General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThinkingabout
(30,058 posts)If he hasn't been to accomplish anything in the time he has been in Congress he needs to ask himself why not, what is it going to take for Congress to do their job, what plans dies he have to change anything. If he isn't a part if the solution then he is a part of the problem.
cali
(114,904 posts)your post is unintelligible.
Plus you got me to laugh/snicker out loud on this bizarre morning.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Are you saying the Democrats accomplished nothing in all this time?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)When in doubt, just move the goalpost from where has Sanders been for the last several years to how many Democratic Senators are calling for a political revolution.
Yeah, that's the ticket!
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Sounds like he is playing to his base and not working on the do nothing Congress. He should be exerting his influence in Congress.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)olddots
(10,237 posts)Autumn
(45,106 posts)He and many Democratic voters are beginning to see their agenda is not working for most of us.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)others.
Autumn
(45,106 posts)and speaking to the peoples needs is part of the problem.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)What we have is 100 members in the Senate saying I can't help it, I am just one,they wont do as I say, he has to step up and assume the position I am going to find other members to work with, and this means he needs to be able to compromise his "issues", have nit seen this happening so nothing gets accomplished.
Autumn
(45,106 posts)Funny, from where I sit I see the fault as the republicans refusing to compromise so nothing gets accomplished. But hey blame Bernie if that works for you. I wish we had another 99 just like Bernie.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)Autumn
(45,106 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)and now Bernie wants to play to a base and ask for a revolution, yep, get someone else to do the work. The work still needs to be handled in Congress.
RedCloud
(9,230 posts)They steal elections, but they cannot force us to buy their crap.
brooklynite
(94,591 posts)Sorry to rain on your parade, but these are pie in the sky fantasies. The only way to change things, clumsy as it is, is through the political process.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)(Why else would have replied to my +1, rather than to Red Cloud's post?)
Second, I boycott products and stores all the time. Know what it changes? It changes who gets my money. That's all Red Cloud said--we don't have to give them our money. And that's all I seconded. And I really don't have to give my money to anyone I don't wish to. No fantasy involved at all. Never called for a general strike, either. (Poor brooklynite, stuck with making up stuff.)
Third, it's not either-or. You can boycott stores, products, etc. and participate in the political process and demonstrate, etc. All can be effective or ineffective, including the political process.
brooklynite
(94,591 posts)...I wouldn't stop anyone from boycotting businesses. I merely opine that envisioning a boycott large enough to influence Government policies on race relations and law enforcement is unrealistic.
noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)The problem is: Americans have very short memories. Boycotts were a useful...and very successful tool for the civil rights movement. That movement led to policy changes.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)Then your saying boycotts are successful on all govt policies(minimum wage, income inequality,etc.) except race relations and law enforcement because those boycotts would be too small and insignificant?
brooklynite
(94,591 posts)...but race relations and law enforcement are the issues at hand.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)brooklynite
(94,591 posts)aspirant
(3,533 posts)brooklynite
(94,591 posts)This is a line that gets thrown around frequently, but it's not true. A politician that can be bought by person A can presumably be bought by person B for a higher price.
What happens is that the politician believes in the actual policy that person A does, and therefore person A supports them.
in any event, your logical extension (that boycotting a company will result in politicians who are no longer "bought" makes no sense because that's never the focal point of the boycott.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)from 2009 thru the first 3/4 of 2014.
Do you really think they do that for charity?
brooklynite
(94,591 posts)...and explain how your boycott is going to change that.
aspirant
(3,533 posts)Is that why we had an American Revolution and an American Civil War?
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)The only other possible outcome is a real one.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable."
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)days the latter is getting closer and closer each day.
Initech
(100,080 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)in a sewer of sellouts.
Bernie Sanders, 2016
Ghost in the Machine
(14,912 posts)elections so the "common man" has a chance against the out of touch millionaires & billionaires that keep getting elected.
K&R