Bernie Sanders is no spoiler: He’s trying to cure centrist complacency plaguing Democratic Party

[TalkingDog]

To forestall the inevitable alert.

Per GE 2016 via Skinner: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1013&pid=7292

You are permitted to support Bernie Sanders' efforts to influence the platform and the party


http://www.salon.com/2016/06/21/bernie_sanders_is_no_spoiler_hes_trying_to_cure_the_centrist_complacency_thats_plaguing_the_democratic_party/

“In this view right-wing opposition is not to be dislodged, let alone defeated,” writes Karp. “At best, it is to be resisted from within the walls of the Democratic Party fortress known as the White House. ‘The next Democratic presidential term will be mostly defensive,’ writes Jonathan Chait — no more or less than a ‘bulwark’ against Republican extremism in Congress… Seldom do establishment Democrats stop to consider whether this negative mentality — both disturbingly complacent and profoundly uninspiring — has contributed to the steady evisceration of the party at the state level.”

Sanders rejects fortress liberalism, while Clinton — who has described herself as “kinda moderate and center” — will in all likelihood be running her presidential campaign on a platform of fortress liberalism and what author Thomas Frank described as “militant complacency” in a recent editorial. In other words, Clinton will be campaigning as the lesser-evil candidate against the sexist, xenophobic, and Islamophobic demagogue that is Donald Trump; and considering the sheer toxicity of Donald (according to a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll, 70 percent of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of the billionaire), this will probably be enough to win in November. But it certainly won’t increase voter turnout or lessen the political discontent that has become so widespread. And it won’t bring about the kind of sweeping reform that the Sanders campaign has advocated.

[PADemD]

1. What if Trump is not the Nominee?

If the Republican Rules Committee, now chaired by two Romney supporters, establishes a rule that delegates can vote their conscience, Trump may not get enough votes on the first ballot. Someone else could be the Nominee.

[upaloopa]

2. Why is Sanders' definition of the Democratic Party the one we should adopt?

I think we would be heading for ideological purism just like the right and we would be the ones that got nothing done if it did not meet the purity test.

I think this is the wrong way to go.

What needs to be done is to move the country left and the party will follow.

Work towards public campaign financing and work to elect progressive candidates

Don't try to do what the tea party did in 2010

[bjobotts]

8. His definition of the dem party is what the party used to be until the DLC took it over.

The Democratic Leadership Council or Committee allowed in the lobbyists for the Banks and wall street as a means to get funding and donations pushing the dem party to slowly supplant the republican party as the party of Wall street. Rather than depend of the unions (which were decreasing due to unfavorable legislation making it easier to break them up) as well as trial lawyers (down for the same reasons). The party needs to return to being the party of the middle class, the working poor and minorities. To regulate Wall street and break up the too big to fail banks. Never compare progressivism to the tea party as they are opposites. Hillary is starting to pay attention to this populist movement and this political revolution which merely means paying attention to what the people want and not what big money wants.

[upaloopa]

19. The Democratic party changed long before the DLC came along.

I was born in 1946 and grew up in a factory town. Everyone voted Democratic in the working class. What begin the swing to the right was the rebellion to the Civil rights a act.

Also the dislike of the war on poverty, the Vietnam war and of Jimmy Carter.

That allowed Reagan to take over.

The DLC was needed at a time when Progressive Dems could not get elected.

The DLC is not what we need today and all those things you list are needed but it is too simplistic and not historically accurate to say that Bernie wants to take the party back to what it was.

Times change and events happen to drive change one way or the other.

What Bernie wants to do IMHO is to take the party in a more progressive direction which I agree with.

I just don't want us to become ideology driven like the present day Repubs.

[TonyPDX]

21. Thank you. n/t

[Craig234]

24. I think that's confused

It's like saying, don't make an army and military and go to war like the Nazis did in WWII, that'd be becoming just like them.

Well, ya, other than the whole we're for freedom and didn't kill everyone in the Japanese camps part.

'Ideological purism' is just centrist ideology language for attacking the progressive policies. It's wrong.

There are better policies and worse policies. Republican policies are terrible, centrist policies are less bad, and progressive policies are better. There's nothing wrong with those policies, and attacking them as ideological purism is misguided.

Ideological purism CAN be a bad thing - but be specific. Bernie isn't calling for a Soviet or Maoist system where such 'ideological purity' was a disaster. Saying 'make a policy good for the public, not the billionare class and bad for the public' isn't a bad thing.

But I agree with you the key is to move THE COUNTRY left and the party will follow. That's also what Bernie is trying to di.

There is a war in the Democratic Party between corporatist and progressive factions. Having taken over the Republican Party, corporatists would love to get the other party as well - and they have about half of Democrats in Congress, progressives a third.

We need to do something quite like the tea party as far as the progressive wing trying to gain power in the party.

[TwilightZone]

3. "those who support his reform efforts must do so without bashing Hillary Clinton or trying to

undermine her candidacy against Donald Trump"

You probably should have kept reading. This is little more than the same lesser-of-two-evils, "both sides are bad" nonsense Salon has been peddling for months, both in regards to Clinton personally and to Democrats, in general.

They even trotted out a 20-year-old interview as "proof" of Clinton's current intent. Uh, huh.

Edit: noting that you quoted the GE: 2016 rules, shouldn't this be in the General Discussion: 2016 forum? Just a thought.

[Politicalboi]

4. Is it July 25th already?

There's still some possibility. Tick tock.

[gordianot]

5. Tick tock, are you listening to Hillary in Raleigh?

I would swear I am listening to Bernie Sanders stump speech. Looks to me like coming together.

[bjobotts]

9. I agree. It's like she learned something from Bernie cause she sounds so much like him but his

was what the majority of the people when polled claimed they wanted so she is getting ahead of this populist movement. Yeah. She is coming together with the people and not the billionaires

[gordianot]

11. I credit Sanders and Warren.

Her recent approach to Warren confused me but it looks like the tree will bear fruit. I expect to see Sanders stick around not to jump in but consolidate wth the Democratic Party.

[rhett o rick]

14. I think the Powers That Be will try to punish Sen Sanders, they already are indicating that they

will primary him. Not many true progressives survive in politics. Some have their lives destroyed and some die young.

[gordianot]

18. It appears he already made his mark the speech Hillary made in Raleigh is now public record.

I put it on DVR. Being an elderly Democratic Socialist is not easy but he has survived worse. Running as an independent helped get to old age. I was truly shocked by that speech.

[rhett o rick]

22. I don't know what speech you are referring to.

[gordianot]

29. One she made today.

[rhett o rick]

30. Could you help me out. What in her speech showed that "he made his mark"? nm

[gordianot]

31. The entire speech appeared to me a pick up on Sanders tone.

She used many of the Sanders themes some commentators believed it was her pitch to the progressive wing. I still have a healthy degree of skepticism for all politicians. Overall I found it to be a good starting place. I have it on DVR and plan to review in the next couple days. For me a reason to vote for her with reasons other than the Supreme Court appointees.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. K&R

[BlackLivesMatter]

7. I don't agree Hillary Clinton is centrist, but he made her into a stronger candidate

[Else You Are Mad]

10. Which was..

That was really one of the goals Sanders set when he entered the race. He wanted to make sure whoever the nominee was going to be (though he knew it probably would be Clinton) to continue to run on actual liberal values and not just give them lip service while pandering to the wealthy and the right.

Mission accomplished. And you are correct, she is a stronger candidate because of it.

[Starry Messenger]

12. I'm looking at the House floor and wondering what centrist complacency?

Maybe the problem isn't the "fortress", but that some people need to get off the stick and get into the actual movement, the one that is actually happening, at this moment.

[rhett o rick]

13. I am glad you brought that up. We've seen some spark in our Democratic Congress people

as of late. Can't help but think that the awakening of the Progressives as shown at Sen Sanders' rallies doesn't have something to do with it. I think our Reps will be braver now they know that the Progressive Left has their backs.

[sangfroid]

20. Of Course

And I predict if Trump is not nominated, we will have to sit through pounds of sugar about how Bernie is just such a swell guy and could his supporters help elect the former Secretary Clinton.

[sangfroid]

23. Sure

And that's why so many folks supported Bernie, because he was "newsworthy." Very incisive.

If I remember correctly, the MSM spent most of the campaign ignoring him.

[Uncle Joe]

17. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, TalkingDog.

[jalan48]

25. Thanks for the post! Bernie, reminding all of us what we used to be.

[truebluegreen]

28. Not "it", us. nt

[pansypoo53219]

27. both sides have a bubble now.