General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAre Progressives Ready for 'Political Revolution' with Bernie?
https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/03/10With lots of agreement, some divergence, and plenty of questions still to consider, progressives weigh in on a 'Bernie Sanders for President' campaign. (Photo: DonkeyHotey / cc / Text added)
Vermont's Independent Senator Bernie Sanders has now said he is 'prepared to run for President of the United States' in 2016, but that he wants to hear from progressives across the country about what such a run should look like if and when he makes it official.
In interviews with both The Nation and Time magazines published last week, Sanders spoke in the most specific terms yet about why a serious progress candidate is necessary, what the goals of such a campaign should be, and the inherent challenges involved. And even though the self-described democratic socialist admits he's not 'the only person out there who can fight this fight'Sanders says the moment demands what he repeatedly calls a "political revolution."
Speaking with Time's Jay Newton-Small, Sanders said, "We need candidates who are prepared to represent the working families of this country, who are prepared to stand up to the big money interests, who are prepared to support an aggressive agenda to expand the middle class. And I am prepared to be that candidate."
And on two key issuesrunning against the as-yet-undeclared but clear Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton and the question on whether he would run as a Democrat or as an independent candidate outside the two dominant partiesSanders was descriptive if not conclusive in his answers.
Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
Autumn
(45,120 posts)Please. rec
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)Phaedrus76
(25 posts)And the Left, and students and minorities and women, will come out and vote for Democrats. Everyone who can, call Bernie, go to events he is at, and give something, even $5.
INdemo
(6,994 posts)was bought by corporate $$ long ago. Bernie is an Independent and should run as an Independent. We have two corporate owned parties and Bernie would be just another Corpracrat if he ran as a Democrat.
It is a know fact that billionaires are standing by waiting for Hillary's decision....
Bernie's campaign would be financed by the working class and yes he could do it as an I
BeyondGeography
(39,379 posts)They're right.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Cheese4TheRat
(107 posts)Than by status quo "liberals" who prefer the slow death of creeping conservatism and lesser of two lessers Democracy.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Response to SidDithers (Reply #32)
Post removed
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)You forgot SchmerzImArsch.
Sid
Cheese4TheRat
(107 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)over and over and over and over and over and over?
Sid
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)but an attempt to split the vote (a la Tea party), is the dumbest idea on this thread.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Vote for Democrats.
Winning elections is important therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)No longer going to just eat whatever corporate tool the Dems put up.
bigdarryl
(13,190 posts)The republicans
demwing
(16,916 posts)...next problem?
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)If Bernie wants my vote, he needs a D behind his name. Electing Democrats matters.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)Just sayin...
Kilgore
(1,733 posts)Bernie does!!
Run as a Democrat and give 'em hell, Bernie!!
Hoppy
(3,595 posts)14 Senators with (D) to their name voted to block Obama's nominee to the Civil Rights Commission.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)... But it's still better than them being R's and you know it.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)It's just as bad!
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Take a look at some recent filibusters and tell me party affiliation doesn't matter.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)If you vote for the party, and not the person, it's just as bad as what the RepubliCONs have been doing... Marching in lock step to their leader.
This is wrong!
daybranch
(1,309 posts)from the democratic wing of the democratic party. He sure talks and acts more like a democrat than Hillary. What idea does he have you do not like??
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)... But if if wants my vote, he needs to run a Democrat. I am voting to Democratic nominee in the Generals because it matter that democrats win. Remember 2000? We could have President Gore rather than Dubya if it weren't for Ralph Nader. Hundreds of thousands of people would still be alive today because Gore would not have invaded Iraq. The U.S. Would not have engaged in torture and extreme rendition.
Yes. Electing Democrats MATTERS.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)Bernie ran as an indy on the left, Hillary ran on the Dems, and Christie ran on the Cons, you would vote for Hil?
Sorry, I would vote for Bernie. I would invite Rand to run as an indy on the right too!
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)If Bernie gets the nomination, I will donate till it hurts, and work as hard as I can for him.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)You vote for the Party, not the person?
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Yes, policy matters.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)... surely he would have killed MILLIONS.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts).... voting for Nader, or not at all, because someone didn't like Lieberman gave Dubya and Darth Cheney. That administration is responsible for hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded. Nader had no hope of winning, so voting for him was essentially a protest vote. Not voting at all was just plain dumb.
Would Gore/Liberman have been the perfect admin? No. I didn't vote for Gore in the primaries, and I sure as hell don't like Lieberman. Would they have been MILES better than Dubya and Darth? You bet.
Vote your conscience in the primaries, if you must (I personally consider electability in the generals in my calculations), but in the generals, almost any Dem is better than almost any Repug. And realistically, at the Presidential level, the winner is going to be a Democrat or Republican, at least for the foreseeable future.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... the didn't like Lieberman, it's that Lieberman inspired no additional voters to turn out for their ticket.
Gore would have won had he chosen a progressive who could have inspired some of the electorate who didn't bother instead of a neo-con who inspired no one.
Blaming Nader is a copout when Gore picked a guy who did not help the ticket in any way.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)That's not a cop out. That's the numbers.
In this thread (and particularly my comment), we're talking about people potentially voting for Sanders running as an independent. Assuming Clinton as the party nominee, each vote for Sanders would be a vote NOT going to Clinton. Why on earth would we want to do that in the general election? Bernie won't win running as an independent, and people who think he would are kidding themselves.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... a progressive running mate could have inspired a couple thousand of them?
Do you believe Lieberman got any of the mythical "moderate Republicans" to vote for Gore?
In my humble opinion, the "both parties are too much alike, why bother?" issue had far more impact than Ralphie's 1,635 supporters.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)We're talking about people potentially voting for Bernie Sanders as an indeendent candidate.
And whatever you think about turn-out, the plain truth is that is those voting Nader voted Gore in 2000, we would not have had President W.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Adrahil
(13,340 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)But Gore still won remember?
Can we all finally accept the fact that Nader did not cause Gore to lose? Gore won Florida and the Presidency , but the corrupt SCOTUS interfered and crowned Shrubya king..
Why we didn't take to the streets with torches and pitchforks still amazes me...
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)All that matters is the color of the jersey, not the quality of the player.
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)I'm not interested in noble defeats. REAL PEOPLE are affected when someone like Dubya gets elected because people voted for Nader instead of Gore.
Yes. Winning matters. And in some cases, what team their playing for matters more than the fact that aren't ideologically perfect.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)To abuse the old saying, if the mountain will not come to Mohammed, then Mohammed must go to the mountain. That is if the Democratic party is not going to figure out how the fuck to be liberal, then people with an interest in liberal policies are just going to have to look elsewhere.
Sorry, I'm not content to sit around yanking my pud and going "YAY I'M ON THE WINNING TEAM!"
demwing
(16,916 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Big Corporatist-style Democratic running of the nation into the arms of the Banksters, the NSA Surveillance types and Big Prison et al.
Bernie would be a welcome relief from Big Corporations and their control.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)In 2012 Bernie Sanders got...207,000 votes. Yep, Hillary is definitely the weak link.
daybranch
(1,309 posts)Your ability to crystallize this and turn it around fairly in my mind is very appreciated. Republicans are the party of big business and everyone in business knows business has too main imperatives, first is to stay in business and second is to make a profit. Republicans know these rules well and any thought that they will fail to evolve to something that allows them to continue to exist is just garbage. Republicans have used social issues and hate to bring voters to the polls, but you should not believe that accomplishing the social dreams they spouted were the goal or the intent. Getting more elected offices was the intent. Getting more votes than Democrats is only a necessity where they have not Gerrymandered. Now we will watch as Republicans move toward more of society , respecting gay rights and non secular government, and eventually womens' rights as they need to win elected office. This is to be as expected, elected office is the goal which allows them to remain corrupt, selling the political representation they amass to the highest bidder for profit either in terms of money or increased power. When they achieve and maintain their ability to sustain the first imperative, they will continually revise the election system to push voter influence out of the process so they can pursue the profits they receive from corporations without the unwelcome intrusions by voters.
It is this second imperative that makes corruption necessary. They cannot be rewarded by money for doing what voters really want and therefore must be unrepresentative in their actions in order to satisfy big money and corporations. But they walk a line here and still must crate enough supporters to get elected eben in the rigged Gerrymandered districts they support. They will , I think the term is pivot, on social issues but economics is what big business and big money donors care about primarily. This is what unites them. You will not see republicans working against the obvious and very harmful economic inequality. They will fight hard to protect big business and big business profits because without them they are lost in the wilderness. They have continued to spout but never support an ideology. They will throw any ideology they claim under the bus in order to help their donors. So just watch as they move to the middle on social issues and do not let them lie to enough people that they should vote for the man.They are serpents and will not change. We must prevent these evil people from being elected or re-elected in 2014.
LoisB
(7,231 posts)A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)If I'm going to throw my vote away, it will at least be on someone I want to be president and reflects my values.
No more lesser of two evils, it is still evil. I have voted for the lesser of two evils since 1972 in all but one election (Carter), where has it gotten the United States?
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)I would work for Bernie if he ran, and get 100,000 people to vote for him. If there were enough people like me, who would go out and campaign for him tirelessly, Bernie would win in a heartbeat!
toby jo
(1,269 posts)aggiesal
(8,923 posts)He has to prove he can beat Hilary first, otherwise splitting the dem vote will only benefit whatever figurehead has an (R) next to their name.
Also, if Bernie runs as a dem, he will not get any support from dem offices if the DNC endorses Hilary, which I expect they will do.
Bernie has a huge hill to climb.
Cheese4TheRat
(107 posts)aggiesal
(8,923 posts)I'm just trying to point out that regardless if Bernie runs as an (I) or a (D)
he's going to have a tough time.
I personally would rather have Bernie over Hillary.
Hillary will no doubt be the corporates' choice, so Bernie will get bad press at every turn (TV, Radio, Newspaper)
Cheese4TheRat
(107 posts)For me, policy is a requirement. Democrats usually support policies I support. But not always, and certainly not lately.
Sorry if I misinterpreted your comments.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Bernie would NOT catch the majority of Independents because he would not capture any of the two largest groups that make up Independents ... the Millennial and disenfranchised republicans.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)You might be able to use the movement to exert more control over State Parties (although I would argue that the Ron Paul Republicans were a lot more politically worked up then the Progressive Democrats are at this point) bu I would argue that he had very little influence on the Republican nomination. Mitt Romney felt a lot more pressure to pretend to be a Tea Party kook than he did to become a libertarian.
Beacool
(30,251 posts)Same delusional mindset. The Freepers think that either Cruz, Rand or Palin are sure bets to win the WH. Here, they think that an old Socialist is viable in a general election.
It's amusing, but far removed from reality.
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)Bernie Sanders getting elected is far removed from reality? Yeah, kind of like America having a Black President.. Never happen.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)I know he is; I read it here.
Explain to us a position Obama took that was as radical as Bernie's. And if there is one, why do we need a radical like Bernie?
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)Bernie Sanders getting elected is no more far fetched than Obama getting elected and tried to turn it into a policy fight.
Congrats. Thats what the party needs. More infighting. Have a nice day.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)You support an OP that proposes Bernie Sanders run for President as a progressive.
I suggest that he's too left wing to be an attractive candidate.
How is that "infighting"?
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)stating that President Sanders is no more far fetched than President Obama.
You chose to take that to mean that I wanted to debate policy. You were wrong. I'm happy to debate policy when the time comes. Right now we don't even know if the man is going to run. All I am saying is it's not impossible for him to get elected.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)Or are only your opinions relevant?
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)if you are going to use the word impossible.
Have a nice day.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)erronis
(15,328 posts)People get so caught up in labels that they don't really pay any attention to the messages (and better yet the actions) that these potential candidates are identified with.
As far as I can tell, Bernie has been straightforward about his positions and has backed them up with votes and explanations about how he reached these positions. Most of them are just common sense, as long as you care about the common person.
I can't say anything about Hilary because I really don't follow politicos that closely. I would want to believe that she has strong positions of her own but most of what I read recently is her Dept. of State pronouncements.
Progressive/democrat/liberal/conservative/right-wing/whatever. These are intended to numb your mind, to pigeon-hole a person/position so you don't have to think about it any more. Those that attach the labels are trying to own your own conscious.
--- Think for yourselves. Eschew stereotypes. Analyze past actions, not current words. Be sentient!
Scuba
(53,475 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)for the Reality-based analysis.
MO_Moderate
(377 posts)The real question is are 'regular' Democrats ready.
rtracey
(2,062 posts)Yes I am, but I cannot speak for my fellow REGULAR Democrats. I do believe if he runs as independent, it will split the democratic vote, causing a loss in 2016. I think he needs to join the democratic party.....(IMO)..
MO_Moderate
(377 posts)as long as regular Democrats embrace his progressive solutions.
djean111
(14,255 posts)MO_Moderate
(377 posts)All I know is that this Sanders guy needs moderate Democrats to accept his progressive solutions if he is going to have a chance of becoming President.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)Third Way represents Americans in the vital center those who believe in pragmatic solutions and principled compromise, but who too often are ignored in Washington.
Our mission is to advance moderate policy and political ideas. Our agenda includes: a series of grand economic bargains, a new approach to the climate crisis, progress on social issues like immigration reform, marriage for gay couples, tighter gun safety laws, and a credible alternative to neoconservative security policy.
Unlike traditional think tanks, we do not house scholars who work in silos on academic research. Instead, we are built around policy teams that create high-impact written products and innovative trainings to influence todays debates.
Our ideas have been used by the President, members of Congress, governors, mayors and countless political candidates. Based on our record, the media has labeled us the future of think tanks, incorrigible pragmatists, radical centrists, and the best source for new ideas in public policy.
http://www.thirdway.org/about_us
MO_Moderate
(377 posts)Not all that PC savvy here, but will try to look where they stand on actual solutions to those things.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)It's not pretty.
demwing
(16,916 posts)not yours (of course), but a turd nonetheless...
Half-Century Man
(5,279 posts)A few talking heads at the top of a "Presumed" majority.
I might be wrong, but I afraid I'm not.
djean111
(14,255 posts)Third Way folks wrote a piece in the WSJ (I think) saying Elizabeth Warren and her progressive ideas were "getting out of hand". Third Way would adore to start cutting away at Social Security, under the false flag of "bipartisanship". Stuff like that.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)what with their RadicalPragmaticConservativeCentrism and all. They're essentially Republicans who believe in "gay marriage." BFD.
Elizabeth Warren, Third Way and the Battle Over American Liberalism
http://billmoyers.com/2013/12/11/elizabeth-warren-third-way-and-the-battle-over-american-liberalism/
djean111
(14,255 posts)And yes, they throw around gay marriage as if everything is an either/or.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)"Turd Way?"
MO_Moderate
(377 posts)Run, Bernie! But change parties NOW and run as a Democrat, echoing others here. "...Descriptive if not conclusive...". Come on Bernie, give it up. Don't leave us hanging. You are just about our last great hope of getting a real Democrat in the White House.
I bet you he switches parties soon. He should know he can't run as and Independent, as it would be too dangerous of splitting the vote and the Repubs squeaking thru. Bernie knows this, if anyone does.
groundloop
(11,522 posts)I'd fully support Bernie Sanders if he chose to run as a Democrat, and of course come general election time I'll support whomever gets the nomination. But the thought of Bernie running as an independent scares the shit out of me, it smells of the 2000 fiasco all over again.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)He's going to do the right thing.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)rurallib
(62,448 posts)The thought of anything like another Bush presidency shakes me to the core.
My hope is that Bernie runs as a Dem. If he wins, hooray.
If he loses hopefully he will have moved the Dem candidate to the left forcing said person to adopt policies that are real old traditional Dem policies. That will then hopefully force issues to be brought up that haven't seen the light of a good debate for a long time.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Someone like Dragon Lady Feinstein would welcome him into the party with welcome arms.
bread_and_roses
(6,335 posts)As tired as the phrase "thinking in the box" or "outside the box" itself is.
And as much as I love Bernie, seems he's stuck in same, from the article - though I suppose one could argue that seeking feedback from his natural "base" in itself a novelty in these times.
Seems to me that the record of BO in the WH should disabuse any "progressive" of the notion that any sort of progress is to be made inside the conventional political structure, including that of the Democratic Party. It sure did me. The persistence of this fantasy seems to me a prime example of "hope springs eternal" - no matter the concrete realities.
Do I have an "outside the box" solution? No, so don't ask me for one. I don't claim to be brilliant or a master strategist or anything else - just an on-the-ground grunt in the never-ending struggles just to keep from falling further behind in our rights, our livelihoods, our ordinary human desire for a degree of comfort and meaningfulness in our lives. I don't have an answer.
But I am quite convinced that electing a President is not it.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)The Democratic Party Bosses will "Dean" him right out of the gate. Personally, I think he should run as an independent but then again, I hate political parties and so did at least four of the Founding Fathers:
"A pure democracy . . . can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction . . . . There is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party . . . . Hence it is that such democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been a short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." --James Madison
"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under it leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble opinion, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution." --John Adams
However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.
GEORGE WASHINGTON, Farewell Address, Sep. 17, 1796
"And of what kind are the men that will strive for this profitable preeminence, through all the bustle of cabal, the heat of contention, the infinite mutual abuse of parties, tearing to pieces the best of characters?" Benjamin Franklin
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Congressional races which is where the power could more easily be turned back to the people, not overnight, but we have two Congressional elections 2014 and 2016 where the people have a chance to start removing the millionaires who are beholden to Corporations and start replacing them with people who represent them.
And as someone else said to me, and I agree, start at the local level, electing people who are more concerned about the people than about corporate donors.
If we had a Congress that truly represented US, rather than rubber stamping Corporate legislation, who is in the WH would be far less important.
Emphasis should be on Congress now.
Andy823
(11,495 posts)As you stated, it is in congress that we can make changes, and yes it will take time, that will move this country in the right direction. It has to start from the local level and work up to the national level. No matter who we nominate for president, they would not be able to make the changes needed without help from congress, and if we don't take back the states that are being run be republicans, we will be in the same boat as Wisconsin, Maine, Florida and all the other states that voted republicans in back in 2010.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I know it's not fair for me to say that I want both, the WH and Congress. I totally agree that we need to work hard to fix Congress. That alone is an undaunting task but the WH can shape America's opinion of the party. America needs to hear Sen Sanders and I think they will like the message. And at some point we will have to take on the corporatish Democratic Party machine. If Clinton-Sachs becomes president she will teach Americans that Wall Street rules and that 25% poverty for American children is just the cost.
on edit: Also, it may be time to r3bel. It looks like the political system is fixed beyond repair. We cant wait too long to decide that we must work outside the political system. No violence, as that's counter productive, but civil disobedience. Unless we think we can repair the "fixed" political system, we must start thinking of r3bellion.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)my thoughts and not assumed that people would know where I was coming from. I was thinking about how impossible it is to get someone like Bernie elected to the WH and even if we succeeded, unless he had a Congress to work with, he would alone could not implement real progressive policies.
Otoh, even if a Republican ended up in the WH, IF we had a truly Progressive Congress s/he would not be able to do what, say, Bush was able to do.
So my point was that no matter what, Congress is key, with a Great president or with a terrible president, Congress holds the power to either support or block their initiatives.
We don't spend enough time on Congress, all the focus is on the WH race and while we're busy with that, Third Way and Republicans are being backed by both parties.
No problem I am always interested in your thoughts, Rhett .... one thing is certain, we the people have to change what we have been doing.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)as a DEmocrat he would get a forum. That's huge. Would die for a debate with him and Clinton-Sachs. At this point we can not defeat Citizens United (how ironic that it will help Clinton-Sacs) but we must try to get our message out there.
We must develop a strategy. I wish I knew we had someone working on it.
iamthebandfanman
(8,127 posts)would do it so poor Bernie doesn't have too.
a lot of stigma that comes with running third party.. some lefties seem to take offense to that...
to be honest tho, I kinda hate the thought of losing Bernie or Elizabeth from the senate.. we need as many liberal minded lawmakers as we can get in congress
somebody HAS to challenge Hillary tho.. or the left will be marginalized so quickly we wont even feel our heads spin.
im fine with Hillary winning the nomination, and would obviously vote for her in a general over a republican.. but it shouldn't be given to her.. and if the left doesn't put up an opposition within the party , im seriously debating unregistering with the democratic party.
LittleGirl
(8,291 posts)against Ron Paul (who should run as an independent as well) and let them split the votes.
With Sanders the clear winner! Yes!
cali
(114,904 posts)LittleGirl
(8,291 posts)sorry. but I can't and won't.
I'll vote for Bernie no matter what party he runs with.
Someone above mentioned splitting the vote if he ran as a Dem. That's where I was going with that. Sorry it wasn't clear enough for you.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)to battle the billionaire backed opposition.
polichick
(37,152 posts)That's what "revolution" would look like today in the U.S. - a critical mass of people working around the bought-and-paid-for system.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)Cheese4TheRat
(107 posts)What this tells me is that pretty much everybody here votes for the party and not for the policy. How thoughtful.
The question is, will the Democratic Party let him participate in the primary debates? I think he would be "winnowed" out early, and on purpose.
Anyway vote Chist for Governor. Sure, you voted against him before. And his policies haven't changed. Just his party.
Go Dems!
Autumn
(45,120 posts)The policy of the Democratic party is sadly lacking and I would like someone to give a voice to those issues and people who don't seem to matter to the circle d democrats. I would support him no matter how he decides to run, Democrat or Independent he has my support.
Cheese4TheRat
(107 posts)However, if he runs as an Independent then the Democratic nominee will be hard pressed to earn liberal vote.
I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)over an Independent.
Cheese4TheRat
(107 posts)And I shall soon have my posting privileges revoked.
Autumn
(45,120 posts)Skinner in ATA has said people can come back as long as they don't get into the same drama that got them banned.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Autumn
(45,120 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Autumn
(45,120 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Autumn
(45,120 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)I don't know much about socks.
Sid
Autumn
(45,120 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)who used 2 accounts at he same time for a period if about 8 weeks. Then they let the old account go dormant, and continued with the new account.
Maybe you have specific information about others.
Unless your suspicions are nothing more than idle speculation.
Sid
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)many people realize that casting their vote does two things...tell the candidtate who they prefere, and keeps the non preferred candidate out of the White House. Many, many realize that keeping Rand Paul, or Christi out of the White House is a noble cause and a worthy use of strategic voting.
Cheese4TheRat
(107 posts)And I always vote offensively, not defensively. I don't give up ground for fear of the big gain.
Sorry if I take positions seriously.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)so do what you want, but dcomer here and pretend you can forsee any outcome based on your assumption that splitting the vote wont hurt Dems overall.
rucky
(35,211 posts)and progressives will have no pull in the primaries without this. And if his message gains any traction, the other Dems will jump on.
Quit bellyaching everyone - this is strategic.
Bernie's not stupid. If the numbers look like an election would sway to Republican, he'll throw his support to the Dem nominee.
yurbud
(39,405 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)yurbud
(39,405 posts)corporate on the inside, not crazy on the outside.
polichick
(37,152 posts)imo he should run against the one corporate party with two faces - that way millennials will come to the polls, along with those of us older voters who have had enough. Perhaps we'll reach critical mass together!
(Nobody is going to buy the "revolution" if it's in the Dem Party - too many voters thought they were getting that with Obama.)
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)What a "hope and change" bust that turned out to be.
polichick
(37,152 posts)the Dem Party. Just spoke with a very astute, in-touch millennial who said his generation is over both parties and feels so burned about what happened with Obama.
Run a REAL REVOLUTION as an indie, Bernie!
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)I didn't expect O to be some revolutionary, but I didn't expect Rick Warren. Drones. Not letting those fucking Bush tax cuts fully expire. "Evolution" on marriage equality, and only coming around when it was politically expedient. Chained CPI. Just a few examples.
Obama doesn't seem to identify as a Democrat. Oh, he can turn it on while campaigning and rallying the troops at conventions, but he doesn't seem proud of the brand. That's a huge problem.
I'm in NC where the Democratic Party is in shambles. I'm a bit over both parties as well, and am far from a Millennial...
polichick
(37,152 posts)both parties - but that means there could be enough for a real "revolution."
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)candidate, running in a different party, would have a great play contrasting the difference between them and the similarities between current D & R policies, since the only thing worse than a D for about a third of the country right now is an R.
They might lose and cause the Ds to lose also, but, quite honestly I think the best thing for Ds would be for them to lose 3 or 4 elections in a row, It's the only thing that will cause real change.
If things keep going the way they are we will have tens of millions of people who will never recover from the lack of effort on the part of the government to help working people for the past several years, from policies that are deliberately designed to help the wealthy keep control.
The way it is now pandering to the right brings enough success and jobs for the few that they have been able to hang on to their donors, but 100 million "working poor", people in poverty, long-term unemployed and hungry folks is a lot to throw under the bus to keep their banker donors happy. They may not just continue to lie down, though odds are they will.
polichick
(37,152 posts)Again and again, I guess, since it seemed we had hit that place with Bush.
In any case, we are due for the "political revolution" Bernie mentions. Hope you're right about the numbers wanting real change.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)Change requires spirit, and that hasn't been fed in some time.
polichick
(37,152 posts)Obama's 2008 campaign. He's in touch with others in his generation who worked with us back then and were so fired up. He says they are over both parties and don't even talk politics these days. He doubts any of them will vote in 2014, maybe not even in 2016.
I get it - after many years of working for the party, not sure I could drag myself to the polls for a Third Way Dem again.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)I have been for a long time.
lostincalifornia
(3,639 posts)candidates do
hack89
(39,171 posts)grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)but if I was convinced that he could actually win the presidency by a wide margin then I would vote for him.
But the likelihood of that happening is minuscule at best.
polichick
(37,152 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)Beacool
(30,251 posts)A Socialist in his mid 70s.
Might as well throw in the towel and let the Republicans win the trifecta. They already have the House, they might win the Senate this year (which is my biggest fear) and they may yet win the WH in 2016.
polichick
(37,152 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)Beacool
(30,251 posts)And everyone here knows that I'm not precisely a big Obama fan. There IS a difference between both sides, and denying it is disingenuous.
polichick
(37,152 posts)imo voters need to stop settling for the lesser of evils.
Beacool
(30,251 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Bernie comes into the race, complains about Hillary's positions and attacks the folks running for the Republican nomination. She has good debates with him which reminds people about her ability to debate and her gravitas. She comes off looking like the moderate and so she is well positioned for the general.
In addition, Bernie helps make the case for Liberal and progressive positions without forcing Hillary to seem too far left.
This is why I welcome Bernie to the race. I think it is a win all around.
I love him, but there is no way Bernie raises the funds he would need to be competitive in a drawn out race for the nomination. He ends up being a factor, but Hillary will prevail. I don't think it goes much beyond the first 3-5 contests.
demwing
(16,916 posts)should he win. Don't forget that...
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)He can have the effect of making a good case for progressive positions. Which again is why I enjoy the thought of him entering the race.
polichick
(37,152 posts)and vote accordingly.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)You can't build the necessary ground game in enough states to mount a serious attempt to contend for the nomination without a lot of money.
polichick
(37,152 posts)You don't have to run a traditional campaign with big ad buys if you run a grassroots/social media campaign. That's the only way we're going to get out of this mess because our corrupt Congress won't vote the money out of elections - and the Less-Than-Supreme Court is right there with them.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)I would like Bernie to have a good showing at least. I love the guy quite frankly.
polichick
(37,152 posts)Beacool
(30,251 posts)I'm just amused and somewhat annoyed at the number of people who actually think Sanders has a snowball chance in hell of winning a general election. In what country do they live? In this one, there are plenty of people who think that Hillary and Obama are Marxists, as crazy as that is too.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)"I'd support a Sanders campaign," Dreier told Common Dreams, but onlycapitalizing IF"he ran in the Democratic Party primaries and not as an independent candidate."
A Sanders campaign inside the party, he continued, "could (1) draw a great deal of media attention, shift the agenda, and help raise public awareness about corporate power and widening inequality, (2) push Hillary to the left on key issues, and (3) help build a progressive infrastructure within the Democratic Party similar to how the DLC moved the party toward the corporate center. I would love to see Bernie in action during the primary season's televised debates. I would NOT support Bernie running as an independent candidate, where he'd run the risk of being a spoiler in battleground states and handing the White House over to the Republicans."
adirondacker
(2,921 posts)PS Hope things are going better for you! Good to see your posts again as well.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)But watch the Media Horse pile on him once he announces.
As for me, I'm doing fairly well under the circumstances. Been out of the hospital for 3 weeks and am trying to increase my activity level as much as I can.
It's a beautiful sunny day here, almost the first one above freezing since sometime in November.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)No chained CPI.
Cut the big war budget.
End oil subsidies.
Medicare for All.
End of American exceptionalism... er... Empire
Tax the hoarding class again.
Etc. Hillary will look foolish in a debate. What are her positions???? For that matter, so will any R.
Beacool
(30,251 posts)Bernie would win and Hillary would do poorly in the debates????
Oh, gee........
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)who predicted a Kucinich victory in 2008.
Of course "Bernie" is considerably more electable than Kucinich because CCPI or something.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)...it's only the fact that the "Party bosses" kept him from getting his message out.
At least that's how I remember the story going.....
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)after grabbing a respectable 0% in Iowa, followed by a commanding 1% in New Hampshire. He had momentum, damnit!
Beacool
(30,251 posts)grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)no I'm not.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)I mean Bernie of course!
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)Beacool
(30,251 posts)actually think like they do. Poll after all has shown the contrary to both ends of the political spectrum, but they forge ahead. In their world Bernie and Palin are viable candidates, when in reality, they have zero chance to become president. That's why I equate DU to Free Republic, it's as if their members live in an alternate world where folks are as liberal or as conservative as they are.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)I think that is what makes the science of polling so exacting. Just a slight change in wording can affect the poll results.
I guarantee you that Tea Partiers and Freepers can point to polls that they say shows that a majority of Americans believes the same things that they do. Progressives can do that too.
The problem is, when the subjects are debated back and forth and people hear politicians and pundits give their spin, people change their minds and their positions become more nuanced. But that is what matters, how people look at things after the debate and which laws they are willing to fight for or against.
Half-Century Man
(5,279 posts)"Figures don't lie, but liars can figure".
Edit: Sorry, that comes over as insulting, I was pointing out that data can be manipulated by experts and presented to meet a predetermined agenda. Not that anyone on this thread was doing so. Merely that it could be done.
Personally I think it is too early to call it one way or the other. Bernie has strong backing and backlash from the anti-corporatist movement could bury Hillary. And no one is accounting for a little known to sweep in from the side.
Stop believing main stream media corporations. Stop believing the Washington establishment. Stop believing in what you think you know.
Question everything, evaluate everything, and get ready to change your mind.
polichick
(37,152 posts)frylock
(34,825 posts)labels like "centrist" or "liberal." when you poll people on policy, and not personality, poll after poll show overwhelmingly that we are a left-leaning nation, despite what The Very Sensible People would have us believe.
Half-Century Man
(5,279 posts)Any time, every time, someone chants a label they have decided for themselves at you; like it is some mantra against political discussion. Shake them up, send them here.
http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html
Let them find out where they really lay in the political spectrum.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)do nationally what has done within the state of Vermont in de-demonizing social democracy. I have consistently found conservatives who have not a nice word to say about liberals - even those who aren't really liberals - speak with respect and admiration for Sen. Sanders. That is how he is able to win even conservative precincts in his home state by landslide proportions.
I am not predicting Sen. Sanders will win the nomination or the presidency. I am most definitely predicting he will win and come close in some primaries if he runs as a Democrat - enough to change the range of discussion with an outside and admittedly long shot possibility of winning. But, if all he does is bring progressivism into the mainstream of political debate for the first time in more than a generation - the campaign will have accomplished a lot. And this is a realistic goal.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)a Democrat in the primaries. They do seem to genuinely believe their own propaganda that no progressive can possibly be taken seriously and never will be. Of course the media has been telling them that for decades. I'm not predicting Sanders will win. I am most definitely predicting that the Wall Street Dems will have a rude awakening when Sanders wins and comes close in more than enough primaries to shake up the race and emerges as a viable candidate.
"A Sanders campaign would show how broadly popular the progressive agenda is with the U.S. publicnot just among progressives or the Democratic base." Jeff Cohen
Hotler
(11,445 posts)the PTB (military, rich) will never let him in the Whitehouse. They will stop him by rigging the votes or use the SCOTUS or they will have him killed.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)If he or she happens to have a "D" next to his/her name, then fantastic. But it's certainly not a requirement.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)I can't wait to see "non-revolutionary" candidates try to explain why that's such an apocalyptic notion.
penndragon69
(788 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)and me too!
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)brooklynite
(94,727 posts)polichick
(37,152 posts)still listed in the Democratic Party platform.
Accepting the bullshit that the party currently dishes out isn't being reality based; it's being complicit.
brooklynite
(94,727 posts)...coupled with a candidate as progressive as Warren would be extremely unlikely to appeal to a national electorate where 60 million people voted for Mitt Romney last year despite his having sucked up to the Tea Party during Primary season. Bear in mind, Sanders has never had a competitive election, nor has he had to appeal to a significant number of conservatives.
The fantasy is that Elizabeth Warren would be on the ticket, since she's said she doesn't want to run.
Half-Century Man
(5,279 posts)I've got two spare pitchforks and a bunch of torches, I'll meet everyone at the drawbridge whenever Bernie wants.
Phlem
(6,323 posts)-p
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)He can win if he ran on the Party Hearty Party.
His ideas and policies are what WE THE PEOPLE want, not them, the corporations!
He keeps getting landslide wins in Vermont, he an win in a landslide in the US!
Yavin4
(35,445 posts)What the hell good does it do if the Republicans control congress. Do some of you think that Paul Ryan will magically change his beliefs because President Sanders made a speech? Do you think that Rand Paul will disavow Ayn Rand because President Sanders is now in the White House??
Can I have some of that fairy dust you people are smoking?
antigop
(12,778 posts)nt
bvar22
(39,909 posts)... have succesfully taken their governments from the hands of their 1% Oligarchs
through near bloodless Ballot Box Revolutions.
That can happen here too,
as soon as our Working Class & Poor realize WE have more in common with each other
that we have in common with the 1% and their Mouth Pieces in Washington.
In Venezuela,
The POOR are celebrating,
and the RICH are protesting!
We need some of THAT salsa
here at home!
VIVA Democracy!
rwsanders
(2,606 posts)WatermelonRat
(340 posts)passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)colsohlibgal
(5,275 posts)Bernie is the anti Max Baucus type, a true blue progressive populist, proud to label himself a democratic socialist.
He is truly for the 99% and that puts him in a very small club in congress.
WhiteTara
(29,722 posts)both camps work together to make 2016 on path to a sustainable future. If not, our certain death will come sooner than we would like.
dflprincess
(28,082 posts)BrentWil
(2,384 posts)Socialist is a political slur in America for the vast vast vast vast majority of Americans. You put up someone that calls himself that and has views that will be destroyed by the GOP, nominate him. He is the one person that could give Ted Cruz the White House.
Stop living in a fantasy world.
Pryderi
(6,772 posts)shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)And he would know. Mind you he ran in 1934 when there was actually a functioning political left in America.
If nominated, he won't win. And even if he did it wouldn't do any good. The problem was always congress. Currently sanders is the only senator in the congressional progressive caucus. If he leaves to run for president there won't be any.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)DemocraticWing
(1,290 posts)I hope Bernie runs as a Democrat. I will donate to his campaign, volunteer for his campaign, and do anything I can to get him the nomination and the Presidency.
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)I would support Bernie HOWEVER he ran!
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Should I vote with my heart or my intellect? Neither of which seems to be getting me anywhere lately.
DFW
(54,436 posts)And that means the Democrat for Governor (in Texas, anyway) and for my Congressional District and the US Senate.
If there is any announced candidate for president in 2016, I must have missed it, and frankly, I don't care. I will not waste time tearing my hair (or anyone else's) over a race with no announced candidates.
Go hunt corporatists (whatever that means) if you like, but in Texas, we have a chance to keep our statehouse out of the hands of a nut case (Greg Abbott), and in Washington, a Senate majority to preserve and a House Speakership which we have a slim chance to retake. Not in two years. NOW.
Arguing about Bernie or Hillary at this point is EXACTLY what warms the heart of Karl Rove, the Kochs, Adelson, Art Pope.
As Stevie Winwood sang, "I just ain't got the time........"
maced666
(771 posts)I would LOVE him to run and if not nominated by the party at least last long enough to get his agenda assumed by the eventual winner.