It's not about Bernie. It's about the way he wants to change the party.

[DanTex]

And it's very clear what he wants to do. He wants the party to prioritize economic issues over social issues.

There's no getting around that. Either part of it, in fact. There's no getting around the fact that Bernie wants to elbow out candidates that don't support things like single payer and free college. And there's also no getting around the fact that he wants to make the party more accommodating for people who don't support things like choice and gay marriage. It is true that Bernie himself holds progressive views on social issues. But that doesn't change the fact that his vision for the Democratic Party is one that is strongly populist on economic issues and accommodating on the social front.

In fact, I want to thank his supporter Krystal Ball for making this point clearly on AM Joy today. Good for her. Because a lot of people supporting Bernie's attempts to transform the party try to obfuscate here. No obfuscation. Bernie wants to prioritize the economic over the social. People defending his agenda should do what Ball did: own it and defend it.

Turns out a lot of Democrats are justifiably not too happy about that whole thing. Why?

Well, first of all, social issues like choice are extremely important. As some here have pointed out, choice is also an economic issue. Which is true, and important, but to me it kind of misses the point. Choice doesn't need to be justified on economic grounds. It's a moral imperative. Women should not have religious fundamentalists deciding for them what they can or can't do with their bodies. Period.

On the other hand, on many economic issues, there actually is room for progressive debate. It's not at all clear that Bernie's economic positions are the best ones. For example, a lot of progressive, intelligent experts on health policy do not think that single payer is the best way to achieve universal coverage in the US. Some progressive economists question whether the labor market can sustain a $15 national minimum wage. And so on.

In contrast, there are zero progressive arguments that can be made that abortion should be banned, or that gay people shouldn't be able to get married, or that racial profiling by police (and by non-police) is a serious issue that needs fixing, and so on. I know that there are parts of the country where these things might not be popular, so maybe for political calculation we might have to support some Dems that don't hold progressive views here. OK, fine. And the same goes for economic issues. We do need to win elections, and purity tests don't help. But at the policy level, there is simply no progressive argument to be against these and other positions on social issues.

I'm sure there are Dems who would like to see the party prioritize economic issues over social issues. And Bernie is a big political figure now, and he has a right to make his case. But he, and everyone supporting him, have to understand that this is going to be very controversial. It's not "Bernie-hating", it's defending what most Democrats think of as Democratic values.

[Sculpin Beauregard]

1. Don't we have enough Bernie posts? Active measures much?

[DanTex]

2. This post is not about Bernie. It's about the way he wants to change the party.

[Blanks]

33. Bernie can start by becoming a democrat...

And follow it up by pointing out that a large part of the Russian hack was successful because 'berniebots' had infiltrated democratic web sites and trashed Hillary with coordinated attacks on Hillary supporters.

Until he does that, I don't expect I'll have much respect for him.

[Magoo48]

74. Why?

There's nothing extraordinary about being a democrat when the platform is more republican light than progressive. When democrats decide to back a truly innovative progressive vision, people will rush to join...until then, not so much.

[kstewart33]

47. Bernie is not a member of the Democratic Party.

He wants to lead the party that he refuses to join.

That truth greatly discounts whatever he has to say about the party. At least in the minds of a whole lot of Democrats.

[Plucketeer]

72. There must be some REAL MAGIC

About having a (D) next to one's name! No tolerance for (H) for humanity. Just git yerself a (D) or get gone.

[panader0]

4. Really makes you wonder about the intentions of these posters.

4 0f the top 5 OPs are now anti-Bernie posts.
The enemy is over there--#Russia/Trump.

[emulatorloo]

10. Doubt DanTex is a GOP troll.

Bernie primary supporter here.

Ya'll need to let go of the idea that Bernie's infallible. He's human like the rest of us.

he's sort of prone to gaffes and not articulating things very well. The good thing is that he corrects things he doesn't say well. Like how he corrected himself on Ossoff's progressive creds.

[panader0]

14. Agree with you.

I just think the constant focus on Bernie's flaws in the face of the myriad
unreal things the GOP is doing is quite counterproductive.
I too supported Bernie in the primary. Hillary won 16.9 mil to 13.2 mil.
Bernie asked his supporters to back Hillary. He needn't have asked me or
the vast majority of his supporters. We voted for HRC. She got cheated
in my opinion. Now the focus should be on resisting the GOP and not one
of the Democrats best allies in the Senate. It's getting smelly in here.

[sharedvalues]

39. Agreed. Focus on what YOU want to do to HELP

Be constructive.
Discuss ideas

[emulatorloo]

86. Yes.

I hate to see DU'ers at each other's throats. I think we all are liberals and progressives.

[Sculpin Beauregard]

15. Yup. It's more than coincidence. Everyone suddenly on the bandwagon.

[Equinox Moon]

19. the enemy is the republican party

[Adrahil]

25. Remind Bernie of that, please... NT

[pnwmom]

61. The intention is that he's a Democrat who's supporting the base of the Democratic party --

the ones Bernie loves to say are playing "identity politics." Women, people of color, religious minorities, and LGBTQ people.

[Chevy]

7. Well Dan has been a member since 2002

and has been through some tough battles over the years like the rest of us here and on the ground.. Soooo

[sharedvalues]

37. And he posts at least one Bernie post a day

Two in two days, using language like "obstruction" and focusing on the negative.

We need fewer negative posts and more constructive and positive posts.

[pnwmom]

59. I see Bernie offering mostly criticism of the Dems. It isn't fair to expect us

not to answer him and his supporters when we're constantly being told he's right and the party is wrong.

Hillary supported free college tuition (the same program Bernie just introduced in Congress -- her version, not his), the $15 minimum wage, improvements to Obamacare, and full funding for Social Security. It wasn't her progressive policies that caused her loss -- and in fact she won by almost 3 million votes.

She lost because of James Comey's 2 letter bombs, which brought her support from 6% above DT's to only 3%. And then she lost by 2.1% -- well within the last poll's margin of error. And without voter suppression and Russian interference, her margin would have been even greater.

She did NOT lose because she wasn't progressive enough. That's just BS.

[Chevy]

60. Maybe if the Senator

didn't attack the democratic party on a daily bases he wouldn't have to. You can't poke peoples chest and not have them respond.

[pnwmom]

56. Now that DanTex has weighed in, maybe so. He said something that needed to be said

and he said it very well.

Democratic women, and black people, and brown people, and religious minorities, and LGBT people -- the ones Bernie too often dismisses as playing "identity politics" -- are the backbone of this party. And we are not going to be cast aside in the Bernie fervor.

[dsc]

3. you did a much better job than I did trying to say the same thing

thanks for posting this.

[Ms. Toad]

5. If it's not about Bernie, they why mention him?

Start a discussion based on the issues you are concerned about, and leave Bernie out of it. If you can't do that then it IS about Bernie, regardless of any assertions you make to the contrary.

[DanTex]

6. Because he is leading the charge to transform the party in a economic-over-social manner.

My point is, the objections are not because his name is Bernie, or even because he is Independent. The objections are to his agenda, and they are substantive.

[kstewart33]

53. Dan, what exactly is he doing?

Besides talking a lot?

Ossoff could have used his help in Georgia. But apparently, he wasn't progressive enough. Apparently, Ossoff failed the Bernie test.

But he campaigns for a candidate who supports laws that force a woman to see the ultrasound of her fetus before getting an abortion. Apparently the candidate was progressive enough. ???

It just seems to be all about Bernie.

[dsc]

8. because he is the leader of the faction of the party which wants this change

It would be like discussing the Obama administration without discussing Obama.

[QC]

29. That wouldn't have the desired effect.

[Ms. Toad]

42. Kind of my point.

It is very easy to talk about where the party should go (or should not go) without tying it to a specific person.

[athena]

9. Excellent post!

Beautifully stated, and well-argued.

[Warpy]

11. Now you're complaining about "change."

The party is going to change and you don't have to like it but you can't stop it. We've been shut out of too many elections we should have won easily, largely because of silly poliicies at the top that withheld money unless the race was absolutely certain. That has to change or there won't be any elected Democrats, period.

We can no longer afford to be the party of the banks and the insurance companies. We can no longer afford to be the party that listens only to business and ignores the fact that wages have been allowed to fall too far for too long. Business always screams at any increase in wages. Six months later, they always boast about how much better they're doing because business has increased.

We can't afford to be a party fixed in amber, its inability to change comforting to conservatives. They've had their run, now it's time for them to step aside for a while.

Change is inevitable. If it makes you feel better, I probably won't like much of it, either. But it will happen and your only choice is to keep grumbling about it and trying to split the party or accept that it will happen and participate in it.

[DanTex]

17. Change can be either good or bad.

And, yes, of course, the party is going to change, like parties do over time. The question is how is it going to change.

Bernie has an opinion about that. I, and a lot of Democrats have a different opinion. And I'm not going to refrain from stating my opinion because people call me a Bernie hater or whatever.

Also, I think it is totally absurd to say that the Dems are "the party of the banks and the insurance companies." I don't even think Bernie believes that. But if he does, that's all the more reason to question his plan for future of the Democratic Party. Good plans are not based on fantasies.

[Warpy]

52. Splitting a large segment of the party off by continued harassment

is not going to stop the party from changing.

Change is both necessary and inevitable.

[Demsrule86]

88. Sorry we will not accept change that sacrifices rights for women and POC.

That is an absolute. Economics is indeed important but so is equality.

[Warpy]

91. Now THAT is part of the change I'm hoping for

Throwing us under the bus of expediency because our rights might be bad for somebody's business is no longer possible, really, because they know we'll stay home and sit on our hands rather than vote for that shit any more.

I know if I were voting for a certain mayor in Nebraska, I'd be sitting home, instead.

[Demsrule86]

93. No we disagree on that. I would always vote for the Democrat.

I wouldn't in a primary, but in an election where the choice is Republican or Democrat...you vote for the Democrat. I voted for Tim Ryan before he changed his views on abortion...in the Democratic Party we have a few who believe personally in pro-life but are not anti-choice. I can live with that. What I can't accept is the idea that we must abandon 'identity politics' (right wing meme)in order to attract voters by championing a populist economic policy. We can not ignore the importance of civil rights for Women, Gays and POC. And anyone who calls for such a thing is not progressive.

[Warpy]

94. I look at the race

an antichoice mayor is in a position to harass women's health clinics. No thanks. He wants to get into heaven, that's peachy. He wants to do it by stepping on women, forget it.

I won't participate in my own subjugation.

[Demsrule86]

95. The Republican would be way more likely to harass women.

We have some pull with the Democrat but not the Republican.

[Warpy]

98. I think she's prochoice.

You don't have ANY pull with a religious nut who thinks he can get to heaven by climbing over women.

That's one truth I have learned the hard way over a long life.

[Demsrule86]

104. Hmmm...I still would vote for the Dem...Republicans are bad about school,

LGBTQ, taxes etc. However, it would be a hard choice.

[Warpy]

105. I would not vote Republican

I would also not vote for my own subjugation.

So I'd most likely sit home.

[delisen]

101. We support positive change; we don't support negative change

To retreat from human rights is not a positive change. The Democratic Party was not always the party of human rights and equality. Once, it accommodated inequality because the party believed it needed to do so in order to win elections. we were a party in thrall to the Dixiecrats. Once we were a party in which women were the worker bees of the party but discouraged from running for office.

We changed for the better and an opposing party took up the banner of inequality.

For Democrats to return to that philosophy is is not positive change; it is a step backward. It is an attempt to become more like the Republican Party in order to win elections. But we don't have to become more like the Republican Party in order to win elections.

I don't agree with your analysis of the the reasons for losses. I do think that maintaining competing fundraising organizations probably doesn't help.

[Warpy]

103. Well, duh

However, a lot of us will disagree on what positive change consists of.

[killbotfactory]

12. Should he, or should he not support democrats running for office?

I thought the last election made it pretty damn clear that a Democrat you disagree with on important issues is always better than a republican?

[Demsrule86]

89. I would vote for the guy if I lived in his city. Always vote for the Democrat.

However, I would not waste time or money on a mayor's race and essentially ignore Georgia six....thank goodness, Perez has reconsidered and will appear at Ossoff's rally.

[LuvLoogie]

13. Great post. But I give not one shit what Bernie says about the Democratic Party until...

He becomes a Democrat.

[kstewart33]

49. Bingo. nt

[alarimer]

16. The Democratic Party purports to be the "party of the people"

Bernie Sanders is not saying anything different than Elizabeth Warren has been saying for years. It is a false dichotomy to suggest that economic and social progress are two separate issues. They are not. We will get nowhere without acknowledging that a good number of people have fallen far, far behind. Economic inequality has been increasing for decades and Democrats are at least partially to blame, with their adherence to policies that have enabled corporations to run roughshod over people, through offshoring or free trade or whatever.

The Party of the People needs to sever its ties with Wall Street and start behaving like the party that brought us the New Deal. THAT is the thing that will help everybody.

[Demsrule86]

90. Sorry...that is nonsense...the only progressive achievements are provided by the Democratic

Party...and the Democratic party must stand for full equality.

[PufPuf23]

18. I think you are wrong.

Sanders is 100% committed to social issues.

Sanders thinks we should move away from neoliberal economic solutions and neoconservative foreign policy "solutions".

Some here at DU and much of the leadership of the current Democratic party say the term neoliberal is meaningless but this is untrue but inconvenient for many politicians. It is also inconvenient that some of the leadership of the Democratic party are just fine with neoconservative foreign policy.

I have been a member of the Democratic party ever since I could first vote in 1971 and do not intend to leave.

I am a minority opinion within the party but want the change well stated by Sanders.

That does not mean I am a Bernie or bust or misogynist or racist or Trump supporter or Putin lover or a Russian troll.

It means that IMO the Democratic party needs to change to gain more political control and get the results so desperately needed by so many.

There are very many Democrats that share my opinion so perhaps some would quit setting up straw men so we can move forward.

What I see is that old guard Democratic leadership is reluctant to change for whatever reason but probably money and control.

We need new Democratic party leadership. We need to be attractive to Independents. We need to be a good ally and friend of other nations.

To trade off social progress be it for woman or any other identity group for economic "justice" or any political reason is abhorrent and not economic justice at all.

[DanTex]

22. No, he is not "100% committed" to social issues.

Yes, he is a social liberal, but his commitment is less than 100%. If it were, he wouldn't have made excuses for anti-choice Dems. Can you imagine him making excuses for a Democratic candidate that was in favor of eliminating the minimum wage or repealing banking regulations? No. Me either. So let's not pretend he is equally committed to both.

I do agree that in his own voting record, he is very strong on social issues, with the exception of guns. And that is commendable (with the exception of guns). But I'm talking about his vision for the party. And that vision is one with a strong and stringent commitment to economic populism, along with flexibility on social issues in order to run electable candidates that can support the economic agenda in red states.

That, in a nutshell, is "Sandersism".

One more thing I'll add. In politics there are tradeoffs. Sanders understands that. This is the reason he is pushing the economic-for-social tradeoff. Yes, if it were possible to build a national majority with a party where everyone voted like him or Elizabeth Warren, he would be in favor of that. But it's not. There are red states. He knows that.

And so Bernie's calculation is that it is preferable to trade flexibility on social issues for holding the line on economic issues. And, sure, a lot of people agree with him on that. But a lot don't.

[Skidmore]

35. It should send up all sorts of red flags

that Krystal Ball's full throated endorsement and articulation of Sanders' economic over social agenda was virtually the same argument made by Joe Scarborough on his Friday show. This approach furthr fragments the party and weakens it. GOPers are salivating over driving this wedge. Women and minority groups have been the base of the Democraric Party. Selling civil and social rights for a bowl of pottage is not progressive but regressive.

[Chevy]

70. Very good point

on the Ball and Scarborough comments.

[Cha]

83. Shame on her.

[PufPuf23]

36. The social justice "tradeoffs" you attribute for Sanders are one or more steps

removed from Sanders himself. The "perfect" is not there.

The economic justice "tradeoffs" for too many in the current Democratic party leadership are their own favored policy for whatever reason.

I for one am not going to leave the Democratic party but do what I can and support others that share my vision.

I think you have the situation regards "tradeoffs" backwards and do recognize that your perception is a majority opinion at current DU.

I think it is misleading and counter to success of the Democratic party and social as well as economic justice.

It is hard to discuss this divide at DU.

[Cha]

99. Bulloney.. don't try to cover for him.. it's not working.

We're quite capable of figuring out for ourselves what BS is all about.

All he does is haranguing on the Democratic Party. He's divisive and wrong.

[kentuck]

20. Why does it have to be one or the other??

I don't understand that logic?

[TexasBushwhacker]

100. Yeah, economic issues are social issues and vice versa

Wouldn't tuition free college have a dramatic impact on black and hispanic students? Imagine being able to graduate without being saddled with $100K or more in student loans.

[sharedvalues]

21. DanTex, don't we have enough Bernie posts?

And "obfuscation"? Using a word like that is divisive.

Moreover, why are you alleging what Bernie "wants" to do? I don't think it's clear Bernie "wants to change" the D party.

Between the language, the repeated posts, and the implied allegations, your Bernie posts are starting to.jump the shark. How about taking a break on Bernie posts for a week?

[DanTex]

23. Bernie, in his own words, has called for a "fundamental transformation" of the D party.

So, yeah, I think it's pretty safe to say that he "wants to change" the D party. Don't you?

[pnwmom]

63. Sorry, but as long as Bernie keeps saying things that aren't right,

people will want to respond.

Maybe Bernie should take a break. i don't think his "unity tour" -- consisting mostly of disparaging Democrats -- is helping.

[Cha]

96. BS is Always on tv harranguing on the Democratic

Party.. got anything to say about that?

[melman]

24. It's not about Bernie....but here's a bunch of ways it's about Berine

This is really the dumbest thing...


I mean, "the objections are not because his name is Bernie" -wtf?

[Highway61]

26. Good post

Thank you. We need to WIN elections.

[Darkhawk32]

28. We can see how establishment Democrats have done with elections lately.

Badly.

[Highway61]

30. Right?

Bill Mahar was just talking about that last night.

[kstewart33]

50. Well, at least they're Democrats.

[Steven Maurer]

62. I'm curious - where have "non-establishment" Democrats won where "establishment" ones have not?

Insofar as I can tell, the answer is nowhere.

But if you have some examples, I'd like to hear them.

[uponit7771]

79. good point, mostly what I've seen is shit talking

[uponit7771]

78. said the GOP and the Russians

[Cha]

97. "Establishment".. that tired ol fucking buzzword that

means absolutely Nothing. Planned Parenthood and John Lewis are accused of being "establishment"

So it's a Good word.. 'cause I know when someone accuses anyone of the E word.. they got nothing.

[George II]

27. What if the majority of members of the Democratic Party do not want to change it?

Most of the Democrats I know, and I know hundreds personally, don't agree with how he wants to change the party.

[panader0]

31. Well, in the last 8 years, the Democratic party has lost about 1000 seats

on the national, state and local levels. Perhaps a change is needed.
Our party needs to move back to the left. It has been drifting right for years.
Many Dems, myself included, are worried about that. It's not all about
Sen. Sanders. He is just the one calling attention to the problem.

[George II]

38. Were those 1000 seats lost to candidates that were further left than their Democratic opponents....

...or further right than their Democratic opponents?

[panader0]

40. To Republicans.

[George II]

41. Thanks but that doesn't answer the question.

[panader0]

45. I seriously doubt that any Republican would be further left than a Democrat.

[George II]

54. That's my point. We lost those 1000 seats to candidates that were further right than our....

....candidates, and you're saying the solution is to move even further left in order to regain those seats?

[Nay]

87. Yes -- because if the voters have a choice between a Republican and a

Republican-lite, they'll vote for the Republican every time.*

*"I've seen it happen time after time. When the Democratic candidate allows himself to be put on the defensive and starts apologizing for the New Deal and the fair Deal, and says he really doesn't believe in them, he is sure to lose. The people don't want a phony Democrat. If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time; that is, they will take a Republican before they will a phony Democrat, and I don't want any phony Democratic candidates in this campaign.

But when a Democratic candidate goes out and explains what the New Deal and fair Deal really are--when he stands up like a man and puts the issues before the people--then Democrats can win, even in places where they have never won before.
--Harry S. Truman

[DanTex]

48. The party stopped drifting right sometime between 2000 and 2008.

Since then it has been drifting left. Hillary ran the most progressive presidential campaign in many decades, probably ever.

So this "drifting right" thing, that gets repeated all the time, is totally mistaken. The party drifted right in the 90s. That was 20 years ago.

[pnwmom]

64. Gerrymandering won't be solved by electing Bernie wannabes. Those red districts

aren't thirsting for progressives.

It's not drifting we're facing. It's election rigging. The reason we've been losing ground is due to the combination of gerrymandering and voter suppression.

[Lucky Luciano]

34. Down with single payer! Down with tax funded college tuitions n!!!

[Me.]

32. Krystal Ball Certainly Did Try To Push That Agends (Along With Her Book)

But she got some pretty strong push back, which I don't think she appreciated, as she tried to filibuster the other guests.

[George II]

43. I found her highly obnoxious in her appearance this morning, and thoroughly enjoyed...

....the push back, especially by Howard Dean.

[Me.]

51. Am In Total

and complete agreement with you.

[Cha]

84. Thanks for the report from tvland, Me..

strong pushback!

[ehrnst]

44. Women's reproductive health and lives are not mere "social issues." That is Tea Party thinking. (nt)

[safeinOhio]

55. The new and successful Democratic Party is

The EW wing. I support her 100%..

[left-of-center2012]

57. Let's stop the Bernie bashing

No matter how it's disguised,
we need to move forward united in '18 and '20.

[pnwmom]

65. When is he going to stop bashing Democrats? n/t

[killbotfactory]

71. He's supporting a Democrat, backed by the state and national party

And people here are giving him endless amounts of shit for it. And i'm supposed to believe it's his lack of fealty to the party that's a problem?

[pnwmom]

73. He was dismissive of another progressive's bona fides, saying that not all Democrats

are progressive. There isn't a single Democratic member of Congress who isn't MUCH more progressive than the least conservative Rethug.

But Bernie couldn't bring himself to say anything nice about Jon Ossoff. (Until days later, after pushback.)

[killbotfactory]

75. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. Nt

[pnwmom]

76. He was criticized for endorsing the anti-abortion guy but being dismissive of a progressive.. n/t

[Cha]

85. Stop trying to deflect with accusations of "bashing"

[pnwmom]

66. It is not suspicious at all. It's a natural result of his bashing the Democratic party. n/t

[elias7]

67. There has been more progress on social issues than economic issues

In the past 15 years, there has been great strides made socially, especially LGBTQ issues and acceptance. More to go obviously, but steady and strong progress.

Economically, however, there has been worsening of conditions that create income inequity, lack of meaningful bank and wall street reform, struggle to get minimum wage increases, pilfering of pensions.

I don't disagree with prioritizing economic issues over social ones at this time, but I don't see why we are creating castes within the left based on priorities and preferences.

Seems like the primaries again.

[pnwmom]

69. And ALL that progress is in jeopardy. And for black people, they have made less progress

on economic issues than anyone else. A rising economic tide doesn't automatically lift everyone's boats.

[elias7]

80. Agreed.

But a rising economic tide should lift everyone's boat, and as you point out, these econ and social issues are connected. And there's certainly room for improvement and critique. I just don't get the Bernie bashing. I liked both Bernie and Hillary, as the bulk of their views I agree with. They both have their flaws, but are on the same team.

Hillary should have been elected (and maybe was), but she does have a communication issue. Bernie shouldn't bad mouth Dems, but he did kind of get screwed by the DNC. We need to focus on what Bernie can offer rather than hold him forever to blame.

[dsc]

77. actually legally there hasn't been all that much on LGBT issues

other than marriage equality, and ending DADT, LGBT have seen no legal victories at the federal level and a virtual handful outside of the Pacific coast, New England, and the mid Atlantic. Abortion has seen a loss of rights in recent years not an increase. LGBT victories have largely been cultural or in courts not legislative ones.
Both of the last Democratic administrations saw increases in the median income as well as reductions of poverty.

[elias7]

81. I see much more social acceptance of groups that have been reviled/marginalized

Each generation is so much more accepting than its predecessor.

I don't think it's fair to compare progress in social, science, technology, and economic fronts. They are interrelated and as you and I have shown, it's pretty easy to argue both sides of the argument

[dsc]

82. I don't deny that LGBT have made social progress

and certainly that is important, abortion shows that it is necessary to have social acceptance to shore up legal victories, but the fact is social acceptance for LGBT hasn't lead to all that much in the way of legal victories. We have 0 chance of ENDA at the federal level and pretty much no chance of any state passing it anytime soon. Outside of the coasts and the upper mid west our progress has largely stalled in terms of legislation (Colorado and New Mexico being pleasant exceptions). Abortion rights are in nothing short of serious trouble especially if Kennedy retires or dies during this term. LGBT rights are getting into majority support and likely have surpassed the support for the pro choice position but are no where near the overwhelming support that such rights need to be safe in the more conservative corners of the country.

[aikoaiko]

68. Dantex says that Krystak Ball says ... Must be true then

Own it.

[Vinca]

92. It seems there is one thing you can count on with the Democratic Party: division.

Divide, divide, divide and then we wonder why we lose elections. Guess we'd better get used to Dear Leader for 2 terms.

[Ken Burch]

102. What did he actually say in the speech today? Is there a link?

I didn't see it(been sick for the last few days), but there have been several freakout threads.

I doubt Bernie would saying we shouldn't be staunchly anti-racist pro-LGBTQ or pro-choice.

[Gothmog]

106. K&R