Bernie Sanders
Related: About this forumWhat do you think of this OP?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1107152387My response: We had far less income disparity in the 1950s and maybe in the early 1960s although we always had poverty especially among people in areas like the Appalachians and the South and among people of color.
We had less income disparity due to a higher tax rate on top income.
But, I think that post is symptomatic of what differentiates Hillary supporters from Bernie supporters.
The smug indifference to injustice of Hillary supporters is incredible to me.
If Abraham Lincoln lived today, he would just suffer in poverty. He was poor. Lost his mother when he was very young.
The unbelievable smugness of many in the Democratic Party of today compared to the great compassion of Democrats in the FDR era. What a pity that our Party has degenerated into what it now is.
bjo59
(1,166 posts)"Wall Street and bankers are not the as important as the issues that touch people's daily lives." The ignorance information that statement is colossal.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)But that is as it is.
DiehardLiberal
(580 posts)The wealth inequality is huge and cause for suffering. The data is from the Congressional Budget Office. How can they not accept that as fact?
I agree with you completely.
TimPlo
(443 posts)arikara
(5,562 posts)Unreal. They aren't interested in truth at all if it interferes with their cult worshipping.
I guess they banned you now too.
DiehardLiberal
(580 posts)They are welcome to remain uninformed and enjoy their Kool Aid. I never actually went to the group - just saw the OP on Latest Threads and thought I'd offer information without realizing that I was stepping into a ___ (fill in the blank with your choice).
So be it.
TimPlo
(443 posts)And might actually get less smugness from many GOP posters there. It was a real shocker when I came here to a supposed liberal site and got told universal Heath Care was just lazy people wanting free stuff. It is so amazing how much idol worshiping can effect someones beliefs. And those same people think the GOP base are insane. The Trump supporters have at least voted partly to get rid of the corruption, unlike DNC base who seem to just don't care about the corruption as long as a (D) is elected.
jpmonk91
(290 posts)Who fought in wwii would be disappointed in the smugness of the HRC supports. He was an FDR democratic. Helping other people was a very important ideal to my grandfather.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Bernie -- compassion and the wish to help others.
Hillary -- the wish to be president and control and get back at others.
Maybe I'm being unfair but that is the way I perceive the primary contest.
DJ13
(23,671 posts)I'm not sure if its genuine indifference, or just an inability on their part to admit that their candidate has a vested interest in maintaining the system in its current form.
They remind me of the people who blindly supported Dubya and refused to acknowledge any of his shortcomings.
Its so similar that part of me thinks many of them ARE the same people who just switched parties to perpetuate our nation's downfall by supporting the last conservative with a chance to win.
And thats frightening.
Response to DJ13 (Reply #6)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
leftinportland
(247 posts)I'm banned there and could not answer...here is the link from the first response...
http://www.cbpp.org/income-gains-at-the-top-dwarf-those-of-low-and-middle-income-households
Thanks to Diehard liberal
DiehardLiberal
(580 posts)And I'm in Portland too.
leftinportland
(247 posts)jeepers
(314 posts)OP lists getting rid of citizens united as prime concern but then says wall street and banks are not important issues. They are hand and glove issues. It is the big money on wall street and the banks that exploit citizens united.
ebayfool
(3,411 posts)she didn't like him. Her money, her privilege was the standard. Sanders people just want free stuff. Repub thinking. Actually, I've seen it from several Clinton supporters. The kind of attitude that has been used to parody Democrats for years as latte-sipping, etc and here I've finally seen on DU. Up 'til this cycle I thought it was based on nothing, but it seems there is enough of it to actually have some small foundation. Dammit.
So yeah, that's the kind of reasoning that justifies the position she takes.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)One of the things that causes people, especially young people, to love Bernie so much is is palpable compassion.
As one woman said to me when I was canvassing and knocked on her door, "His face. You can see it in his face."
May not be a perfect quote, but I am capturing her emotional response to Bernie's compassion.
Hillary does not convey that spirit of compassion and caring at all. It shows in her supporters. There is a coldness, a disregard for others. That will hurt the Democrats should Hillary be the nominee in November.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Was the Hillarian who ordered a responder to Leave! for posting a link to a chart. Not a word about Hillary, just some uncomfortable facts. Pathetic.
DiehardLiberal
(580 posts)Happy to oblige but really they have lost their grip on any semblance of reality. How anyone can argue with that chart from Congressional Budget Office or posting it boggles my mind.
Well one poster did say thank you so grateful for that.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)LWolf
(46,179 posts)" This is the Hillary Clinton Group. Leave. Now." I hear this in so many threads, every day.
This is DU. Leave. Now.
This is the NEW neo-liberal Democratic Party. Leave. Now.
Of course, next November it won't be "Leave. Now."
Then it will be "Shut up and vote for us. Now."
Good luck with that.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Donkees
(31,453 posts)universities, schools, hospitals, libraries, museums, endowing charities, the arts, etc. Now we are in an age of narcissistic greed.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)If you think of the primary campaign in that frame of reference, it makes a lot more sense.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)surrealAmerican
(11,364 posts)Of course there's always a "top 1%" - that's how percentages work. The top 1%, however, did not always control as much wealth as the bottom 90%.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Mike__M
(1,052 posts)any kind of pogrom against the 1%; he just says they should carry their share of the burden.
1monster
(11,012 posts)poster who made a completely innocuous reply to the OP. That person told the answering poster,
DiehardLiberal
(580 posts)make any difference to fair-minded people. The content of my post was relevant, valid and tone was polite.
Now understand what many others have been going through with members of that group. They are now on Ignore.
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)They'll posture on the right side of the culture war, but if something threatens their portfolio...
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)For Hillary supporters, as for Republicans, it is all about short-term profits and not about long-term health and harmony in society.
Short-term thinking. Sorry, but that is what it takes to be a Hillary supporter..
And that is what bothers me about Hilary's claim that she evolves and has evolved on so many important issues. She spoke for and held the wrong view in the first place because she thinks short-term. She does not have the vision to see beyond the short-term.
What makes Bernie so amazing and so right for the presidency is his ability to focus with regard to nearly all issues, on the long-term and to see and decide based on those long-term considerations.
And today, once again, when it comes to climate change, Bernie nailed it.
Bernin4U
(812 posts)The op asks about the 1% ever not having the "most money". Some quick googling suggests that in the US, the amount of wealth owned by the top 1% has gotten into the 40% range, but never over 50%. Although worldwide, it seems the top 1% has very recently surpassed the 50% mark in total wealth.
My "wtf" questions are:
1. What kind of benchmark is this? As long as they stay below half, then everything's fine? Or as the op tries to suggest, that the top 1% always has most of the money, so what's the problem now?
2. So insane levels of income disparity don't matter, but min wage and Citizens United do? Is this our version of, "Government out of my medicare"?
3. Really, nobody on "their" side wants to chime in with anything factual or useful? And if "our" side does, just get the hell out?
4. Who doesn't love those "But the Republicans made us do it" replies?
Also to JDP, sure reasonable taxes are a huge issue, but the falling cost of labor may be even a bigger one. Who cares what the min wage is, if there are no jobs? Uber is a $50B company, with < 4% of its workforce consisting of actual employees. What company doesn't want to be the next Uber? So should I tell my kids to goof off in school? Why go to college if the best job is likely to be a plumber or welder? Because for every opening in anything tech, there's going to be a million potential applicants, because it's all going to go to worldwide crowdsourcing and the lowest bidder. Oh, and back on topic, usury is a pretty good deal these days. Borrow money from the gov at a few %, then loan it out at 26% or more.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Meanwhile, Bernie gave a great press conference on the environment this morning.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017380305
Contrary1
(12,629 posts)Here's their response to another OP:
Trump Leads by Double-Digits on the Economy
This is really depressing. The positive view is that people haven't starting thinking about the details yet.
A new Gallup survey finds a majority think that Donald Trump as better able to handle the economy than Hillary Clinton, 53% to 43%.
Trump also leads on being best able to handle terrorism and national security, 50% to 46%.
Reply: She will handle that when her financial allies come out from behind their Wall Street desks and boardrooms and give their support to her. One day at a time.