2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWashington Post: Bernie Sanders is hijacking the Democratic Party to be elected as an independent
I said it before and I'll say it again, Sanders is attempting nothing less than a hostile takeover of the democratic party.
How Bernie Sanders is hijacking the Democratic Party to be elected as an independent
If you look at the exit and entrance polling reported by CNN, you'll notice that Sanders consistently does far better with independents that vote in the Democratic primaries and caucuses. It's fairly simple to figure out how much of Sanders's support in each contest comes from independent voters. In many cases, it's nearly half.
See my own post on his hostile takeover here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511175288#post21
Wilms
(26,795 posts)Go make your own party.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Wilms
(26,795 posts)A great colleague of mine would say, "If you're gonna open a door that wide, I'm gonna drive a truck right through it!"
erlewyne
(1,115 posts)I do not like Wall Street.
Bernie keeps me off Wall Street.
dinkytron
(568 posts)Or go back to the Republicans and make them sane again.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Which hopefully will be a move to the center..the Clinton policies
are perfectly comfortable in that arena. It us up to us, and the
movement to push them with their war hawking and free trade
bullshit to reform or move over.
Wilms
(26,795 posts)Just leave the Democratic Party out of it.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)be grateful Sanders has moved this along much quicker than I would ever
have thought possible.
Those three deserve each other, sickening policies.
musiclawyer
(2,335 posts)And the coup is almost complete. Only Bernie can stop it and return the Party to its rightful place as party of the middle class......
The most rediculous thread started this year.
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)Kittycat
(10,493 posts)They're responsible for countless lost seats.
demmiblue
(36,875 posts)CentralMass
(15,265 posts)Chan790
(20,176 posts)a.) Generally, nobody but them (and an establishment-backing media) cares. Not even a little bit.
b.) It bodes better for the Democrats in the GE as long as Hillary isn't the nominee.
If indies are hijacking the Democratic party...they're just hijacking it back from the Clintonites, Third-Way and DLCers that hijacked it from traditional Democratic constituencies in the first place.
kennetha
(3,666 posts)then he should run as an independent.
No reason at all that independents should vote in a democratic primary, any more than Republicans should.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)There is no possible way Bernie's candidacy hurts the Democratic party.
He's more pro-labor than HRC. He's more anti-institutional bigotry than HRC. He's more committed to democracy than HRC.
The party has nothing to lose by embracing what Bernie's campaign stands for.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)move my party farther left -- i.e., to demonstrate that it is possible. Not to CREATE a left wind in the party but to demonstrate to the nation that the will was there all along.
However, I believe that Bernie has a rigid, extremist personality and that that is a limitation that makes him both functionally and ideologically undesirable for the leader of our nation. It's not an illusion that really does not care what others think. He doesn't. And that is anti-democracy.
Chan790, what you don't get is that we are the Democratic Party, and we are not complaining about fellow liberals who support Bernie. They're balanced and decent overall and have made their choice. In Iowa, 80% of those who voted for Bernie were Democrats who like Hillary also.
What we really don't like endangering the Democratic Party is Bernie's left fringe support that has, for instance, made a crusade out of hating Hillary and the Democratic Party, and by far worst of all has no respect for the democratic process any time it gets in their way. Those people come from a portion of the other 20% (not the entire group) which includes voters from both the far left and right.
The simple truth is, although most of us definitely prefer Hillary because we trust her more than Bernie to protect our democratic principles, we actually mostly accept him. It's that unstable, hostile, aggressive extremist fringe he's energized that no one, not us, not anybody else, want anything to be associated with.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)LonePirate
(13,431 posts)The truth is somewhere in between most likely but she is definitely not a Republican.
kristopher
(29,798 posts)This excerpt from FDR's 1944 State of the Union helps define our situation by giving a benchmark for measuring which candidate is a true Democrat:
We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. "Necessitous men are not free men." People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
America's own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.
One of the great American industrialists of our daya man who has rendered yeoman service to his country in this crisis-recently emphasized the grave dangers of "rightist reaction" in this Nation. All clear-thinking businessmen share his concern. Indeed, if such reaction should developif history were to repeat itself and we were to return to the so-called "normalcy" of the 1920'sthen it is certain that even though we shall have conquered our enemies on the battlefields abroad, we shall have yielded to the spirit of Fascism here at home.
I ask the Congress to explore the means for implementing this economic bill of rights- for it is definitely the responsibility of the Congress so to do. Many of these problems are already before committees of the Congress in the form of proposed legislation. I shall from time to time communicate with the Congress with respect to these and further proposals. In the event that no adequate program of progress is evolved, I am certain that the Nation will be conscious of the fact.
Our fighting men abroad- and their families at home- expect such a program and have the right to insist upon it. It is to their demands that this Government should pay heed rather than to the whining demands of selfish pressure groups who seek to feather their nests while young Americans are dying.
To compare and contrast John D. Rockefeller's view of how the world is supposed to be organized you could read this HistorydotCom review http://www.history.com/topics/john-d-rockefeller
Or you could just watch Hillary and Bill Clinton in action.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)I would ask that you consider making it an OP,,
clap: :
kristopher
(29,798 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)But I know what you mean..
By TODAY's standards, no, she is not a republican.. however...
TM99
(8,352 posts)I bet you don't, so let's inform you.
Sanders entered congress after the DLC take over of the Democratic Party. The DLC/Third Way is willing to compromise traditional progressive policies and positions for corporate cash. He refused to be a bought and paid for politician.
He still caucused every single year with Democrats. He still supported Democratic presidential candidates from Jackson through Obama. He still founded the House Progressive Caucus which he has co-chaired with Democrats since. The Democratic Party has supported him in Vermont without running primary candidates. They have actually asked him to host DSCC fund raising events for the Party.
These are the facts. You and the idiots at WaPo are pushing a lie. And just keep berating us independent leftists. Y'all need us this year if Sanders doesn't win the nomination. But your insults, lies, bullshit, rat-fucking, and smears are pretty much insuring that bridges will be so burned that Clinton will lose in a major way.
Bravo for party purity, eh?!
Carolina
(6,960 posts)BTW, the bridges are already aflame!
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)magical thyme
(14,881 posts)he wouldn't threaten the coronation of Hillary. Too late now. Too bad; so sad.
Besides, Bernie is more a democrat than the Goldwater Girl ever was. And plenty of Dems and Indies are switching to the GOP to impact their race.
Chaos rules. Deal with it.
CanadaexPat
(496 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Hostile takeover of the Democratic Party? LOL! Democrats like Dean and Schumer could not praise him enough---until he got in the way of a highly un-democratic Democratic coronation attempt.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/128018753
Should he have done what Nader did? Pick a position!
Better yet, admit anyone who tried to interfere with the coronation would face crap.
kennetha
(3,666 posts)Facts are your friend, not your enemy. Embrace them!
merrily
(45,251 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Say it with me: Facts have a liberal bias.
Note: not a center right bias.
jillan
(39,451 posts)KPN
(15,649 posts)kennetha
(3,666 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)Keep up.
Wilms
(26,795 posts)Or do you think we are??
The Clinton Foundation holds their records. The Progressive (sic) Policy Institute.
BTW, the roots of the DLC are with the original neo-con, Scoop Jackson.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Naive, neurotic, nuanced, Opaque, overblown, and
Pretentious. ............. I have more words.
But since you are obviously literal, I edited for you. Hope that better meets your approval.
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)Marr
(20,317 posts)casperthegm
(643 posts)It would be the democratic party. Hijack it and make it what it should be. Time to the party from the stagnation brought on by corporate interests and Wall Street. What is supposed to set this party apart from the Republicans is that it works for the people, not special interest. That line has been blurred to the extreme. So yeah, take it over Bernie- hijack this party so that I can recognize it again.
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Partial List of used up, bogus, Don't-Feel-the-Bern memes:
1. "not a Democrat"
2. Bernie Bros
3. got free stuff from the banks also (free checking)
4. can't win
5. against (pick one or all): ACA, Obama, trade
andym
(5,445 posts)His economic platform is less radical than McGovern's was in 1972-- Nixon's 1972 platform was more left-leaning than Obama's. McGovern was the apex of the FDR/LBJ led Democratic Party's move leftward, with the addition of a strong anti-war sentiment. That's how much the country has moved rightward since Reagan. But the question is how can he and the Democrats erase the anti-government, anti-tax sentiment that Reaganism engendered.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)It's really corrupt
vintx
(1,748 posts)Onlooker
(5,636 posts)Sanders is energizing a lot of independent voters towards the Democrats. They may not all become Democrats, but most of them will likely lean Democratic in the future. He's bringing a lot liberal and progressive people into the party and into the election. Let's face it, whether it's Hillary or Bernie who wins the nomination, it should be a net gain for the Democrats. Even if many of the Bernie supporters don't back Hillary, there will also be many new voters who would not have voted at all if it wasn't for Bernie.
My only concern is why did Bernie admit that he only became a Democrat for opportunistic reasons? That basically plays right into the hands of the superdelegates who are supposed be Democratic Party stalwarts. Now if the finally results are very close, Bernie will probably not be able to make a serious play for the superdelegates.
merrily
(45,251 posts)those people will vote Democratic in the general if he loses the primary.
I doubt many of the Millennial will either.
kennetha
(3,666 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Nothing would be better if Bernie hadn't run.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,168 posts)RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)Bernie Sanders is the best thing that's happened to the Democratic Party in decades.
After a generation of being kinder, gentler Republicans, the Democrats are finally returning to their working class roots.
It's no wonder that corporate America is feeling threatened. They should be.
GreenPartyVoter
(72,381 posts)splitting the vote. And yet, here is Bernie doing just what I was asked to do, and it's somehow a problem?
Vinca
(50,302 posts)Kicking and screaming. For decades we've edged right to the point I consider Hillary (prior to her moving toward Bernie) as half a Republican.
marew
(1,588 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)Peace Patriot
(24,010 posts)Cuz it is unrecognizable compared to the party I joined in 1960, with all this mind-boggling greed, "free trade for the rich," smashing up of the New Deal, deregulation of the banksters, etc., etc., that has infected my party with the plague of Reaganism.
Most of the Democratic Party leadership is beholden to the banksters and the Corporate Rulers. Bernie, PLEASE HELP US CLEAN OUR HOUSE--and turn it back into the "big tent" party of the People!
And Washington Post, SHUT UP!
riversedge
(70,286 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)Had a hunch this Rag was going to do a number on Bernie. They want Trump as their Fascist Leader.
disillusioned73
(2,872 posts)Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)and his third way crap which corrupted the party.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)kennetha
(3,666 posts)Certainly not Obama, I would guess, he was as "third way" as they come.
Jimmy Carter, maybe?
Probably not, he drove a stake in national health insurance -- that's what caused Kennedy to run against him.
Gotta go aways back to find a Democratic president to your liking I bet.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Don't throw shit where it will land in your face
Blood splatters are forensics tool to find how the criminal did his deed.
At least my son found out what a blow job was..... way before I did in my youth, from the president on national TV and not from my adolescence friends from some porn magazine.
That really helped get Bush elected........... but you know
.
The Clintons and Bush are best friends.
kennetha
(3,666 posts)why are you now supporting a candidate who wanted to primary Obama, and wants to throw away his signature achievement on a quixotic chase for single payer?
Buyers remorse?
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)How's that going?
Obama is not running but your girl is.
kennetha
(3,666 posts)so sad, that your heart is filled with such bitterness and you mind such confusion.
Mediate, take a walk, take a deep breath, clear you mind and your heart. You'll feel a lot better.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)but not with the Clintons ruling this nation again.
She voted for war and Bill egged on the Brits to join that war.......
If ignorance is blis, then I'm blistered.
It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.
The constant assertion of belief is an indication of fear.
If we can really understand the problem, the answer will come out of it, because the answer is not separate from the problem.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)And you don't have to take my word for it:
Robert Kagan: Republican, Neocon, PNAC co-founder endorses Clinton
Jeffrey Sachs: "Hillary Is the Candidate of the War Machine"
Jeffrey David Sachs is an American economist and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University. He is known as one of the world's leading experts on economic development and the fight against poverty.
cabineer
(30 posts)In other words, get off the Hillary-train and look around you. Take a breath and search your heart! You KNOW Clinton is damaged goods.
You'll be welcomed when you get your head on straight.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)Al From in his recent book, The New Democrats Return to Power, indicated that their group was formed to take over the party's policy.
He went further, even proclaiming they could take over the party. In many ways they did. This is sort of Part 2 of It's Al Froms Democratic Party, we just live here.
The DLC group is sometimes portrayed as a pro-Wall Street set of lobbyists. And From did recruit hedge fund legends like Michael Steinhardt to fund his movement. But to argue these people were corrupt or motivated by a pay to play form of politics is wrong. From is clearly a reformer and an ideologue, and his colleagues believed they were serving the public interest. Make no mistake about it, wrote From in a memo about his organizations strategy, what we hope to accomplish with the DLC is a bloodless revolution in our party." It is not unlike what the conservatives accomplished in the Republican Party during the 1960s and 1970s
I disagree with Stoller on one point for sure. I do not believe From's colleagues believed or even cared if they were serving the public interest. I believe funding and profit were their main goals.
We can thank them for the trade deals that have taken many jobs overseas. Al From was really firm on Bill Clinton supporting NAFTA. Notice he wants to "beat" organized labor. What kind of Democrat does that? A New Democrat.
As From wrote in a memo to Clinton in his first term, Of all the opportunities you have this fall, NAFTA presents the greatest. Passing NAFTA can make your presidency. NAFTA presents both an economic and political opportunity I cant tell you how much better it would make your life and how much it would strengthen your presidency for you to beat (David) Bonior and organized labor on NAFTA. That would reestablish presidential leadership in the Democratic Party, something that hasnt happened since 1966.
From had an institutionalist perspective on NAFTA. He believed in free trade, but he also believed in Presidential primacy over the legislature. 'Politically, a victory on NAFTA would assert your leadership over your own party by making it clear that you, not the Democratic leadership in Congress or the interest groups, set the Democratic Partys agenda on matters of real national importance. You can hear echoes of Obama, and the broad Democratic party, in its collective disdain towards Congress. That is one consequence of Froms revolution, a shift of legitimacy away from the legislature.
From worked with Bob Rubin, Bill Daley, and Rahm Emanuel to run a campaign to pass NAFTA. Since rolling labor and crushing the left was his favorite activity, From jumped into this feet first. He registered as a lobbyist, talked to members on the Hill, and traveled nationwide to do public and media events on behalf of the agreement. It worked, and in his view, set the stage for the rest of Clintons term
I question the wisdom of having a contest between Congress and the President on purpose.
More from Al From's piece about his book at The Atlantic last year.
Recruiting Bill Clinton
Subtitle:
How the New Democrats recruited a leader and saved the party after three devastating Republican routs
I have to disagree with Al From about the subtitle. We have had other devastating losses in the most recent years. How does he explain that? His DLC advocates are still in firm control of the party apparatus, so how do they explain these losses.
In this article Al From tells of how they got started on changing the party. Their think tank formed their own think tank called the Progressive Policy Institute. Al From named it Progressive because, in his own words, he was tired of his group being called conservative.
To bring about real change in the Democratic Party, the Democratic Leadership Conference, which we had founded in 1985 to expand the party's base and appeal to moderates and liberalshad to become a national political movement. That required two things.
First, we needed an intellectual center, because without a candidate to rally around, we needed a set of compelling ideas. Just as it was clear that we needed to paint the mural, it was also clear that we needed to beef up our capacity to paint it. We needed more substantive help. We needed a political think tank with the capacity to develop politically potent, substantive ideas that our elected officials and political supporters could embrace. In January 1989, we created the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI).
Hard to argue they did succeed in setting policy for the party.
This article from last month by the Progressive Policy Institute tells how President Obama worked on getting the TPP passed.
New Democrats plan assertive new presence in House
But a group of pro-business Democrats, who allied with President Barack Obama and Republicans to pass landmark trade legislation, are angling to cut more deals with the GOP and White House as a way to assert themselves and force the Democratic Caucus to the center.
Led by Rep. Ron Kind of Wisconsin, the New Democrat Coalition of some 50 members sees opportunities this fall on taxes, trade, Medicare and government spending. Those are all areas where House Republicans have struggled to fashion 218-vote majorities from within their own party, with a cadre of restive conservatives often rejecting leaderships compromises with Senate Democrats and Obama.
We need to reconstitute the center of American politics again, on both sides. That is a crucial role we have to play, especially when it comes to the economic message and what resonates in those competitive districts, Kind said in a recent interview.
Moderates are tired of being overshadowed in a party where liberals have long dominated the agenda, even as Democrats slipped further into the House minority after the 2014 midterm elections. Theyve accused the White House and party leaders of focusing too much on niche economic issues like the minimum wage and pay equity policies, moderates argue, that turn off suburban voters Democrats need if they want to take back the House. And top Democratic leaders have released them to break with the partys liberal base, in many cases an acknowledgement that many moderates come from tightly contested districts.
Early returns have been positive.
When needed support from his own party to pass landmark trade legislation, he turned to the New Democrat Coalition. The group mustered just enough votes 28 in total to clear fast-track trade authority through Congress, despite opposition from the partys left, including Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California. It was the latest and most controversial instance of the group flexing its muscles.
I disagree with above statement about liberals controlling the agenda. Can't remember a time when we did that. Maybe before my time.
In his article linked above, Recruiting Bill Clinton, Al From tells why they felt they needed someone like Bill Clinton. He quotes from Clinton's words:
He was not afraid to challenge old orthodoxies. In the early 1980s, long before I knew him, he and Hillary Clinton pushed cutting-edge education reforms, like pay for performance and public-school choice, against the opposition of the powerful Arkansas Education Association. Speaking about education in his Philadelphia speech, Clinton said the Democratic Party was good at doing more. We are not so good at doing things differently, and doing them better, particularly when we have to attack the established ideas and forces which have been good to us and close to us. We are prone, I think, to programmatic solutions as against those which change structure, reassert basic values or make individual connections with children.
Some "established ideas" that have been under attack for a while are Social Security and public schools.
From's writing indicates the group believed they were deciding policy for the party even back in the early 90s.
Nearly a year after our Little Rock meeting, at the DLCs Annual Conference in New Orleans on March 24, 1990, Bill Clinton became the DLCs fourth chairman. Calling Clinton a rising star in three decades, Sam Nunn passed him the gavel. Nunn quipped that when the DLC was created we were viewed as a rump group. Now were viewed as the brains of the party. In just five years, weve moved from one end of the donkey to the other.
I noticed some interesting quotes from Amazon reviews about From's book from December 2013, The New Democrats and the Return to Power.
Al From redefined centrist politics and provided the ideas and organization to move the Democrats from opposition to government, showing progressives across the world how to be principled, modern and in power. (Tony Blair, former prime minister of the United Kingdom)
I always wished I could be as smart as Al, and this book shows why. He shows what it was really like to be present at the creation of a movement that would take the Democrats from the wilderness to the White House, forever changing the course of American political history. This is a book about ideas as much as the people who forged them into a winning strategy, and it should be read, re-read and underlined by anyone who wants to know what it takes to be successful in American politics today. (Rahm Emanuel, Mayor of Chicago and former White House Chief of Staff)
Before 1992, the Democratic Party had moved too far to the left to win national elections. Too little credit is given to Al From, whose book tells the story of how he helped move his party back toward the common sense center. (Haley Barbour, former governor of Mississippi)
The American business community owes a big debt of gratitude to Al From. With vision and persistence he helped lead a major political party back to the principles of private sector growth, trade, jobs, personal responsibility, and fiscal stability. This book proves that the political center can win politically and govern effectively. Both parties -- and the American people -- would be wise to learn from Al's inspiring story. (Thomas J. Donohue, President & CEO, U.S. Chamber of Commerce)
I don't find those reviews reassuring considering the sources.
I think we have to look back like this to understand why we are where we are now. It's time to reverse that "intellectual leveraged buyout" of our party.
Otherwise known as a "hostile takeover."
djean111
(14,255 posts)serving.
Oh, and the Democratic Party asked Bernie to run as a Democrat - because they believed he would get so much support that the Democrats would lose. The DNC is using Bernie - they just thought he would have dropped out by now, giving newly politically aware supporters to Hillary. Isn't working out that way, hence, I see, the petulance.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Bernie is trying to revive progressive politics. There is no downside to his candidacy. He isn't hurting the party or anyone who supports the party.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Because that "Independent" is far more loyal to the policies the Democratic party *claims* it is for than any other Democratic politician an everyone damn well knows it. If he's successful in his takeover we may get the party we all wish we had.
He has not been an independent all this time because he isn't on liberals and progressives side. He has been an independent because the Democratic party hasn't been on their side ENOUGH.
And anyone who has spent any significant amount of time on this board over the years can hardly claim to be surprised by that fact. Not honestly at least, although there is much dissembling by the supporters of a certain candidate who is really really cozy with a lot of corporations that screw us all on a regular basis.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." Thomas Jefferson
libtodeath
(2,888 posts)JFKDem62
(383 posts)And voting for outsiders.
Trump and Bernie are the symptoms of wide spread voter discontent
with the current state of affairs.
Triana
(22,666 posts)You know who I mean - the DLC at al.
TalkingDog
(9,001 posts)n/t
However, it is disingenuous to suggest Bernie has hijacked the party since he has always caucused with Democrats and endorsed Democratic policies that are in the spirit of FDR. Sure he wasn't crazy about NAFTA and the ACA since they were policies lifted right out of the right wing Heritage Foundation. So who was hijacking the party who backed these deals.
TalkingDog
(9,001 posts)And if you think this has been "hostile", you might want to give back your adulting license.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Saving the Democrats from their co-dependent relationship with Corporate and Wall St. Oligarchs
EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)It's the 3rd way-ers that have hijacked the Democratic party.
I am voting for Bernie because I'm a Democrat. Hillary does not represent my liberal or Democratic values.
dchill
(38,521 posts)on a hugely mistaken view. I feel sorry for you.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)What is a political party -- the people controlling it, or the people in it?
Who has the right to say who "we" are?
Who gets to say who is legitimate and who is an intruder?
And all the same questions apply equally to the country at large. Are "the people" writ large supposed to have a voice, or do they need to just settle down and let their self-imagined betters run things as they see fit?
Because that's maybe not working very well.
To me the attitude that someone will establish control and then dictate to everyone else is supposed to be the Republican view of "democracy." Once it was white male landowners; now it's simply whoever has the most money or can otherwise purchase the most influence.
"We stole this power fair and square. Now butt out!"
Whenever I see people enthusing about how they can't wait until people who disagree with them have to shut up or be "kicked out," I wonder why they call themselves Democrats in the first place. We already have a party that's about hierarchies and rigid power structures and elitist ideas of who is permitted to call the shots.
And of course, WaPo is so deeply in the tank for the Clinton campaign that it was recently observed hitting 16 anti-Sanders stories in 16 hours, joining the growing laundry list of establishment institutions setting their credibility on fire to try to swing the Democratic Primary.
http://usuncut.com/politics/washington-post-bias-against-bernie-sanders/
Whatever we do in this election, we need to think about whether the Democrats stand for small "d" democracy, or for a slightly more polite authoritarianism than what the Republicans are offering.
vercetti2021
(10,156 posts)This is some of the dumbest shit I've seen in a long time. Keep on with the Third Way crap.
Gothmog
(145,496 posts)Sanders wants super delegates to support him and that is not going to happen
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)kennetha
(3,666 posts)all the way back to socialism,
But when was the democratic party a socialist party exactly?
My Good Babushka
(2,710 posts)can you imagine how much further the DNC is going to pull rightwing next election? No. I'm sick of being told I have to go right if I want to go left. There is no end to it. I'd rather blow up the whole process than vote for a neocon like Clusterbombs Clinton.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)An independent in name only in many ways
He caucused with the Democrats for, 16 years in the United States House of Representatives, 10 years in the United States Senate;
where he served on many committees Representing the Democratic party such as the:
Committee on the Budget (Ranking Member)
Committee on Environment and Public Works
Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety
Subcommittee on Green Jobs and the New Economy
Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Subcommittee on Energy
Subcommittee on National Parks
Subcommittee on Water and Power
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Subcommittee on Children and Families
Subcommittee on Primary Health and Aging (Ranking Member)
Committee on Veterans' Affairs (chairman)
He has every right to expect respect from those he served with such loyalty and in so many capacities.
Lieberman on the other hand, was more Republican than Democratic and received not only "party respect" but endorsements for him as an Independent OVER A DEMOCRAT by the Democratic establishment.
You make a point
Unfortunately it is a dishonest talking point and nothing more!
.
kennetha
(3,666 posts)and being free to denounce the party whenever it suits his purposes.
A mere marriage of convenience.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)I am done with entertaining your false talking point, read my damn post, the party put him on those committees and to represent THEM, the party apppears to disagree with your dishonest talking point, or are you going for a full false meme on this one?
Wake up! He has been loyal to the party and the party rewarded him for it by placing him on so many committees to represent them.
I don't entertain false memes, and I dislike feeding trolls more than a quick bit of truth.
our conversation is over, spread your dishonest talking point elsewhere, I am allergic to lies so I have no more troll kibble for you.
Goodbye
kennetha
(3,666 posts)couldn't deign to run as a democrat before, when he was denouncing the democrats as just the second party of the Ruling class and urging Jesse Jackson to bolt the party and run as an independent.
the idea that Sanders is really in his heart of hearts a tried and true democrat, when he has never called himself that, is laughable.
2banon
(7,321 posts)You're attempt to traffic poppycock in the form of smear is pathetic. It's been clear for decades your masters would prefer the party to remain a private club..
but here's a bit shocking news for you: It ain't your private club, nor is it the Clintons.
You'd be wise to bow out of this thread and let it disappear into the black hole it belongs and go read some history.
WDIM
(1,662 posts)Instead of voting for more neocon corporate controlled government!
Occupy Democrats!
beedle
(1,235 posts)Screw the DLC, it the body that left the Democratic Party long ago.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)If he wins, then it is apparent that he and his ideology are not the hijackers.
Blue Owl
(50,490 posts)beedle
(1,235 posts)as this group is to Japanese Idol girl bands
A big and needed improvement
Matariki
(18,775 posts)Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)We are fortunate we have an electable candidate.
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)...we're REPOCESSING it.
Don't like it? Too bad so sad.
Setsuna1972
(332 posts)Now note that I'm not attacking Senator Sanders or calling him any bad names, BUT..he isn't a Democrat . There's nothing wrong with him being an Independent, but I do have problem with him campaigning as if he represents a party when he isn't a member of that said party . I'expecting some nasty replies with this, so go ahead and have at it !
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Setsuna1972
(332 posts)Your tag here sounds quite similar to someone I like there
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)(I'm too old to do the Twitter thing. But at least I know what it is.)
#TooOldToBeOnTwitter
JackRiddler
(24,979 posts)Dem2
(8,168 posts)Bernie is a good Democrat
kennetha
(3,666 posts)He's a Democratic SOCIALIST --- you forgot the socialist part.
Dem2
(8,168 posts)It's a political philosophy in this country, not a party.
A very large number of Democrats will admit that they are socialist, or at least are for many socialist programs, and would prefer more if it was possible.
Edit: reading this later, it occurs to me that there is a socialist party on this country. My bad.
Wow -- Hostile takeover by running proudly and strongly on issues central to the democratic party is now the equivalent of hijacking?
I have been a registered Democratic voter for over 20 years. I proudly registered as a democrat because I believe strongly in the ideals expounded by Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman and Lyndon Johnson as well as many of the old stalwarts in the democratic party during their tenures.
I did not register as a democrat because I supported welfare reform, nafta, deregulation of the banking industry, union busting, consolidation of the media, etc. etc.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Time to kick the effing corporatists out. Go back to the GOP, ya bums.
Lucinda
(31,170 posts)But at least he's out in the open about it and not fibbing anymore.
shawn703
(2,702 posts)These independents would have never left the Democratic Party if it didn't become Republican-light.
Before the DLC was founded in 1985, Democrats controlled the House with 269 members. We haven't had that much representation since.
kennetha
(3,666 posts)gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Seriously. Wake up.
kennetha
(3,666 posts)That's pretty naive and uninformed about the complexity of FDR's approach to things.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)...that Democratic Socialism and Socialism are the same thing the way New Mexico and Mexico are the same thing... right?
And were his policies basically the definition of Democratic Socialism? YES THEY WERE.
kennetha
(3,666 posts)gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Didn't mean to interrupt your internal monologue, but when you're done if you want to get a start on that studying.:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model
kennetha
(3,666 posts)gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Strong social safety net? Strong labor protections? Strong labor organization? Public sector involvement in critical sectors of the economy while maintaining a free market? Strongly progressive income tax rates?
What the fuck DOESN'T it have to do with FDR? Read. Learn.
kennetha
(3,666 posts)But FDR wasn't a socialist. He did not nationalize a single industrial sector, if I recall.
He certainly did spend a lot of tax money to stimulate the economy. And he issued a lot of regulations -- that regulated finance and the banks, etc.
He also developed and funded some massive public works projects, unprecedented in American history.
But he didn't leave us with a socialist economic structure -- not at all. He set out to and actually did, save Capitalism, by inventing the mixed economy. Great invention the mixed economy. But it is not socialism,
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)But FDR wasn't a socialist. He did not nationalize a single industrial sector, if I recall.
"Democratic Socialism Is Not Socialism."
READ THE LINK. One little relevant excerpt in case, as I anticipate, you can't be bothered:
"The Nordic model is underpinned by a free market capitalist economic system that features high degrees of private ownership"
shawn703
(2,702 posts)Control of the party isn't necessary for most people to feel comfortable voting for the party's candidates.
Merryland
(1,134 posts)and nobody is fooled.
GeorgeGist
(25,322 posts)independents to vote in their primaries.
The 1% are getting paranoid.
matt819
(10,749 posts)Whatever the label, Sanders is more of s Democrat than any other Democrats running against him.
kennetha
(3,666 posts)matt819
(10,749 posts)His overarching principles are those of Democrats. The Democratic Socialist label is fine with me, but he's running as the nominee for the Democratic Party. And in his respect his Democratic credentials are more consistent than his opponent.
beedle
(1,235 posts)so the "democratic socialist" who actually adheres closer to the actual principles of democracy than the "Democratic Party', is :hijacking" the "Democratic Party" and they are complaining because he's using democracy to do so.
Don't let anyone tell you that 'irony' is a metal that looks a lot like iron.
democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)That is exactly what the Democratic establishment needs - a hijacking! The party has become too entrenched with corporate interests and Bernie's campaign has demonstrated the power of grassroots activists in a way that has to make the establishment sit up and pay attention, whether he wins or loses.
And I would much rather have people like Bernie "hijack" the party from within than act as spoilers in the general election. I can't stand the Green Party because I feel that rather than try to effect progressive change from within the Democratic Party they end up acting as spoilers and helping Republicans get elected. We need more people like Bernie to run in Democratic primaries rather than going out there and spewing the lie that there is no difference between the parties.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)alarimer
(16,245 posts)They need it. They've sold their souls to the corporate wing.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)take it back!
orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)orpupilofnature57
(15,472 posts)Owl
(3,643 posts)Jarqui
(10,130 posts)I'm sure someone has already explained why Sanders decided to run as a Democrat - to not hand the White House to the GOP by splitting the Democratic vote.
Where "hostile takeover" doesn't entirely work is the Democratic party could have declined. They did not decline. They declined assuming Bernie couldn't compete against Hillary.
I don't think you'd have to twist the Sanders campaign's arm to get Bernie to withdraw now as long as he can run in the general as an independent (haven't checked dates or sore loser laws). Because if Clinton & Trump are the two other candidates, I think Bernie would be the next President of the United States. Trump can't beat him head to head and Clinton can't beat him outside of the party.
Sanders would keep what he's got of the Democratic party, do the best of the three handily with the independents (the biggest constituency) and do well attracting GOPers who cannot stand Trump or Clinton (a lot of them hate both).
Be careful what you ask for. If Bernie hadn't made the promise he did, I would have been all over him to run as an independent.
Of course, if the other shoe drops on the emails or Clinton Foundation returning an indictment, the Democratic Party might be real glad to have a candidate like Bernie.
Carolina
(6,960 posts)The DLC and turd-wayers like the Clintons did that ages ago
And the WP is worthless, too