Bernie Sanders: To Defeat Oligarchy, I Would Run for President

[Jesus Malverde]

Senator Bernie Sanders, for the second time in as many weeks, is indicating serious contemplation for a presidential run in 2016 if none of the potential Democratic candidates show the proper urgency when it comes to addressing a key set of issues that he thinks now face the country and the world.

Stressing the overarching crisis of out-of-control income and wealth inequality coupled with the planetary emergencies of global warming and climate change, Sanders' message has been that unless these problems are put at the forefront of the domestic policy agenda he will feel compelled to run.

In an extended interview with Salon journalist Josh Eidelson published Wednesday, Sanders admitted he does not "wake up every morning with a huge desire to be president of the United States... I don’t."

However, he continued, "I do wake up believing [that] this country is facing more serious crises than we have faced since the Great Depression. And if you include the planetary crisis of global warming, the situation today may even be worse. And given that reality, what distresses me enormously is that there is very little discussion about these major crises, and even less discussion about ideas that can resolve these issues."

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/11/27-4

[Agschmid]

1. Proud to have voted for him!

[AZ Mike]

47. Jealous that I have not been able to....

....hope to have that chance.

Sanders would be my ALL in POTUS politics....

[KamaAina]

2. As long as he runs as a Dem

the last thing we need is Nader 2.0. Third-Party Bernie would probably siphon off even more Dem votes than Nader did.

[Lee-Lee]

3. Long term, maybe third party Bernie will shock the DNC enough

to actually represent people.

[KamaAina]

4. Can we really stand even one more term of a repuke?

What would the Supreme Court look like after that one term?

[merrily]

100. Ah, yes, the Supreme Court argument.

I am not that thrilled with Kagan or Breyer and I fear a Sunstein nomination.

On the other hand, two out of the three most liberal Justices in the entire history of the Court were appointed by Republicans, namely Chief Justice Earl Warren and Justice Stevens.

So, there are no guarantees, either way.

[KamaAina]

127. The repuke party has changed a lot since Warren and Stevens were appointed.

Their recent appointments have all been hard-line far-right ideologues.

Also, who is this Sunstein of whom you speak?

[merrily]

164. So has the Democratic Party.

[KamaAina]

171. Indeed. We've appointed such monsters as Scalia, Thomas, and Alito.

[Coyotl]

40. I would love to see him in the Dem primaries

[arcane1]

56. Yes, at the very least! Independents can be ignored with ease by the media.

They don't get attention in any of the debates. Even if he just ran in the primary, he could do a world of good. No matter who else was in the race, it would be an exciting primary!

[Coyotl]

98. Plus, imagine how many people would register asDems to vote for him.

As an independent he would just be a spoiler helping the Republicans and wasting his own time.

[KamaAina]

72. Oh hell yeah

Hillary, er, I mean "the other candidates", would actually have to respond to his questions!

[Coyotl]

97. This would provide national attention to his voice, position, and important issues he champions.

[AverageJoe90]

62. Which is why I might be against him running at all, TBH.

Hey, love ya, Bernie, but you'd be better off as a support guy in '16.

[dotymed]

105. LOL...more DLC garbage.

If we ALL vote for Bernie Sanders the dlc candidate would attempt to be the "spoiler."

We ALWAYS wonder how the repugs can consistently vote against their interests.

How can WE vote against our interests?

Senator Bernie Sanders has been a consistent voice of reason for decades. He has PROVEN his willingness to fight for sanity, wealth equality, IOW, average Americans.

How can ANYONE put party first when our world is at stake? If we UNITE against oligarchy and vote in our own interests, instead
of the top 10% of the elite, we will vote for Sanders.

I am sick of being told (by the elite) who I can vote for. I will vote for the best qualified, most people first and world first
candidate. One who has consistently shown their support for a fair America and world.
There is so much more, this is an opportunity of a lifetime, one that will change our current wealth oriented, planet destroying
paradigm.
Can you imagine the SCOTUS appointments that Bernie Sanders would make? WOW.... a peaceful revolution.

[SammyWinstonJack]

111. +1.

[tavalon]

118. I'll probably have to step off of DU after ten years here

If he runs, especially if he runs as a Democratic Socialist, I will vote for him and campaign for him to the ends of the earth and that is in direct conflict with the rules here. Don't worry, if the time comes, I will step aside gracefully.

I won't need to be kicked off. I am a Democratic Socialist who caucuses with the Dems, but I won't in this case.

It hasn't happened yet, so I'm not off the reservation yet, but I'm giving notice that I will be off the res at that point.

[Ikonoklast]

128. It would be a tough decision to make for some. Not me.

If it comes to supporting Bernie over Hillary, I already know what I will do.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

153. Very well said. nt

[tavalon]

176. Exactly!!!!

We can stop the DLC in its tracks if we only want it bad enough.

[democrank]

5. Run Bernie, run!

Bernie consistently speaks for citizens who aren`t able to purchase a member of Congress to represent them. He has lived the same principles for years. And you can bet that he would never, ever say one thing in public and do the exact opposite behind the scenes.

I hope he runs and I hope he really, really shakes things up. That would be real change I could believe in.

[MissDeeds]

7. Well said

Very well said.

[lumberjack_jeff]

116. ... as a Democrat! n/t

[polichick]

6. I wake up wth those same thoughts about our biggest issues...

not even being discussed.

Run Bernie, Run!

[Cha]

8. Yeah, and where are you best suited to do just that, Senator Sanders?

In the Senate or as a 3rd party?

[polichick]

9. Why not as a Democratic prez?

[Vincardog]

25. I say have Bernie run as a DEMOCRAT and he will have my vote.

[riqster]

30. Damn skippy.

Independents cannot win a Presidential race. All they can do is tip the scales in favor of the party they are the least like.

In Sanders' case, that would mean electing a Repube. And to Hell with that.

[Vincardog]

31. That is why I want him in the Democratic Primary.

[riqster]

43. Yep. I supported Kucinich in 2008.

Sanders would be even better.

[rhett o rick]

36. The solution to fight off a spoiler running as an Independent, is for the Democrats to nominate

someone progressive. If the Democratic Party nominates HRC, they will be giving the race to Christie. It's completely in the Democrat's hands.

[riqster]

44. I heard that in 2000. It turned out badly.

Not going down that road again.

[rhett o rick]

59. It looks like we might. If Christie is the nominee, he will take a lot of the

Old Republican/New Democratic votes making it a close race for HRC. She might need the left to defeat him. I doubt she will make any concessions or even promises to the left. The Powers To Be are arrogant and they will see a Clinton vs. Christie contest as a win-win for conservatives.

If we dont want Christie to win in 2016, we must not nominate Clinton. Just sayin.

[riqster]

90. I'd prefer a more progressive Dem myself.

But after 8 years of an illegal Bush occupation, I will do whatever I can to defeat any and every Repube candidate I can.

For the powers that be, there might not be a difference: but for the poor, the sick, and the powerless, there is a huge difference between R and D.

[rhett o rick]

158. The attitude that we must vote the lesser of evils is what's got us where we are.

The Powers To Be manipulate us into that situation. They will back both Clinton and Christie. The frog is boiling slowly.

[riqster]

167. The greater of two evils is really fucking evil.

I dig what you're saying, but working in food pantries and shelters from the Clinton years, through Bush and into Obama's tenure; that greater evil took a huge toll on those least able to defend themselves. I and other volunteers saw that evil emerge and do its worst. And when Obama won, we saw the evil weaken, and were able to beat it back.

It was not a small difference, not a minor philosophical quibble, not a "no real difference" as some have said. Not out on the sharp end, not in the Midwest, not where the Repub economic policies destroyed hundreds of thousands of lives in a few short years.

Nope. I'll hold my nose if I have to, before I have to witness such a cataclysm of misery caused by Repube control of the White House again. I have to look at the victims in the eye, and tell them "I voted as best I could to keep you safe."

Because they do not have the luxury of political debates: they are trying to keep warm and dry and not starve to death. There is (in my opinion), nothing more noble and no cause more just than to feed a hungry family, when their government has turned its back on them.

And if we vote in such a way as to help enable another Repube to take over the Presidency, then all who voted thus bear some degree of responsibility for that misery, no matter the excellence of their reasoning or purity of their cause. Repubs in office are a far greater evil.

Try thinking this way: instead of "choosing the lesser evil", try "fighting the greater evil". It is closer to the truth.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

155. I agree totally.

[Beacool]

63. And if they choose Sanders the WH is a shoo-in?

[rhett o rick]

106. What an absurd statement. nm

[Beacool]

108. What's absurd is to think that this country would vote a Socialist for president.

It'll be hard enough to keep the WH with a moderate and some of you are offering options that could maybe get elected in Europe, but not in the USA.

[rhett o rick]

122. I agree, so why did you even bring it up? I certainly didnt make that statement.

My point is simple, if you want Christie to be president, nominate Clinton.

If you nominate Clinton and we lose to Christie, DONT BLAME ANYONE BUT YOURSELF. Dont blame the left, dont blame Ralph Nader. Democrats have the responsibility to run someone against Christie that is progressive.

[Beacool]

130. I live in NJ, Hillary is so far the only one who could beat Christie.

Last edited Wed Dec 11, 2013, 04:39 PM - Edit history (1)

Why do you keep insisting that if Hillary were to be the nominee that she would lose to Christie, when there's plenty of polling evidence to the contrary.

[truedelphi]

139. Thanks for reportingon the polling numbers off in NJ.

On the West Coast, it is hard to ascertain how people elsewhere think.

But for those of us who are familiar with the gerrymandering issue, the 2016 election will go down as rigged.

The gerrymandering issue has already helped the RW in six states back east, where more than a million popular votes should have insured that Democratic candidates got into office, but the popular vote didn't matter.

[Beacool]

141. Hillary has always had my support, but I'm sure that there'll be others running in the primaries.

That's Democracy. What I don't get is people insisting that their favorite LW candidate has a valid chance to win the nomination, let alone the presidency, when there's plenty of evidence that it's wishful thinking on their part.

This place more and more is becoming the mirror image of Free Republic. People who seem to be living in some utopia where a Socialist, and a MA senator who's been in politics for less than a year, have a realistic chance of becoming president. It's crazy........

[truedelphi]

149. Well, to answer your remarks from my

Perspective, the Democratic Party was once a real party, with vast differences between them and the Republicans.

Those of us old enough to understand what it means to be a FDR Democrat, and who realize that FDR's legacy is vastly different than what the New Age "Liberal" Democrats are forging, know that a Hilary Clinton Presidency is more of the same ol' same ol, Corporate-run state. (The definition of fascism, is after all, a place and time when Corporations run the government for their own purposes. Fascism doesn't necessarily have anything to do with swastikas or goose stepping soldiers.).

Thirty years of New Age Libs and we have a party far, far, FAR to the right of Richard Nixon.

With people like Obama supporting a Totalitarian NDAA Spy State, and the complete collapse of our civil liberties, with Endless wars for profit, with total support for the Nuclear Industry, with total support for Fracking and Pipelines (Obama approved a pipeline similar to Keystone XL over the Thanksgiving vacation,) what do people do if they want to have a decent environment? And to stop the military/surveillance state? Or to ensure that we have a decent safety net? And remember to arrive at such a militaristic, surveillance society, we have to insist on Austerity, including eliminating Social security and seizing that Fund, which currently has a damn Surplus of over 2 trillion bucks.

Right now due to Obama's Big Banking Appointments, 49 cents out of every dollar of profit generated in the USA goes DIRECTLY into the coffers of Big Businesses. Mainly the Four Biggest Banks.

To give you an idea of how out of whack that is, consider that under Reagan, only 8 cents out of every dollar went to banks.

How do we have a middle class if we continue along these lines? Of course, some here would argue we should just re-define "middle class" to mean people who make
$ 300K to $ 600K a year!

[Fantastic Anarchist]

156. Beautifully said.

Bravo!

[rhett o rick]

161. It's my opinion that when push comes to shove many of the "New Democrats" that refused

to support Rmoney will support Christie. And I dont think the left will support Clinton. She refused to stand up to Boy-George the Dim-Son on Iraq.

Of course you are correct that as of this date, Clinton is the leading Democrat. That's why the left has to start now to get someone progressive. We have to try. Eight more years of the status quo will kill the lower classes. Wall Street is having a hay-day and there is no reason to believe that Clinton will change that.

Will you support Clinton if she gets the backing of The Third Way?

[A Simple Game]

109. I see a Christie/Hillary race as a coin flip, no big difference between them.

I think Sanders would stand a good chance as an independent in that race as the only true alternative.

As for me? No more lesser of two evils, I vote for the candidate that will best serve the Country.

[rhett o rick]

123. I appreciate your view, but as I see it, if you dont want Christie to win, we must run a

valid progressive against him. We must fight hard to win the nomination.

[Beacool]

134. That's as asinine as those who were saying that there was no difference between Obama and Romney.

There's a hell of a lot of difference between Christie and Hillary. Do some research on the guy.

[Vincardog]

160. Too damned true

[newfie11]

10. He's got my vote

Please run Bernie

[WillyT]

11. If He Runs... He's Got MY Vote !!!

& Rec !!!

[woo me with science]

12. Thank you, Bernie!

[blue14u]

13. Bernie does speak to

the issues killing this Nation. He would be a force to be reckoned with if he runs..

I hope we can find a Progressive to run and win in 2016...

[Nanjing to Seoul]

14. He has my vote already!

[99Forever]

15. He has my vote and all of my support. n/t

[wildbilln864]

16. go Bernie go!

Sanders/Warren 2016!

[Demeter]

17. We could do worse. We HAVE done worse.

[albino65]

18. Yeah, but no

We don't need to split the vote. What are all you people with Warren 2016 doing supporting Sanders?

[Jackpine Radical]

29. Hedging our bets.

Everyone is telling us Warren isn't running.

Anyway, for most of us, this has noting to do with a Cult of Warren. She just happens to be the the most visible and dynamic face of Progressivism in the Democratic Party at the moment.

[JDPriestly]

34. We want to see changes in our economic household. We want to see some openness and

transparency and honesty in government. Both Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders would bring the changes we need in this country.

Get rid of the stupid government by propaganda and get some staight-talkers into the White House.

Obama was a drastic improvement over Bush, but we need much more transparency and honesty than even Obama has delivered.

[Dawgs]

124. "What are all you people with Warren 2016 doing supporting Sanders?"

Sanders is the male version of Warren, and she's the female version of him.

Not much of a reach.

[1StrongBlackMan]

19. If he runs ...

and runs in the Democratic primaries (both of which I doubt), he will have my primary vote; but only after I hear from him on foreign relations issues and non-economic domestic issues.

[cantbeserious]

20. Go Bernie Go

eom

[LittleGirl]

21. The dems in Congress

need to look to Bernie as a Mentor. I would vote for Bernie in a heartbeat but I'm a raving lefty and don't think anybody else could match him. But his age bothers me. I am worried that youngsters might not go for him. I love Bernie and wish he was President right now!

[JDPriestly]

33. I think youngsters might go for him more than they would someone in their parents' generation.

Bernie is very appealing.

[LittleGirl]

45. I think he's a true liberal

and that's why the GOP hates him and calls him a socialist. I love that he is that way.

[tblue37]

58. Of course, he also calls himself a socialist--and I love *that* about him. nt

[tavalon]

119. He calls himself a Democratic Socialist

It's the same descriptor I use for myself.

[LittleGirl]

129. same here! eom

[tardybar]

22. Bernie 4 prez

I Would vote for him. Please run!

[calimary]

39. Welcome to DU, tardybar!

Glad you're here! We LOVE Bernie Sanders. I sure wish there were a way to clone him. I think every state should have at least one like him in the Senate. And multiples of him in the House. We need that mindset leading the way, helping the pendulum swing back in our direction. It's been way too far to the so-called "right" - heck, I don't even like using the word "right" because the bad guys have completely perverted its meaning.

[truedelphi]

151. Yes A Big Welcome to DU! n/t

[Catkin]

23. Go Bernie!

[chknltl]

24. Welcome to the Democratic Underground Catkin

Cool name btw

[niyad]

27. welcome to DU.

looking at your screen name and avatar, you might enjoy checking out "sunday lolcats" in the DU lounge, posted every sunday morning by our own salmon chanted evening. it is an absolute sunday must for many of us.

[calimary]

41. Welcome to DU, Catkin!

Good to have you with us! I love this guy! He's one of the rare consciences of the Senate. I'm happy to say we in California have Barbara Boxer thinking along similar lines, and Massachusetts bats 1000 with Ed Markey and the top of the ziggurat - Elizabeth Warren. There are a few true good guys in the Senate, thank goodness. Wish we had more!

[YOHABLO]

26. If people would only wake up .. I'm afraid the country has been brain washed at this point.

Bernie would be vilified as a ''socialist commie'' no doubt by the right. People in this country are so ignorant and completely out of touch with reality. And the right loves it that way .. it's all part of the plan.

[Scuba]

88. Hillary will be vilified as a "socialist commie" by the right. That's what they do.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

28. He needs to run, badly -

if only to force other candidates to address issues that are off their Party "talking points" -- Kuch and Sharpton played this important role in the past, as did Perot.

[JDPriestly]

32. Good news!

I'd like to see Elizabeth Warren run, but I would also like to see Bernie Sanders run.

It's important to get these issues on the table. The only realistic candidates who can do that are Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. Grayson is also great, but I think Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders would make more viable candidates.

I think more Americans need to hear Bernie Sanders' message. If they did, his chances of winning would rise considerably. I think that Sanders and Warren are saying and thinking what Americans want and need to hear, and that either of them, just with their appointments to the Fed, Commerce, the SEC and the Treasury Dept. could change the country.

[sabrina 1]

35. He's got my support. Run Bernie!

[ananda]

37. Oh I would love to have the chance to vote for Bernie Sanders!

I love that man.

[rhett o rick]

38. He has my support, but the Powers To Be will not let him be the Democratic

nominee, at all costs.

Once again, how ironic if HRC gets the nomination via massive help from Citizens United.

[cprise]

42. K&R

[Neon Gods]

46. Either Bernie or Elizabeth

I want a strong, smart progressive to run against Hillary in the primaries. Most Americans never get to hear real liberals talk about liberal ideas and solutions. We need pressure on Hillary from the left to keep her from going all third-way on us.

[libdem4life]

48. Yes. I'm not enamored or excited by HRC, but refuse to be a Spoiler and do Nader 2.0. Not.

But if we can energize the Progressive, yea Liberal, side of the party by an Independent firebrand, Let's Go. There are more of us than they realize, cooling our heels behind the Third Way wave.

If I have to vote for her in the General, sobeit, I won't vote for a Republican SCOTUS, which awaits in the Split/Democrat-Republican wings. But a sharp Progressive prod in the political backside is a good thing. She's a political animal, and if we stop whining about here and, as Obama said, "make me do it", her strength of "vascilating" will lean our way, at worst. At best, maybe we can field another candidate who has the entire package. That will absolutely bring an about face for HRC.

And, she hasn't yet said she's running.

[Jamaal510]

77. I'm pretty sure that

HRC said a few times since 2008 that she won't run again, but people in the media (especially MSNBC) and elsewhere don't want to take her at her word. Same thing with Warren. The news cycle must be horrendously slow (aside from the Mandela thing, at least) for them to continuously pit people against one another who either haven't announced they'll run, or have said they won't. Right now, it's merely a distraction from next year's elections.

[1StrongBlackMan]

96. I see it as just another ...

poor excuse to sow dissension among Democrats, distracting us from the tragedy that is the modern gop.

[BlueStater]

49. DOB: September 8, 1941

Forget it. If he was about ten years younger, I'd be open to him but definitely not now.

[RoccoR5955]

50. I would quit my job to work full time for Bernie.

If that's what it would take, I would do it in a nanosecond!

[ladjf]

53. I'm retired and ready to work for Bernie. Where do I sign up?

[ladjf]

52. I believe that Bernie is the smartest and most well informed person in Washington. The U.S. would

indeed be most fortunate to have such a highly qualified politician in Congress. If he runs as a Democrat, he has my vote.

[dotymed]

115. He has my vote

no matter which party he runs under.
I happen to be a people before party kinda guy.

We always ask republicans "how can you vote against your own interests?"

How can you? You wrote "I believe that Bernie is the smartest and most well informed person in Washington."
Yet you would only vote for him as a democrat?
That is the definition of "party before people." Sad...

[ladjf]

165. You misunderstood my reasoning. I believe that he can only be

elected if he runs as a Democrat. Personally, I wouldn't care if he ran on the atheist ticket. I was trying to be pragmatic.

[dflprincess]

54. He has my support

[JEFF9K]

55. Bernie Sanders is a true American. ...

... One of the few.

[Scootaloo]

57. Bring it Bernie!

Give us a real linberal candidate, not just "more liberal than Republicans"

[JEB]

60. Bernie has my support.

[silvershadow]

61. Anyone have a Bernie for President graphic yet I can steal? :) nt

[Left Coast2020]

73. The photoshops programs are running at full speed somewhere.

SANDERS 2016

[Beacool]

64. In what world is Sanders a viable candidate?

He has as much chance of being elected president as does Palin. Wishful thinking is not reality.

[Jesus Malverde]

65. Bernie's Brigade can do it!

[Beacool]

68. I like Bernie just fine.

But he has zero chance of getting elected president.

[Jesus Malverde]

69. This captures the past....

We've got to look forward, the future can be bright.

[Beacool]

71. The future is a Socialist in his 70s?????

[quakerboy]

83. Whats your alternative?

I havn't yet seen anyone else put forward that would do a good job of it. Excepting Warren, but I doubt she is running.

[NorthCarolina]

101. The alternative is obviously

another third-way, right of center politician who will work with the GOP to maintain the status quo. That's what I would gather based on the posters avatar image anyway.

[Beacool]

107. Someone who at least has more than a snowball's chance in hell to get elected.

Pipe dreams of electing a Socialist who would be 75 years old in 2016 are not realistic options. Neither is a senator from MA with all of 10 months experience in elected office (aside from the fact that she' not interested in running). Ideals are fine, but reality always bites us in the butt.

I want a person who can beat the Republicans in 2016. It'll be hard enough as it is to keep the WH without putting out there candidates who only a minority group would vote for and not someone who could take it to the Republicans and give them a drubbing.

[quakerboy]

166. I want a person who will govern well.

If we nominate someone who may beat republicans, but will govern poorly, then we lose.

Someone who can beat the Republicans.. when we go with that as our standard, we do oh so well (Kerry anyone?). And when we put our money on a long shot (multiracial freshmen senator elected mainly as a result of a republican scandal with scanty national political experience, and a name that sounds more like the name of USA enemy #1 than like that of any president in the last 200 years).

Or flip it.. Republicans have been picking based on who can "beat democrats". Thats what Romney was. Their move to the middle. Thats what McCain was. An "electability" choice. Its worked out just as well for them as it has for us.

But lets set aside the clear myth of "electability". Lets run with your standard of someone who can beat Republicans. Who would that be?

We've only had two serious candidates in the last 4 elections who could beat Republicans. Gore did it, and Obama did it. None of the others were able to manage it. So who new is on the scene with that potential?

[polichick]

120. That's the same old lie that has handed this country to corporations...

through elected officials that are supposed to represent the people but are little more than whores for their owner corporations.

Stop spewing this lie!


Edit: typo

[Beacool]

131. What lie?

You truly believe that a Socialist in his mid 70s could win the WH in 2016????

Really?

[polichick]

135. That "viability" lie - the idea that anyone who is not an establishment Dem...

(which these days amounts to a corporate tool) can't possibly be viable.

It's complete bullshit designed to protect the status quo.

Do I believe that a Socialist in his 70s can win in 2016? Only if the people vote for themselves instead of against themselves - and stop buying the idiotic viability lie.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

159. Thank you for saying what needs to be said!

[Dawgs]

125. Oh God. Heard the same the same bullshit in 2007 about Obama. n/t

[Beacool]

132. Obama was a special case and he is a moderate.

He brought the enthusiasm of his charisma and the opportunity to transcend race. Sanders is not in the same category of electability.

[rhett o rick]

126. Seems you like to make your argument thru Just Asking Questions. There is a name for that.

First of all we desperately need a progressive Democrat winning the nomination. I dont think that will be Sen Sanders. But that doesnt preclude him from running and getting the progressive message out. Something that Clinton wont do. Sen Sanders have for years openly spoken out for the lower classes. Clinton doesnt bother. At least she isnt hypocritical.

If Clinton is the Democratic nominee, she will lose lots of New DEmocrat / Previous-Republican votes to Christie. Votes that Obama got in 2012. She may not be able to defeat Christie without the support of the left. And the left recognizes that eight more years of The Third Way will finish off the middle class.

Just Asking Questions - I recommend you google it.

[Beacool]

133. Whatever, keep pushing Sanders.

Some here seem in denial of the political realities on the ground as the Tea Party folks who saw Bachmann, Cain and Palin as viable candidates. Ditto for the Baggers that they are pushing now to run in 2016.

[rhett o rick]

146. Well since you are aware of "the political realities on the ground" please enlighten us.

The reality I see is that the lower classes have been under assault for 30 years and we can not withstand that assault much longer. Therefore we must stop that assault and we wont with another conservative Democratic president that embraces Larry Summers and Wall Street.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

136. He's a helluva lot more "viable" than Hillary when it comes to my vote.

[Beacool]

138. Your vote and that of some on the Left, but that's about it.

Elections are about winning, not about pushing for some idelaized candidate who won't ever win.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

140. "Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone,

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." John Quincy Adams

[Beacool]

142. I'm a pragmatist.

I vote on principle, but also on electability. Sanders has a zero chance of winning the Democratic nomination, never mind that he's not even a Democrat.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

143. John Quincy Adams won the presidency.

But, obviously your principles differ from mine and JQA's.

Not to mention Thomas Jefferson's.

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson, 1789.

"Were parties here divided merely by a greediness for office,...to take a part with either would be unworthy of a reasonable or moral man." --Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, 1795.

[raindaddy]

66. Exactly why he has my vote...

Sanders admitted he does not "wake up every morning with a huge desire to be president of the United States... I don’t."

[cuongtl]

67. Bernie have my support

Bernie have my support

[bvar22]

70. DURec for Bernie!

Now THAT is Change I Can Believe In!
Yes. We. CAN!



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center] [center] [/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[loudsue]

74. If Bernie ran as an independent, he wouldn't get on TV on any of the debates,

and really wouldn't get any face time by the rightwing media. If he ran on the democratic ticket, he would. But, of course, the media will call him a freak, like they did Kucinich and Howard Dean and other great dems.

[riqster]

110. They do it to HRC and Obama, too. Nt

[liberal_at_heart]

75. Bernie! Bernie!

[anti partisan]

76. Mixed feelings

Sanders would make a way better President than any of the "serious" contenders, but a third party run by him could enable a complete crackpot like Ted Cruz to get into the White House.

Nobody would be happier than the Republican oligarchs to see infighting between progressives.

[Le Taz Hot]

102. Ted Cruz will not be the nominee.

That is all.

[anti partisan]

173. I agree

Ted Cruz will probably not be the nominee. I was just using him as an example of someone scary enough that Clinton/Cuomo would look wonderful in comparison.

I do think the GOP is capable of nominating someone very frightening.

[Jamaal510]

78. After all the heat that

Obama has taken from the Right for his not-really-socialist policies, I'm curious to see what they would have in store for a REAL socialist president a la Bernie Sanders. I wouldn't be surprised one bit if they start pretending they were always cool with Obama (like how they've done with Bill Clinton and his various criticisms about Obama), just to try to make Sanders look extreme.

[Drunken Irishman]

80. Is Bernie a socialist?

He claims to be one - but he generally backs the President on everything he's done.

My guess is that DU would become just as disenchanted with a Sanders presidency as they have with Obama's.

[anti partisan]

82. Some people do agree with you

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/30/the-myth-of-bernie-sanders/

I don't agree with that assessment because of numerous statements that Sanders has made, but I see where they are coming from. What some see as selling out, I see as diplomacy. You can have someone like a Ron Paul of the left who never misses an opportunity to fight for what they feel is right (and I would like that, not saying there's anything wrong with it), but without a bit of a diplomatic touch you remain a gadfly for life.

[MFM008]

79. sorry

no more old white guys for a while.

[great white snark]

81. In this case we could make an exception.

Special circumstances for a very special "old white guy."

[sibelian]

86. Ludicrous.

What justifies this insanity?

[sibelian]

87. HE'S A NARCISSIST! HE'S OLD! HE'S A LOONY! ONE OF PANTS LEGS IS SLIGHTLY TOO SHORT!

HE EATS CABBAGE! HIS FACE IS AASYMMETRICAL! IF YOU LOOK AT HIM SIDEWAYS HE RESEMBLES A TABLE LAMP! HE'S LATE TO THE PARTY! HE SMELLS OF CHEESE! HE'S UNCOOL! HE MAKES NO SENSE! HE'S A HIPPY! HE DOESN'T WASH! HE'S GOT HAIRS STCKING OUT OF HIS EARS! HE HAS A PET COW! HE'S A WITCH!!!!

[truedelphi]

152. he sounds like me, and my friends.

Except we are girls. (actually ancient witches!)

[Alkene]

84. Yes, please run- and don't travel in small planes

or open limousines.

[truebluegreen]

85. I hope he runs--we need to move the conversation to the actual Left

not just slightly-to-the-left-of-Attila-the-Hun.

[KansDem]

89. "To Defeat Oligarchy..."

I would vote for him!

[Rockyj]

91. I love Bernie!

I've always been jealous of Vermont because they have him!

[HappyMe]

92. That would be great.

He would have my support.

[treestar]

93. How would that "defeat oligarchy?"

He should understand that just having the Presidency is not enough.

[Zorra]

163. I believe he means that he intends to actually attempt focused, effective actions to restore

democracy and defeat oligarchy.

Considering his past actions in the Senate as well, that makes him the superior candidate by a country mile.

[treestar]

170. But he's in the Senate, so he knows it does not go along with the President necessarily

He can't "defeat oligarchy" without the cooperation of Congress. DUers not realizing that is one thing, but Bernie has been a Senator for years.

[Zorra]

172. Maybe he could, if he made a sincere effort as POTUS.

You never really know unless you really try.

[Autumn]

94. Bernie, To Defeat Oligarchy, I would support you

all the way. Recommended.

[Enthusiast]

95. Bernie will run as a Democrat.

We need him in the worst way. And he knows it.

[NorthCarolina]

103. Why would he run as a Democrat? You think the third-way crew would stand for that?

They would allow exactly zero party support, and would work to derail his campaign as fervently as the GOP. Wall Street has likely already selected their Democratic and GOP 2016 offerings to the people, and you can select from those choices and those choices ONLY!

The Democrats (save for a few good apples) are as corrupted as the GOP, a means to ensure that neither party represents a threat to the oligarchy. I see absolutely no benefit in Bernie running as a Dem, absolutely none.

[lumberjack_jeff]

117. How much support will the Green/Socialist party throw his way? n/t

[Enthusiast]

157. Bernie will run. And he will run as a Democrat.

The Third Way is absolutely hated by anyone that has any understanding of their true nature.

Also, anyone tainted by the Third Way should be completely exempt form deciding anything about the Democratic Party. They can go join the Republican Tea Party, right where they belong.

Bernie will have a shocking amount of support as a Democrat. Bernie is dead center on nearly every issue, right with the American people. That's why the paid NAY SAYERS are coming on strong, saying, "There is no use for Bernie to run as a Democrat."

[NorthCarolina]

174. I really don't see why it's important for him to run as a Democrat.

If he ran as an independent would that somehow prevent you from supporting him or voting for him? The Democratic party likely would not have him, they would not help him, and in fact they would do everything in their power to destroy him and his candidacy. For my money I could care less what party affiliation he runs under. In fact, he can even make up a party name and I will STILL vote for him. If he runs as an Independent, I will vote for him. If he runs as a Democrat, I will vote for him. If he runs as a Green, I will vote for him. If he runs as a NPA (no party affiliation), I will vote for him.

I tend to think that the ones that insist he must run as a Democrat to get their support, really aren't all that interested in his candidacy, but are secretly more interested in ensuring that his candidacy goes nowhere.

[HappyMe]

175. Well said.

[ctsnowman]

99. K & R

[struggle4progress]

104. I like Sanders, but IMO it would take ten to fifteen years of constant grassroots organizing

to build a machine that would have any chance of electing him

[Jesus Malverde]

114. You might be right.

Machine politics

[polichick]

121. I think that time has been greatly shortened with the use of...

internet organizing and social media.

[LWolf]

112. He's got my support.

At this point, unless and until another good left-of-center Democrat appears, I am happy to support either Sanders or Warren; not both, as we're going to need a firebrand in the Senate, too.

I'd probably put Sanders before Warren, based on seniority and experience, but either would do the job.

[KoKo]

113. We need his voice out there along with Warren and Grayson. K&R!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

137. I always vote for the most progressive, anti-war, candidate on the ballot.

Bernie fills the bill.

[raouldukelives]

144. K&R! President Sanders has a nice ring to it!

Addressing climate change is the single most important event in the history of humans and for the animals that depend on a stable ecosystem. By failing to realistically address it with every passing day we are sentencing our children and wildlife to miserable existences and eventual extinction.
Any vote for someone who cherishes Wall St over the environment at this point is not only anti-environment and anti-liberal. I'd say it places you firmly in the lap of Ronald Reagans party no matter the insignia behind the name.
Every dollar invested in Wall St, every hour worked in its service is a disservice to those who will come after us. It is spitting in face of nature and her creations and clearly shows a complete lack of respect and admiration for it.

[William769]

147. Any Librarians running for office that you know of?

[otherone]

148. cool

Thanks for the op

[Fantastic Anarchist]

150. The next Eugene V. Debs

... hope it turns out differently, though.

[truedelphi]

154. + 10,000 n/t

[Zorra]

162. Woo-hoo! To defeat oligarchy, I would be overjoyed to vote for, and elect, Senator Sanders!!!

[hay rick]

168. Run Bernie run.

Bernie is what Democrats ought to be.

[name not needed]

169. It's 2000 all over again.

You people are out of your goddamned minds.

[woo me with science]

177. kick