General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMy thoughts on Bernie for President
For the first time in my 40 plus years of life there is a true liberal running for office.
For the first time in my life we have a chance to do something truly brave.
This is our chance; but are we brave enough to take it?
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
arcane1
(38,613 posts)And we'll win every time.
brooklynite
(94,679 posts)Any ideas?
immoderate
(20,885 posts)I think that Bernie would be good.
--imm
CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Muskie would have lost 49 states. So would Humphrey. So would Scoop Jackson(and if Scoop had won, we couldn't have told his administration was Democratic anyway, since Scoop didn't disagree with Nixon on anything important at all).
A Democrat running on an antiabortion-fuck the hippies-we could still win in Vietnam platform would have been just as doomed to a landslide defeat as the McGovern-Shriver ticket was-and HRC, teleporting back to run in '72 on her current anti-progressive platform, would also have gone down in flames. CREEP and the "dirty tricks" squad would have made sure of it.
It's been shown over and over again that McGovern's stands on the issues weren't the problem.
2banon
(7,321 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)than Nixon did. He, for whatever reason, didn't do that. I think a war hero with dozens of bomber missions, speaking out against war, is a brilliant sell. Most of his supporters, though, were barely aware of his service or his heroism.
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/connelly/article/George-McGovern-Appreciating-a-war-hero-turned-3957900.php
McGovern experienced war, under fire over Nazi-occupied Europe in World War II. He earned a Distinguished Flying Cross for crash-landing his damaged Liberator, the Dakota Queen II, on an island in the Adriatic.
He went back to teaching after World War II, flirted with the radical-left Henry Wallace campaign in 1948, then built the Democratic Party in South Dakota. He served two terms in Congress and was President Kennedy's inaugural Food for Peace director in the early 1960s.
McGovern started speaking against the Vietnam involvement in 1963 and opposed the war from the start.
He was to incur the wrath of Washington, D.C., warriors who never went near a battlefield. Ex-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, he of multiple deferments, labeled Bill and Hillary Clinton as "McGoverniks" because they worked for McGovern in 1972. In his 80s, he became a whipping boy for the "neo-cons," right-wing intellectuals who championed the U.S. pre-emptive war in Iraq.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)And that was because I was highly interested in the political process. I thought it was a plus, and when I told others who were right leaners, they didn't believe me. I do think it might have helped him.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)And your take away...?
--imm
Paka
(2,760 posts)mountain grammy
(26,642 posts)My first vote for president was Hubert Humphrey in 1968.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)I did vote for HHH, but not happily.
My read on games theory says I always vote.
--imm
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Nobody who doesn't think they can make it makes the shot very often.
That just doesn't lead to success.
I KNOW we can do it because Sanders or Warren is so strong, and the opposition very weak and worn.
We will succeed, we will win.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Really?
Setting all others aside, even Kucinich, even... Nader, please explain how John Kerry wasn't a Liberal.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)LOL!
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Exilednight
(9,359 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)So he went from the nearly most liberal to literally the most liberal.
Your standards shame me. Shame me!
http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/past-years-national-journal-vote-ratings-20130213
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)High standards around here.
John Kerry and are I basically Birchers!
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)nomination is suddenly the most liberal person, ever, every time.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)He wouldn't even defend his own courageous opposition to our involvement in Vietnam (even though no one who still supported that war thirty-two years later was ever going to vote Democratic again).
He proposed no significant reductions in the Pentagon death budget.
He made no proposals to reform labor law or address poverty or unemployment.
He backed trade globalization with no questions asked.
His"safe, legal and rare" line on reproductive rights accepted the right-wing assumption that women should be shamed for having abortions.
He blocked any and all progressive platform language and barred peace posters at the convention, while keeping protesters miles away in a Bush-style "free speech zone".
He was only "liberal" on a tiny handful of trivial, meaningless side issues, nothing that would actually mattered to anone but a few Beltway elitists.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Good to know........
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)There was no liberalism in his campaign at all, and nothing would have been different if he'd won.
It's not possible to end a war if you've been elected as the "we can do it better" candidate. There are no positions on war other than hawk or dove, slaughter or not slaughter.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"He was only "liberal" on a tiny handful of trivial, meaningless side issues, nothing that would actually mattered to anone (sic) but a few Beltway elitists..."
No doubt, many people believe abortion rights and affirmative action are trivial and meaningless side-issues except to Bletway Elitists. I call those people 'under-educated;' but no doubt, they'll rationalize it as something entirely different. Bless their little hearts...
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Kerry bought into the "safe, legal, and RARE" canard on choice...meaning he accepted the idea that women who got abortions should be ashamed of themselves.
And he'd been calling on the party to move away from affirmative action(he gave a commencement address at Harvard in which he basically denounced the idea AND denounced most of the party's progressive wing).
Nice try.
Kerry ran in 2004 a bland centrist. He never proposed anything that challenged Bush's ideas in any meaningful way. You can't be timid on the stump and a hero after getting sworn in. Never happens.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)Put that all together, and disgruntled people might add up.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)Dennis was more an ideologue. Bernie comes across as pragmatic.
--imm
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)I find Sanders far more qualified and trustworthy. I would not be a bit disappointed if he were elected the nominee and would strongly support him in the GE.
My comparison is to the way DU is reacting to his candidacy and the other Democratic candidates.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)The only true anti-war candidate back then. Now we have another.
Anti-war is a big deal for some of us. Er, most.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)(not that that was justification for Dennis being forced out in '08, but still).
TheNutcracker
(2,104 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)appalachiablue
(41,168 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)ruffburr
(1,190 posts)The only hope for America to get out from under the corporatist/oligarchy that crooked politicians have let America become. I intend to do everything I can to get Sen. Sanders elected to POTUS.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)I consider supporting and voting for Senator Sanders, not so much a matter of bravery, but more a matter of survival.
We will not make it thru another neoliberal's or neocon's reign of terror. We MUST stop them, now.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)appalachiablue
(41,168 posts)orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)don't are easy to refute .
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)He is taking on the corrupt, secret government and the MIC. He is taking on the oligarchs. He is taking on the deep state that has already demonstrated its willingness to use any means available to eliminate threats to its power.
Voting requires no bravery compared to that. I agree with 99Forever above that we are talking about survival at this point. Democracy itself and the future of humanity are being systematically murdered by these corporate criminals who have taken control of our government. The consequences of their looting and warmongering and replacement of democracy with corporate exploitation are global.
Courage is contagious. Bernie said he'd do this only if he believed that enough of us were ready to take on this fight with him to make it a real force, this political revolution against corruption. We owe this effort to restore democracy to ourselves, we owe it to our children, we owe it to future generations, we owe it to the world.
appalachiablue
(41,168 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)PosterChild
(1,307 posts).. "that which is agreeable to me".
senz
(11,945 posts)against the rich and powerful.
Bernie is a true liberal.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)I dream things that never were and say why not?"
That's Ted Kennedy's paraphrase of brother Bobby's paraphrase of George Bernard Shaw. Be that as it may, it's still an incredibly inspiring quotation.
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)TheProgressive
(1,656 posts)Senator Sanders has the honest potential to be even more than FDR.
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)TheProgressive
(1,656 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)...and even if Hillary beats him, our efforts will not have been wasted. The media, the public, and the powers-that-be need to know that Bernie's goals and values are passionately held by many, many (maybe most?) Americans. This is how we let them know. We must come out in numbers for Bernie.
And if Bernie beats Hillary, then we go ALL OUT to support and defend him, because the powers that be will try to destroy him. (And they are NOT "nice people."
I hate to say it, but this might be our last chance.
KMOD
(7,906 posts)HRC is a true liberal as well, in my opinion.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)many other issues.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)'We are not represented, they don't care about us' meaning politicians.
Now, I can say to them 'there is one candidate you might find interesting, because he DOES care about you'. So far, once they learn about him, they are willing to admit that his record does show that this is someone who actually cares about people.
So this time I am going to be trying to find as many non-voters as I can because already I am seeing comments all over the internet from people who say they had given up on politics, but are now going to register to vote in order to vote for Bernie.
If everyone who supports him can get at least one non-voter to register to vote for him, he will win.
JEB
(4,748 posts)having a candidate you want to vote for. Let us seize the day.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)LWolf
(46,179 posts)I hope there are enough of us out there to help bring foundational change to our country and our lives.
TBF
(32,084 posts)all we need is anyone else who is not a billionaire to do the same. There are many more of us than them.