Bernie Sanders
Related: About this forumA PARTY DIVIDED
Cross Posted from the "Populist Reform of the Democratic Party."
I see the Democratic Party at a crossroads.
The non-progressives, powered by the Wealthy 1%, have taken control of our Party. To fight back we need to know exactly who we are fighting. I would like to have a discussion here to get input as to what we are facing as a foe.
I found the following in DU2 and think it's a good place to start.
The following was part of an OP posted by G - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1500508
- Social DEMOCRATS: Liberals and Progressives representing the ideals of the New Deal social welfare.
- Corporate DEMOCRATS: New Democratic 'moderates' and 'centrists' of the No Deal corporate welfare.
I think that is a good start. In that thread, in post 4, welshTerrier2 (DU2) added the following http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1500508
I frequently see allegations made that the social democrats put ideology ahead of winning ... this is intended as a criticism and is a charge usually made by centrists (corporate democrats to use your jargon) ... one person even told me that "politics has nothing to do with morality" ... sorry, i just couldn't get my head around that one ...
So, it seem there is not one but two factors to consider as to how the Party is divided ...
On one plane, we have the traditional left-center divide ... but there's this second plane that seems to divide the Party between those who perceive themselves as pragmatists (the big tenters) and those on the left they label as ideologues ...
Of course, when centrists label those on the left as ideologues, the intention is to suggest that putting beliefs ahead of winning is somehow a bad thing ... they often overstate the real positions of those on the left by trying to ascribe to them a rigid inflexibility and an extremism ... these generalizations are rarely supported with the facts ... they are little more that "debate tactics" ...
Anyway, there does appear to be a divide between those who want to win regardless of what must be compromised and those who believe it's not worth fighting if we're not fighting for something worthwhile ...
It remains a mystery to me why it is that those in the center also happen to more often adhere to the "stretch the tent too thin win at any cost" philosophy ... nor do i think they have demonstrated that taking strong stands on the issues, or left leaning stands, is not a way to win ... they regularly point out the bad old McGovern days ... but to say that the Party cannot lean left because it fared poorly in the past is not adequate ... many differences exist from the days of McGovern ...
The wishy-washy center has no right to claim they are, or will be, more successful than those on the left ... their track record does damage to that defense ... and this last election was most instructive ... call it the media, call it the right-wing meme, but it was not easy for Democrats to make a strong case on Iraq, terrorism or even tax cuts because the public's perception was that the differences between the two parties was not that significant ...
One last point ... this business of the corporate Democrats trying to "shove Liberals and Progressives out of the party" ... from what i've seen, at least here on DU, this is not at all the case ... i see great disdain shown to progressives who announce they are leaving the Party ... the sad truth is, what the corporatists really want is for the left to be disorganized, powerless, voiceless but to have them remain in the Party and continue to contribute their time and their money ... and therein lies the rub ... it's coming to a head and the risks are very, very high ... ABB held the left this year ... it will not hold in 2008 without major reforms ... a rupture in the thinly stretched tent will do great harm ... of course, sometimes the old structures must be broken down before they can be rebuilt …
By the way, I think those looking to leave the Party are making a big mistake. Here I disagree with welsh Terrier2 in his last paragraph. The Corporate Wing of the Party would like nothing better than drive the pesky Left from the Party. They need neither our money (they have the Koch Bros and Goldman-Sachs) nor our votes (they can manipulate the election process). We must fight for control of our Party. If we can't drive them out we won't be able to keep them from buying control of any new party we might create.
The Peoples Movement is just getting started.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Response to rhett o rick (Original post)
LiberalArkie This message was self-deleted by its author.
yourpaljoey
(2,166 posts)After years of darkness, sanity has entered in.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)to the corrupt culture that has taken control of our government. I spoke to a lady yesterday that is very conservative. She commented on seeing my Sanders bumper-sticker that she supported Sanders. I was surprised but after speaking to her, she admitted her college aged daughter explained to her why Sanders was so important.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)I hate to think of what is coming now that the Money/Power/Political Corruption/"Pay to Play"Influence is fully exposed and contrasted with the "People Power" small donations of a candidate who has 25 years experience in House and Senate who is promising real change and yet is compared with contempt by the PTB to McGovern, Ralph Nadar and Howard Dean as just "not electible."
The final full exposure of our Mainstream Corporate Media ownership as corrupt and unprincipled --willing to promote candidates who are as corrupt and unprincipled as themselves has revealed what we are up against, and, it is frightening in it's power. To make things worse the online "Progressive Media" we have tried to build and promote has, for the most part, betrayed the very people that donated and supported it.
If either Trump or Hillary are elected we can expect four years of chaos, while we, the people suffer.
Bernie is correct: It is time for "A Revolution."
It is becoming urgent imo. So much so that I absolutely will not vote for Hillary if she is our nominee ("if" -- probably wishful thinking). For me, it's time to fish or cut bait. I'm doing the protest vote thing.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)The Left won't bow before the Authoritarian Leader. In 2000 the arrogant Party elite didn't heed the warnings from the Left that America was tired of the faux progressive leadership of the DLC. And when Bush won, the Corporate Democrat minions whined that it was all Ralph Nader's fault. Of all the crooked things that happened in that election, they choose Nader who did nothing illegal.
And now in 2016 we are faced with a similar situation. The hubris of the Party elite expected to force Clinton on the Party and the Left to acquiesce and support her. The Powers That Be even helped get Trump nominated just so the Left could be bludgeoned into supporting Hillary. Like our founders, we will not be intimidated and we will fight the Corporatism that the Wealthy 1% champions.
And it sounds like starting June 17th, the bludgeoning might begin for some folks here at DU.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)favorite Manny (he wasn't my favorite 
) things started happening w/o the fan fare. People were disappeared (FFR), removed from hosting, removed from jury pools, all w/o notification or recourse.
CobaltBlue
(1,122 posts)which can basically say, “If you, Dear Forum Member, don’t like this site’s policy, well…you did find your way here and you should be capable of finding your way out of here.”
No. 1 objective of this site is “Democrats—for the win!”
What is being won is what should be most concerning.
KPN
(15,643 posts)when the No. 1 objective becomes enforceable. That's okay. I've been a registered Democrat for 44 years. If I have to give up DU because I want to restore the party I've been part of my entire adult life to it's "roots", then so be it.
I care about and have too much respect for traditional party values to do otherwise (when I say traditional, I basically am saying the party of FDR up to Bill Clinton).
What is being won? Not sure I get what you are saying there. In my view, Bernie has already won by awakening and mobilizing people who's primary concern is the welfare of the people. In the end, I believe people will win.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)him to bludgeon the progressives into plugging their noses and voting for Hillary. There are lots of ways they can neutralize Trump and they have been known to literally steal presidential elections. The Corp-Oligarchy has hundreds of millions invested in Clinton and they will not let that go.
Sadly we must fight the minions that find it more comfortable to side with the Big Bully, Corp-America. It's just plain authoritarianism. They will support their authoritarian leader no matter what. Ask them if they care about the 16 million American children living in poverty and listen to their sad responses, like "pragmatism, pragmatism, pragmatism", or "just because Clinton has taken hundreds of millions from special interests, she will do the right thing. Quid pro quo is a myth."
I can no longer stand listening to the rationalizations for supporting Big Corporation profits over helping American children. I have 75 on ignore here. Gloating about siding with the Big Bully like in the school yard.
findrskeep
(713 posts)Think about it...who ELSE could she POSSIBLY win against?? I think we are being played. We're being "scared" into voting for the next least hated candidate, which isn't saying much. Trump won't win, because there's enough people on both sides who have a vested interest in Hillary winning. There's no one else she could have possibly gone up against and won. Not with her numbers and the continued lies.
Here's something else to think about...I've been watching how every single show has doubled down on destroying Trump, and now it seems they've found some real criminal activity regarding Trump University. What happens if the Republicans figure out a way to dump Trump at the last minute and drop in a "normal" republican. How's Hillary going to do if she all of a sudden has to compete with someone who doesn't have all her baggage and more importantly, isn't being investigated by the FBI while running for president?
KoKo
(84,711 posts)All that Trump Pump Up in MSM....and they start to take him down just when the Hillary/Clinton Foundation/Server Fiasco shows its Ugly Head with Investigations.
Now Trumps polls are starting to sink since he bloviated, unhinged after Hillary's Grand NeoCon Policy Speech and the "People Said:" NO.....Trump....He's Too Extreme...We Need Hillary! Bernie is TOO Radical and Can't Win.
It has been a "Set Up!" Carefully Calculated.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)too much is at stake - not only justice for the working class and all individuals - but, our planet - water, air, and earth cannot tolerate much more before other living things can no longer be sustained and our own health and quality of life is completely destroyed.
disillusioned73
(2,872 posts)There are two smaller ones, and a much larger one less discussed..
The two smaller ones are always discussed and bantered about here on DU and other sites, these two are well informed and have strong opinions. Then there is that middle that isn't vocal and maybe a bit less invested in the process and just doesn't have the time or commitment to delve into the issues as thoroughly as the other two factions.
This is the part of the party that has been deciding some of these contests during this primary season.. unfortunately they are susceptible to corporate media influence and Democratic establishment rule.. They still trust the DNC, some may have a feel that something is just not right... but they have yet to connect the dots. Bernie has actually been reaching some of these folks - which is why the establishment has been trying to push him off the national stage for some time..
I had a couple beers with one of these "left centrists" last night, and he just wants this primary season to end.. he doesn't want Hillary harmed headed into the general.. he likes Bernies policy but he is in "let's just win the general" mode.. and that is what the center will default to and has been conditioned to except... and it is why we are here - again.
KPN
(15,643 posts)I somewhat agree with the modifier presented by Disillusioned in Post #5. There are too many Ds who are still relatively uninformed -- probably because they are too busy with their lives, or things are going very well for them and those important to them, or they just aren't all that into politics and governance. So the two divisions (social and corporate, but also the less informed party voter).
Here's where I'm at. The "social democrats" (as defined in the OP) need to take back the Party or break it -- and SOON. There is simply too much urgency, too much at risk to delay any longer. "Social Democrats" need to taker action now. What does that mean? Be a disruptive force in the Party. Force the establishment to deal via: (1) Continue to support Bernie 100% till the end! (2) March on Philly, contest the convention -- to the maximum extent they (we) can. (3) Register protest with votes. The Party won't change if things go the way they plan, i.e., Hillary gets elected easily.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)thinking to much about it. They want the safe road so they stick with the comfortable Establishment. I see that at the County level were I participate. They don't want to make waves just get along.
I agree that it's time to fix this shit. Every day we let it go on the more and more power the Establishment gains. Obama promised to roll back the Patriot Act that stole our rights to make us more secure. But he didn't or couldn't. I fear he couldn't, because his paygrade wasn't high enough. If we allow the Wealthy to continue to transfer wealthy from us to them, at some point we will be powerless completely.
The Authoritarian Followers we see too much of, want us to acquiesce as they have, to give ourselves to the powers of the high Authoritarian. They don't know us.
slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)a long time ago 
There was another post by welshterrier which stated if you want to advance an issue you need to FIRST bring that issue into the forefront, it was not about HC, but one could say the same about any issue and I referenced that post several times. If our party chooses to move backwards instead od forwards the we cannot blame the other party.
Unfortunately the major issue of HC was not advanced under Obama, instead he chose to keep the for profit companies alive. HC was a central issue in 2007, but the Dems dropped the ball, there is not a nice way of putting this, but I think they screwed us
We, or I have seen, and been expected to vote for the least offensive candidate all of my life, when should the people matter and how do they win in a two party system?