Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

RBInMaine

(13,570 posts)
Wed Feb 17, 2016, 10:06 PM Feb 2016

The "Non-Establishment" guy who has been in the Congress for 25 years and joined the Dem Party.

In Congress for 25 years.

Suddenly JOINED the "Establishment" Dem Party, I guess, because he wanted to be anti-Establishment.

Like anyone else has had to compromise on legislation over the years.

And what are the anti-"Establishment" credentials? Well, they include for many years trashing the very party he has now JOINED because he knew he wouldn't have a hope in hell without it, and slamming everyone from Kennedy to Mondale to Obama even to the point of trying to get Obama tossed out in a presidential primary.

Bernie is putting the issues of income inequality and political reform front and center which is good. But he has also WAY over-done the "Establishment" meme, and he has engaged in hypocrisy.

Hillary Clinton is brilliant, PROGRESSIVE, and the most qualified candidate on EITHER side who isn't promising things she knows have no chance of passing. PROGRESSIVE means PROGRESS, not pie in the sky good-sounding stuff that riles people up but will not happen.

And I am still waiting to hear about how he's putting together a REAL, longterm, sustained "revolution" that will actually get things done. Will the Bernie supporters actually commit to YEARS of BRUTALLY HARD movement work with real organization and planning for the long haul, or is it all just bluster? The campaign ends, and everyone goes home. Tell me how this is actually being formed the LONG TERM.

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The "Non-Establishment" guy who has been in the Congress for 25 years and joined the Dem Party. (Original Post) RBInMaine Feb 2016 OP
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Feb 2016 #1
Progressive means progress? HassleCat Feb 2016 #2
You don't want the answers. SheenaR Feb 2016 #3
well, she did endure sniper fire Duckhunter935 Feb 2016 #5
Obama had been a Senator for what, 700 days when he decided he was qualified to run for President? MadDAsHell Feb 2016 #4
#fearthebern frylock Feb 2016 #6
I've always found party loyalty as a means of control. It's much better to remain leftupnorth Feb 2016 #7

Response to RBInMaine (Original post)

SheenaR

(2,052 posts)
3. You don't want the answers.
Wed Feb 17, 2016, 10:15 PM
Feb 2016

You have said a version of the same thing in countless posts.

You have asked for answers and have been given them.

Nobody gives a rat's ass about your questions at this point. One can only answer them a few times before it getting old.

Most qualified? One term Senator and Horrific Secretary of State. Jeb Bush's resume looks as good as that one and in no way do I think his is good

 

MadDAsHell

(2,067 posts)
4. Obama had been a Senator for what, 700 days when he decided he was qualified to run for President?
Wed Feb 17, 2016, 10:16 PM
Feb 2016

I'd say that was pretty "pie in the sky" stuff with not much concrete being proposed (at least not much that actually turned out the way he sold it in the campaign), but overall it's worked out pretty good compared to the "experienced" governor before him.

leftupnorth

(886 posts)
7. I've always found party loyalty as a means of control. It's much better to remain
Wed Feb 17, 2016, 10:57 PM
Feb 2016

loyal to ideas. People, parties, and other exclusive organizations tend to change with the wind.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»The "Non-Establishme...