the time has a lot ot do with this issue and should not be ignored. but it is.
you want black and white, go for it. i do not live in that world, nor waste my time in it. totally unproductive.
Response to seabeyond (Reply #47)
Name removed Message auto-removed
cali
(114,904 posts)of vermont dems. Hill's record? Her judgment sucks, and she's dishonest.
ismnotwasm
(41,986 posts)Wow. This is kind of fun
MuseRider
(34,111 posts)is not purity to the Democratic Party. This has long been known. Apparently many people are tired of the way the Democratic party has been run. There are good Democrats, nobody is saying differently but the party is not what it used to be and many of us would like to see it return to it's vibrant roots. There is nothing that Bernie Sanders is running on that would not have been included in the Democratic Party of old (not that old, I remember them being like that). He was however not a member of the party back then for his own reasons.
The bottom line is the DNC was OK letting him in. The Democrats in the House and Senate were OK working with him. He helped them, they helped him. The DNC is making money with his picture on their page and he gets to run as a Democrat while qualifying it as a Democratic Socialist. You don't like it? Take it up with the DNC and DWS. He asked and they answered. It must be OK then since they are the TRUE Democrats. Right? RIGHT?
I really have not seen "purity" used by anyone who is a Bernie supporter. I could be wrong I don't hang out here a lot anymore, more now but not for a long while. I see consistency used. Still it smacks of the same things we heard when Dennis Kucinich was running. Somehow "purity" is a horrible thing. Kinda like a "pony" or "crazy nut job" or maybe "corporatist"?
PS to someone above, the Democratic part of the group Democratic Socialist has nothing to do with the Democratic party so not he is not just using their name. Good grief.
sea! I won't be back for a bit so if you answer I can't reply for a while. Have a great day, I am still so happy you are back.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)and the rest of it.
to me, making a deal with the democratic party in vermont not to put up a viable candidate for his vote is pure politics. i can understand and accept in my pragmatic manner. but do not tell me he is not a politician like every other politician, is my point.
when mayor. he worked and sided with commerce and police.
he did what mayors do.
i listen to the fable that is created of him, but when i look at the man and his history, i merely see a man. a good man. an interesting man. but a man. a politician.
MuseRider
(34,111 posts)ignore those who say otherwise. They are either blinded (and you will find tons of those people on all sides) or they are immature looking for a rock star.
Most of us know exactly who he is. In so knowing we can trust in his consistency. I do not agree with him 100% I do not agree with HRC 20% there is the difference. O'Malley I am only learning and actually only lukewarm.
We are set up to fight over these things, it is dumb actually because we will all go where we feel we need to be. I feel no need to shield Bernie or myself for wanting him to succeed and I don't think he is pure or perfect, I would go to church and listen to Jesus stories if I needed that.
Ignore the people who rally around to shield them all from those who don't like them. Posts like this OP? Crap, sheer crap put out to start fights. It is stupid, unproductive flame bait and I see good people doing this all the time. It is truly beneath them.
I try to ignore those who create the shields and the stories and feel much better. You will not change them like this. Don't buy the fables or the coronations etc. they are not going to move.
You kept up while on your "vacation" so you must have seen the inane things said that sacrificed the dignity, and the membership, of good people in order to keep their candidate safe from those who would muddy their reputations. I don't know about you but I sure can't keep this up much longer. I would love to see people talk about actual things rather than trying to bully and bash other posters around under the guise of being political.
Qutzupalotl
(14,313 posts)How can I trust anything else you have to say?
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Qutzupalotl
(14,313 posts)anacodainfl
(13 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)i prefer the good bad and ugly of our politicians and go from there.
anacodainfl
(13 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)and how sanders does not... ergo why we need him, i call out the inconsistency. i am well aware that life, politics, interaction, work, relationship, is all in the compromise.
just do not be a hypocrite. that one, i do not do, and oh.... consistently call out.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)...while I was at work, sea. You've been great.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)you said that "in 1990 to win, he made a deal with dems for his vote"
what was Bernie's part of the deal? To vote with the Democrats, which he
would anyway since he was totally opposed to the Republicans?
this is such a weak criticism.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)the facts. works for me. i do not sit in outrage over political negotiations and deals.
win win win
all you accomplished was having me waste my time reiterating what i have already said.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)I don't see a deal.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)He beat the Dem in the race. In the year 1990 and 1992, he won his house seat beating the Dems in those races, also.
So, he won 6 elections as an Independent.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)splitting the dem vote and repug winning, hence making the deal. i said viable dem.
“Bernie – out of office for the first time in eight years – went to the Kennedy School at Harvard for six months and came back with a new relationship with the state’s Democrats. The Vermont Democratic Party leadership has allowed no authorized candidate to run against Bernie in 1990 (or since) and in return, Bernie has repeatedly blocked third party building. His closet party, the Democrats, are very worried about a left 3rd party forming in Vermont. In the last two elections, Sanders has prevented Progressives in his machine from running against Howard Dean, our conservative Democratic Governor who was ahead of Gingrich in the attack on welfare.”
“The unauthorized Democratic candidate in 1990, Delores Sandoval, an African American faculty member at the University of Vermont, was amazed that the official party treated her as a nonperson and Bernie kept outflanking her to her right. She opposed the Gulf build-up, Bernie supported it. She supported decriminalization of drug use and Bernie defended the war on drugs, and so on…”
“After being safely elected in November of 1990, Bernie continued to support the buildup while seeking membership in the Democratic Congressional Caucus – with the enthusiastic support of the Vermont Democratic Party leadership. But, the national Democratic Party blew him off, so he finally voted against the war and returned home – and as the war began – belatedly claimed to be the leader of the anti-war movement in Vermont.”
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/07/21/bernie-out-of-the-closet-sanders-longstanding-deal-with-the-democrats/
Once ensconced in Washington as a member of the House and Senate, he abandoned his principled opposition to the two-party system. As Vermont Democrat Howard Dean--a former candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination himself--stated, "He is basically a liberal Democrat, and he is a Democrat at that--he runs as an Independent because he doesn't like the structure and money that gets involved...The bottom line is that Bernie Sanders votes with the Democrats 98 percent of the time."
Since he made his arrangement with the Democrats, Sanders has uncritically supported them in Vermont elections. As a result, when his ally, Gov. Peter Shumlin, declared war on state workers, Sanders didn't even issue a statement in opposition. His silence led many in Vermont to ask: "Where's Bernie?"
http://socialistworker.org/2015/05/05/problem-bernie-sanders
Their big guns stayed out of the way, apparently assured that Sanders was close enough to being a Democrat already. With the help of the National Rifle Association, which hated the Republican incumbent, Sanders won.
His association with Democrats continued to pay off.
By 1991, Sanders — although still officially an independent — was part of the Democratic caucus in Congress, climbing the party’s seniority ladder. He has not faced a serious challenge from a Democrat in all the elections since.
“Why would you run against him, you know what I mean?” said Jeff Weaver, a longtime Sanders staffer and current campaign manager. For Democratic leaders in Congress, he said, Sanders “was a more reliable vote than a lot of other people down there who had a ‘D’ after their name.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bernie-sanders-says-hes-a-socialist-his-old-socialist-buddies-say-not-so-much/2015/07/25/a3948256-3145-11e5-97ae-30a30cca95d7_story.html
some really interesting articles, besides what i excerpt. i have had a blast reading about sanders history that is very public. there is not a single thing that makes me dislike the man, or think less of him. whether i agree with his position and how he is running his campaign or not. i applaud 4 decades of his consistency. he is clear and articulate about his position, what he thinks and how he feels we should move forward. and i do not have an issue with him being a politician, seeing how he is a politician and he wants to win. it was a win win win all around. i always strive for win win win.
ismnotwasm
(41,986 posts)Given his shout out to "not just registered Dems"--I get that he trying to be inclusive, but possibly at the cost of full party support. So many in congress have already endorsed Hillary
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)he is an independent and he is after all the middle class and working class.
that would be the middle and working class repug, teabaggers, populist, libertarian, independent and dem.
MuseRider
(34,111 posts)he has said he does not want to run independent because he does not want to be a spoiler. If he loses the primary he has pledged his support to the nominee. He will be under a lot of pressure to run independent but I think he will hold true to this. I hope so anyway. It would seem very out of character for him not to do what he said he was going to do.
I wonder if this has anything to do with the DNC letting him run as a dem?
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)4 decade position on economic equality and how he feels he needs to run his campaign. whether i agree or not, i do respect him for these things.
frylock
(34,825 posts)and that's who he is "scorning".
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)what is left of the democratic party?
an independent party of teabaggers, populist, repugs, independents, libertarians, dems
on a democratic board, for our democratic primary.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)It is political suicide to "scorn" them.
Hillary Clinton has been endorsed by 29 Dem Senators, 92+ Dem House Reps, and 7 Dem governors.
Bernie Sanders has received ZERO endorsements.
What is the significance of this?
From FiveThirtyEight:
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-endorsement-primary/
frylock
(34,825 posts)and he is not going to get any endorsements from establishment Dems. That's what Clinton's little come to Jesus meeting was all about. I don't think it's really going to have much influence on first-time voters, indies, or disenchanted republicans in the least. If you're suggesting that jilted Dems are going to go full-blown PUMA after Sanders wins the nom, that's another topic entirely.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)But the significance of 'scorning' those "establishment Dems" who have been elected by their constituents, is the risking the loss of their support and thus risking the support - and votes - of their constituents.
Maybe it will be different this time. Maybe constituents of elected House and Senate Dems will ignore their elected officials' endorsement and vote for Bernie Sanders. Miracles do happen. It happened with President Obama, although, unlike Bernie Sanders, he did get some endorsements. But it's no secret they wanted Hillary Clinton.
Not suggesting that at all. But we've seen what happens when a candidate other than the one they've endorsed, wins the White House. We've seen how they've joined with Republicans to obstruct President Obama when he wrote an order to shut down Gitmo. The Senate voted 90-6 to stop him from closing Gitmo, and to this day, it's still open. They flexed their muscle and refused to help Obama keep his campaign promise, serving him his first painful defeat.
frylock
(34,825 posts)because establishment Dems have been instructed to support Clinton. Howard Dean announced his support for Clinton in December 2014 before ANY candidates had announced their intent to run ffs.
To summarize: you cannot lose support you never had, or were never going to get.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Which brings me back to my comment that it's political suicide. It also ties in with my worries that, without any allies in Congress, and should he win the presidency, he'll be made a lame-duck president almost from inauguration day, and he won't get anything done for the country. He would have to tack to the center, just like Obama had to, and that means he'll have to compromise a lot on his liberal ideas and agenda. This would make him no different than Hillary Clinton now who already has the lion's share of endorsements and who, according to every poll I've seen so far, can beat any Republican candidate.
This is why I can't bring myself to vote for Sanders. I love his ideas. I love how he thinks. But reality strikes, and I know he'll never get anything he wants through Congress because they will most certainly obstruct him or demand he compromises.
What Bernie Sanders supporters should do is fight hard to give him the support he needs in Congress. They have to do some extensive grassroots footwork, primary current congressional Dems, and get a far more liberal candidates on the ballots in all States in order to get rid of mod/conservative Democrats in both chambers of congress. Then make certain that people vote overwhelmingly for those more liberal Dems who will help Bernie's presidency. Short of that, there is no way I can vote for Senator Sanders for president.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)nationally.
it does not start with one person at the top... and if this continue with an expection of grassroot hope and change, or grassroot, feel the bern, it will be a fail exactly for your reasoning.
i agree with your post.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)President Obama said that over and over again when he ran for the presidency, and as a seasoned community organizer, he knew what he was talking about.
To date, Senator Sanders has yet to receive a single Dem endorsement, according to FiveThirtyEight's chart. He already lost the endorsement of Gov. Peter Shumlin, Governor of his own State of Vermont. Gov. Shumlin had endorsed Hillary Clinton back in May.
Endorsements by Dems are crucial for a successful campaign. Governors, House Reps, and Senators who have endorsed a certain candidate will campaign for them in their respective States and districts, bringing that candidate to the attention of their constituents. That Senator Sanders hasn't received a single endorsement - not even the Governor's endorsement of his home State - is very troubling to me. It weakens his candidacy and strengthens that of the Republicans.
I will say that should, by some miracle, Hillary Clinton loses the primaries to Senator Sanders, I and my group (41 strong) will most definitely cast our votes for him. No doubt about that.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)in the cod.
i live in panhandle of texas, fundie land. i was among the fundies in 2000 and beyond when christian coalition was so powerful. kids going to a christian private school. i learned so much. being from calif, i knew nothing about. at gatherings, i would listen to the men converse on politics. they wanted i think NC to be their state, lol. that was the dominion. scary group and had come down to my area from colorado springs. but, in listening to their conversation, one of the things they were preaching way back then. get into the local elections. school board, all of them. and rise up in the state. they actively started this in early 2000. just a decade allowed them the power.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)If I think he can do the best job for America then why should it matter? Having a D next to his name doesn't change anything if I know he has the best ideas.
Is there any doubt that he won't still fight for single payer health care if he didn't support the Democratic Party?
Is there any doubt that he wouldn't nominate the most liberal judges to the Supreme Court?
Is there any doubt that he wouldn't pick the smartest progressive minds for his cabinet?
Bernie might still have some problems with the two-party system. I don't know. But, guess what. I do too.
MuseRider
(34,111 posts)I wonder why nobody has responded to you?
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)that could be because I was at work and got home at 10pm.
MuseRider
(34,111 posts)Long day. I wasn't meaning you sheshe, I was just surprised nobody else said anything.
Damn that seems like a long day. I used to work 12 hour night shifts, I loved the extra day off but hated those long hours.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Ha. I think I am getting to old for this, actually it was only 9 hours. Yet the weekend was 2 eleven hour days. Lucky for me that doesn't happen often.
ms liberty
(8,579 posts)sheshe2
(83,785 posts)I would prefer a candidate that focuses on both economic justice and social justice. One with out the other is meaningless. Yes, he has started to speak out for social justice, yet sadly he always turns it back to economic justice being the sole reason.
This
If I think he can do the best job for America then why should it matter? Having a D next to his name doesn't change anything if I know he has the best ideas.
Please don't say "If I think he can do the best job for America then why should it matter" It is about all of us. We all have different concerns.
Bernie can't tell us he knows best. No, he needs to listen. It is not his way or the highway. He needs to listen to the people. Finally, he has started to do just that, yet I have doubts he will stick to them.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)He has NO friends in either chamber. Hillary Clinton, according the fivethirtyeight, has locked up the endorsements of 29 Senators so far, and over 90 House members.
Bernie Sanders has ZERO.
So, unless Bernie supporters get rid of those entrenched Dems in both Senate and House and get Green Partiers or other ultra-Liberal Senators and House members to take the majority, everything a President Sanders will try to do will fail. Again, he has NO friends in the Senate and House, and those are the people who he'll need to support his ambitious agenda.
Of course he'll fight for single payer, although I don't see how he'll succeed since he, as sitting Senator of Vermont, couldn't even get it implemented even with the HHS's approval to offer the waiver and give 80-85% funding via ObamaCare.
His judicial nominees will have to be vetted by the Senate. He can't just send them to SCOTUS without Congressional approval. How is he going to do that if he doesn't have any friends in the Senate?
Most of his cabinet members have to be approved by the Senate, too.
Yes, we all have problems with the two-party system, but without a Constitutional amendment allowing a parliament, this is how the system is.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Someone told me that it could work if ALL of the States did the same at the same time. I don't see how that's possible when twenty two States continue to refuse Medicaid expansion - despite the fact that their constituents are paying for it and their hospitals are desperate for it.
What I rarely get an answer to is: how can an eventual President Sanders get any of his ambitious liberal agenda through when he has no allies in the Senate and House? E.O.s can only do so much. He will have to compromise (something President Obama has been excoriated for time and again - as a sell out) or he'll become a lame-duck president from the moment he's inaugurated.
I don't want the next president's first term to get paralyzed before it has a chance to get things done for the country.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)that is the answer given. that for whatever reason, we the people as a whole are gonna rise and make those int he senate and house do what we say.
these people are being reelected into the house. i mean, if they voted bushcos back in, that was way more hitting bottom than we are today. 2008 with the world collapsing and they still voted in the teabaggers.
the nation of people are not aligned in want and for me totally irresponsible to live in fantasy land when creating our future.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)We will need to vote in ultra-Liberals from the local level on up. We will have to change the majority of politicians in the House and Senate. With new State voter suppression tactics poised to be implemented in 2016 for the first time, I just don't see how it's possible to have that revolution. I really don't.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)republican, teabagger, libertarian, independent, populist and a small section of the democratic vote leaving most of the democratic base behind.
he is dependent on the repug, lib, ind, pop to register for the democratic primary.
we have an independent that refuses to be a part of the democratic party, running under the democratic party, reaching out to repug, lib, tea, pop.....
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Tea Party groups will abandon him and vote Republican in the primaries. They appear to want to prop him up and get him as much media exposure as the "anti-Clinton" candidate as possible, hoping to damage the candidate they really fear in the process so that she's weakened enough to give their Republican candidate a good shot at taking the White House. They will NOT vote for a socialist under any circumstances. We need to begin to accept that, based on their actions in the past, and not be gullible to think that these diehard Republican voters would ever have a change of mind.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)they would be willing to do that. i had to do that for state senate a decade back and resented the hell out of it, to vote for a local.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)he's getting broad support from all political leanings across the spectrum. Their goal is to convince people that Bernie Sanders, as opposed to Hillary Clinton, is a more viable candidate for their vote. He's not. They just want to make it appear that way so they can damage Hillary Clinton any which way they can; damage and weaken the one they really fear.
So far, it doesn't look as if their strategy is working, though.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)they are part of the crowd. a large part of the crowd. i do not think it will result in votes.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)It's, of course, just my opinion/gut feeling.
I agree with you: there's doubt it will result in votes.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Secondly, he co-founded the Progressive Caucus and has always sat with the Dems in the House and Senate.
He is anti-DLC. He is an FDR Democrat at heart. Most of DU seems to be along these same lines.
Peacetrain
(22,877 posts)I live in the reddest part of Iowa.. everybody probably knows that by now..As a Democrat, I face a lot of hostility during the campagin season.. Now Bernie Sanders is running to head up my party.. but he will not join the Democratic Party.. and when the time comes to get out work for our candidate..(and we got a lot of votes for President Obama out of northwest Iowa) .. how in the hell do I explain that.. that the person heading up my party refuses to be a part of that party..Because I have already been asked that.. so I can just imagine what the general election season is going to be like for those working the phones etc..
Edit to add.. I have said it before and I will say it again.. if Bernie Sanders wins the Democratic primary/caucus season.. I will vote for him wholeheartedly .. But as far as walking the blocks and knocking doors.. probably not..
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,986 posts)Those of us who are comfortable in blue states take far too much for granted I think.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Sorry, I have been at work.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)You write:
Now Bernie Sanders is running to head up my party.. but he will not join the Democratic Party.. and when the time comes to get out work for our candidate..(and we got a lot of votes for President Obama out of northwest Iowa) .. how in the hell do I explain that.. that the person heading up my party refuses to be a part of that party.
Answer: If you look at the federal government today, and Congress in particular, you can see what the old us-versus-them partisanship has gotten us. This year, let's try something different. Let's get beyond party labels and support a candidate who speaks for us instead of the 1%.
That's one possibility. I'm sure there are others. I really can't see Sanders losing many votes over this "issue" if he's the nominee.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Well done. I am from a very blue state that sadly elects the likes of Mitt Romney as Governor.
I feel your pain in a red state.
Thanks again.
jeepers
(314 posts)and all us democrats should be thanking him
Had the Senator run as a third party independent, a green or as a democratic socialist he would have at a minimum, split the democratic party in two. Judging from the turnout for Bernie along with his appeal to dissaffected conservatives and stay at homes he could concievbly win a three way race against Hillary and the clown car candidates.
Further, Should the Tramp as he has stated run an insurgent campaign making it a four way race, Bernie would win and your next president would be an independent, a green, or a democratic socialist.
Pretty sure the next president of the United States is going to be a democrat. Thank you Bernie.
ismnotwasm
(41,986 posts)Not sure I agree with the splitting the party part--but he would have definitely had an impact
John Poet
(2,510 posts)to watch, just from a political junkie standpoint.
(Not that I would have wanted things to happen that way).
In the end that could easily have ended up in the House of Representatives,
resulting in victory for the Republican party's candidate
(a horrible outcome by any measure).
HFRN
(1,469 posts)HFRN
(1,469 posts)that sold them out
what's WRONG with these ungrateful little people?!?!?
jeepers
(314 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)your "blind" comment.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)And a person who cares just as much about social justice as you do-as he has proved, over and over.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)sounds like savior status to me
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Saving a political party from its most cynical and self-defeating instincts is not the same thing as saving human souls. Were you one of the people who used the term "messiah" to attack Obama's candidacy back in the day?
It's not as if we're better off with candidates that don't inspire passionate enthusiasm. Cold, reserved, "eat your spinach" candidates are always worse and pretty much always lose. When such people do win, they never accomplish anything.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Nobody is calling him a "messiah"...and there is nothing illegitimate or unhealthy about the enthusiasm Bernie's campaign generates. It's just people responding to a person with a good truthful message. There's nothing that ever can be harmful in that.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Why are you belaboring this when the idea the he might save the party(which was just one poster's opinion)doesn't really mean anything?
It just seems as though you are bound and determined to find reasons to fear and hate the idea of Bernie being nominated and elected president. He has never, ever given you any reason to be as obsessed as you have been with spreading fear about him, with trying to stop him. All Bernie is is a good person who is trying to help make the country better. Why can't you accept that it really is as simple and good as that?
If you want to support HRC, fine. Nobody is stopping you. But you don't have to keep denouncing Bernie as some sort of a menace to do that.
I am sorry if some male posters here have spoken roughly and oppressively to you. That shouldn't have happened. But that is not the fault of any particular candidate.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)it is an insult.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)It's saying that, in allying itself with Wall Street, the Democratic Party has massively corrupted itself. Most rank-and-file Democrats believe the party needs to break totally with corporate power(even a lot of HRC supporters who back her mainly on the "electability" myth).
The assertion that the party needs saving is a statement of how far off track the party's leaders have gone-how much they have betrayed ordinary Democrats like me and like you.
It isn't anything negative about you or me as people at all, because we have been largely powerless in the post-1988 Democratic Party-a party that cares only about what CEO's and defense contractors want(and is only progressive either when forced to be from below or on trivial side issues).
Race matters. Sexual orientation matters. But class matters, too. in addressing class, we can bring in a lot of people who have been seduced by false consciousness into supporting policies and politicians that mainly dump on them. We can move those people past the temporary fears that have goaded them into hatred. We can make life better and make people better.
It's all good, and it's all part of making the world we need.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)sitting on a democratic board, that is about the democratic party, being told sanders is gonna save us. fug that.
nothing about you as a person, of course. or the one telling us sanders is our savior.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)So who cares?
jeepers
(314 posts)Is one of betrayal and loss
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)the democratic ticket who called for Obama to be primaried in 2012,that won't sit well with a lot of democrats.
ismnotwasm
(41,986 posts)True that.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)sheshe2
(83,785 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)
Hell hath no fury like a party scorned?
azmom
(5,208 posts)He is not an independent but a true democrat. See how that works?
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)with him
it is all funny, isnt it?
i do not know why so often sanders supporters tell us to not listen to and believe sanders. i do believe him when he says something.
azmom
(5,208 posts)A definition is on his website
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)sheshe2
(83,785 posts)fredamae
(4,458 posts)who exercise their Voting rights..who are PO'd at the Dem party-Who Left the Dem party - who will come back to the Dem Party For him...Yes.
When you look at his voting record and who he does and Has Caucused with...it seems a bit of a stretch to say he's anything but Democratic in every sense Except his formal registration. He has always been Independent..so it's not like he left in a huff over something..like I did (Dem Supporter since 1959 and Voter since I turned 21)
When you take a look at Dem Registrations over the years...Dems are "bleeding people" and have been for awhile.
They just won't tell you that...nor will they listen and address the reasons why, has been my experience.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)The Dem party has been edging ever to the right, supposedly chasing the center, while ignoring/abandoning people. Bernie seems to be drawing some of those disaffected voters back into politics. Instead of freaking out over "party loyalty", the party should do some hard thinking about why Bernie's been successful bringing out those people.
MuseRider
(34,111 posts)but I am back in so I can vote for Senator Sanders. Both my kids who could not have cared less anymore moved and did not bother to register, they thought it was horse crap and could not see an honest way out. They both have registered so they can vote for Sanders. I have republican farmer friends, teabagger friends who are also fed up and they see Sanders as a way out of the mess we are in.
I will stay a Dem until after the primary. Then I am back to independent until the party looks like something I would want to belong to again.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)and so do those who would like to see Bernie's campaign fail.
I suggest there is a good deal of worrying going on...I highly doubt the "bean-counters" are ignoring the ebb and flow of Dem registrations and the dots are not hard to connect 
Hell, I'm watching it out of pure curiosity...the GOP is also "bleeding people" here as well.
Gothmog
(145,291 posts)Jappleseed
(93 posts)Then the clown car that is the DNC would lose yet another winnable election to another GOpig.
As it is he is helping the Democrats face the hate spewing right wing in their own party and helping us reconizing it for what it is. Giving us liberals a chance to elect someone who is good for the country and not just their corporate overlords.
It's time to move left to vote left for the good of the country. Time to teach the far right wing of the Democratic party that the last 34 years of failure is not something we wish for the future.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)This attack is one that resonates strongly with a certain group of people -- namely, those who were predisposed against the candidate anyway.
How would each of our current two leaders fare in the general election, in the face of this attack? My prediction: The number of people who would vote against nominee Sanders solely or primarily because of party identification is approximately equal to the number who would vote against nominee Clinton solely or primarily because of Benghazi, i.e., virtually none.
The linked Politico story quoted a bunch of disgruntled Democratic Party leaders in Vermont. It gave no reason to believe that this "issue" has any wide traction. I'll amplify my previous prediction by saying that all or almost all the people quoted in that story will vote for Sanders in the general if he's the nominee, despite their current grousing.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)Shame on them for creating this BS.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)but that'd mean there's a split between the everyday Dems and the party establishment
Fearless
(18,421 posts)But had Nader and Gore discussed this we wouldn't have had Bush... Which is good... But poutrage... Bernie is bad!!! 1111!!!
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)So he's got that going for him.
valerief
(53,235 posts)the Citizens United people.
Who here likes Citizens United? Strange comment.
valerief
(53,235 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)I am not going to follow it in that direction.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts).....on if you consider the DLC to define the Democratic Party and want the damn liberals in the Base to STFU so you can work with Wall Street.
FairWinds
(1,717 posts)Who does NOT "scorn" the Democratic Party?
How about the Kochs in funding the DLC?
How about the DP pols who backed the TPP?
How is THAT for scorn?
Enough of Politico already !!
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)is that they have evolved beyond the stoic and constricted and highly controlled 2-party solution. It's old and decrepid and unevolved.
Either the Dinosaurs get with the Newbies, or they get left behind. Just that simple.
The Ds and Rs have milked the public as much as they can and they are being called on it. I say to both sides, Trump vs. Bernie...let's give it a go and find out who really speaks for Americans.
On Edit: It's not just a coincidence...it's a movement of People, not Parties.
zentrum
(9,865 posts)…lifelong democrat and feel the party scorned me and a lot of the recognizable democratic values a long time ago. I have no problem with seeing Bernie as the Democratic Party Restoration. He's like FDR in my circles.
I'm ready to work harder for him than I did for Obama or Gore or Bill Clinton. Every woman in my household feels the same way. Very excited.
Koinos
(2,792 posts)This is one reason I do not support Sanders in the democratic primary.
I believe in building bridges within the democratic party, not tearing them down.
I support a candidate who is as or more progressive than Sanders, and yet has been a lifelong democrat.
Those who don't know who that is should open their eyes and find out.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)-including opposition to police brutality against blacks-
Bernie's worse than THAT?
ericson00
(2,707 posts)that perceptions of far-leftism did to the Democratic brand, which Sanders would bring back.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Just like Trump and the Republicans...the sooner the better the purists get this...many of us "lifelong Democrats" have held our noses and voted for decades. He's not a freaking "socialist". He's representing what the Democratic Party used to be...before all the nifty New Age "changes" and The Clintons.
Scoff at your peril...I do believe there are more of us as we see a Real Alternative than the "Faithful" who have been left at the proverbial political altar too many times.
FloridaBlues
(4,008 posts)His ceiling won't go over 35 in national polling.
Many of my fl dems and dec members are not too happy with him and his snarky remarks but IF he wins the primary he sure will want the money when the opposition starts to eat his lunch.
People will not give their money to the DNC
That helps to fund candidates.
Agony
(2,605 posts)It's very simple… Ha Ha Ha
Autumn
(45,096 posts)However a lot of we former democrats left that party because the party scorns us. Oh I'll still vote for them but that's as far as I'll go.
I like that part,
can't wait till he beats Hillary
demwing
(16,916 posts)Progressives are tired of being sidelined, dismissed, or insulted. No one in the Democratic Party Leadership speaks for us, or to us (unless you count Warren).
Bernie does.
TheFarS1de
(1,017 posts)bring a few from the "other" side as well . It is good to see democracy coming back to life as opposed to the cookie cutter androids we have been receiving .
And a few less millionaires discussing what is good for working people would be just super .
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)FYI
Third way is NOT the Democratic party.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)That means campaigning for candidates that think differently on issues.
I hope he makes clear tht if he wins party buikding will be a priority.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)I have been at work. Thank you for you reply.
So good to see you.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
Missed you.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Do you like my new avatar? I knew Hillary would understand for a few weeks. It's about freeing bravenak.
Did you see my OP?
hugs hugs hugs~
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)sheshe2
(83,785 posts)I'm tired, a lot of hours this weekend. I missed your avatar.
Yup, what they did was a sin. Seven hides to silence her voice.
I love you justin, have missed you.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)sheshe2
(83,785 posts)Well coordinated, I read it was 4 hides in 30 minutes. I bet that breaks a record here.
Love you~
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Love you too.
elana i am
(814 posts)who is most deserving of that little D after their name? here is the problem with pigeonholing someone with a label - the label you give them might not fit. the reason why i'm voting for sanders is because i'm voting for the democrat. the TRUE democrat.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)then 8 horrific years of Bush/Cheney brought me back to my senses.
I know now Democrats are the good guys.. and gals.
jfern
(5,204 posts)caucaused with for 24 1/2 years in Congress, and won the primary for both his Senate elections?
Oh right, this is a Bernie hit piece, fact don't matter.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)I've been a Democrat for 35 years of voting, and I'm not changing now. I believe in and support Democrats. If I can't find a decent Dem to vote for in a race (rare) I just don't vote in that race.
He has dissed Dems his whole career. That's a no go for me.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)he has long dissed the Democratic Party.
Which policies and positions of Sanders are antithetical to the Democratic Party?
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)They destroy more democracy than they engender as far as I can tell and redistribute power to fewer rather than more.
It is what it is and you have to work with the system you get but there is little to lionize to the point of religious devotion at all particularly when we are a pretty damn conservative lot that benefit from comparison to the only other game in town being the a particularly delusional strand of political nihilists who are the patriarchal, Branch Levitican, white supremacist, eagerly and willfully stupid party.
At best, we are the catchall for pretty much everyone who can't stomach or isn't welcome in the other mess.
Awful lot into something that is the only sane - ish option that functionally has any hand in power that has the staggering entry requirement of checking a box on a form to be a member of.
It is a means to an end and a demonstrably raggedy one and little more. The ship is a joke we see the guys we were just running against flipping over and even often recruited and wooed, fuckers didn't have any Saul on the road to Damascus moments either but rather did or said something somewhere within sight of sane or decent and get cast out for a certified loon.
The only fuck I give about the party is policy and all the Turd Way garbage and the folks pushing it are much further away from my beliefs and values as the guy without the "good" letter by his name.
Give me a hundred Sanders over a hundred Klochbars and I'd say she is in the top third maybe or close, I won't even bother with discussing some of the more conservative and/or dubious folks so all it does for me is to make the whole concept to gather more rust.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)The RNC and whoever the GOP nominee is will be running ads 24 hours a day with the anti-Democratic quotes.
Count on it.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)If any Sanders used Politico as a source we all know what screech would come out of Hillary Clinton supporter's mouths. More hypocrisy.
Hypocrisy from the same person that said I didn't sufficiently support President Obama. When are you going to stop with the lies?
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)KMOD
(7,906 posts)Thank you.
sheshe2
(83,785 posts)I agree, it was a good read.
madokie
(51,076 posts)hide and watch
Hope everything is good with you
Autumn
(45,096 posts)
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Autumn
(45,096 posts) seabeyond
(110,159 posts)is... let me see if i can find it.
(cause this is what i was talking about from day one. this.... this.... is avocation, speaking for me, which is what i wanted day one.)
“I can’t think of many personalities who have been attacked for more reasons than Hillary Clinton,” Sanders told John Dickerson on “Face the Nation.”
“And by the way, let me be frank – and I’m running against her – some of it is sexist. I don’t know that a man would be treated the same way that Hillary is,” Sanders added.
Sanders remarks came in response to a question about whether Clinton’s use of a private server while secretary of state has hurt her trustworthiness in the eyes of some Americans. Sanders refused to comment on the scandal or Clinton’s honesty, and went on to emphasize that his concerns with her as the Democratic nominee are about her policies, not personality.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/sanders-some-criticism-hillary-clinton-motivated-sexism?cid=sm_fb_msnbc
Autumn
(45,096 posts)and for people to expect one side to take the high road and not the other is just ridiculous. Bernie won't attack her, he's a perfect gentleman and has a lot of class but that hasn't stopped her surrogates like Claire and Weiner and a few others from getting behind the microphone and lying and trashing him. Hillary has been attacked a lot but some of that is her own making, she should have known whet the republicans would do with the e mail server thing. I like her, I'm just not going to support her and spend any more of my time and energy defending her as a candidate or as a president.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Autumn
(45,096 posts)Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)where to even begin with this. "scorn" ? hardly.
asking hard questions and assessing the party platform is more like it.
and YAWN.
How many times does it have to be explained about Vermont's system of voting? beyond boring.
Both parties are going through drastic changes at this time. I doubt the Republican party survives but, Dems also need to really look at the party and the goals it wants to accomplish.
just yawn at this tripe.