I like Sanders, really I do......BUT...

[BooScout]

I actually like Sanders, but I've always been to the left.

What disturbs me about Sanders is this. He was never a Democrat until he decided to run for President. He is using the party to run. Why after 73 years does he only now decide the Democrats are good enough for him? He's anti establishment and he is running on the premise that he's a fresh face, yet he's playing the system like the best of them do.

It was my understanding that Sanders was initially in this race to drive the party left. With all due respect, is that not a job for an actual Democrat, not a party outsider? And now it seems the tone has changed and he's in it to win it.

He's got a lot of great ideas floating around out there, with absolutely nothing proposed on how to pay for them.

Sanders is not a negative campaigner. That's a wonderful thing, but hey! This is the reality.... National politics for the Presidency is BRUTAL. We know that Clinton is prepared to attack her GOP opponent's position on the issues and hammer home on them. They have been screeching BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! at Clinton for years now and it rolls right off her teflon shield. They have investigated her 8 times about that clap trap and she has slapped them down every single time. When they start yelling SOCIALIST! SOCIALIST! SOCIALIST! at Sanders will he be able to do the same?

It may not matter to me and you that Bernie Sanders has a child out of wedlock. It may not matter that he's a self described Socialist, but you can damn well bet that the Republican party will absolutely crucify him on those two points if it ever comes to him vs a Republican.....and what else is out there on him? The press has not even started to scrutinize him. He is the darling of the left right now because he has not been on the national radar of voters before. He's 73 years old and it has taken him that long to get there. Remember this, the Clintons too were once the darling of the left many, many years ago. They have stood in the blast of the furnace issuing from the right for over 30 years and survived and thrived among the nastiest politics I have ever seen thrown at them. I cannot in good faith say that Sanders will be able to do the same.

I'll also say this. Clinton is 67. If she were to win and win two terms, she would would be 76 at the end of her last term. Sanders is 73, at the end of his first term he would be 78. Could he even have the stamina of going a second round of a national campaign? Would the nation elect someone who would be in his 80's as President? I want a two term Democrat, not a one term one.

These are hard thoughts and questions, but the honeymoon period for Sanders is ending. If it's serious, we need to be asking some serious and hard questions.

[hollysmom]

1. parties are a state of mind

people can grow and change their opinion and change parties. Parties are fluid, they can grow and change and leave people behind.

What you were called by name does not matter. It is where is your heart and does this person represent you,

JMHO

I say this as a so far undecided.

[HERVEPA]

2. Your sincere concern is noted.

[Sheepshank]

77. Dismissive tripe

A well thought out opinion piece and that's the sum total of your response? Typical. Gotta get in a negative overuse oneliner to somehow bolster Bernie.


The op took the time to make points and add reasoning. I fully agreed with most of it, some not so much. But I appreciated the respectful tone of the op.

[RichVRichV]

81. Dismissive tripe is what I'd call the op.

Concern trolling is getting played out. I'd bother shooting all that down, but plenty of people have already done it, so why bother.

[Bobbie Jo]

96. +1

"..your posts are to slam another DUer?"

As are half the posts in this thread.

[Sheepshank]

99. Hopefully you have noticedBernie supporters ......

..... Stating over and over that Clinton supporters must be worried about their candidate because of their questioning of Bernie.

With that thinking, You have 1/2 a thread of Bernie supporters clearly confirming their concern for the viability of their candidate. Lol

[RichVRichV]

103. A thread started by a Hillary supporter

attacking Bernie gets responded to by Bernie supporters and yet it's Bernie supporters scrambling in fear.

Careful, your confirmation bias is showing.

[Sheepshank]

106. OP is an Attack? You need to get a thicker skin

Fwiw...I am calling into focus and using your own teams words. You guys need to think it through before swarming posts that question your favorite campaigner.

I personally don't think it means concern or worry...I think it means someone has an opinion. It's your team that attempts to interpret these posts as a fear their candidate isn't doing well. So...here we are all these Bernie supporters scared shitless for the chances of their candidate.

[RichVRichV]

126. I count at least 7 attacks in the op.

'He's an outsider, not a real Democrat.'

'First he was in it to drive the party left, now he wants to win.'

'He has a lot of great ideas and no way to pay for them.'

Sander's cant survive GOP negative attacks.'

'He has a child out of wedlock.'

'He can't win because he's a socialist.'

'He's too old.'



Now I'll waste my time responding to this tripe.

1) The big tent can apparently include ex Republicans, bur left leaning independents who have caucused with the Democrats need not apply. Simple fact is if he runs as a Democrat you attack him as an outsider. If he ran as an independent you'd attack him as a spoiler. So which is it?

2) This is an outright delusion of Hillary supporters. He has always been in it to win. He stated before he ran he would only declare if he felt he had the support to win. The op is just angry he's not playing by thier delusion.

3) He has already stated how to pay for free higher education in full. It's a proven model through out the world. We would actually save money with single payer. Again proven through out the world.

4) There's plenty to go after Hillary with (and I don't mean Benghazi, which is made up garbage). Bernie has a lot less baggage to attack. It's a lot harder to swift boat with social media truth checking everything now. Good luck to them. So far all the attacks on him have amounted to nothing.

5) Who cares. Tons of people have. That attack is a waste of time.

6) It's killing him so far. In fact he hasn't had any Republican support in Vermont as a self proclaimed socialist.

7) That's an attack on Hillary also, she's not much younger. The simple fact is different people become 'too old' at different rates. Look at RBG. And being young doesn't mean someone won't become debilitated or die.




The fact that you agree with the op doesn't change that it's a thinly veiled attack.

[GoneFishin]

282. +1. Well stated.

[karynnj]

284. it is as much an attack as threads that Clinton supporters

Routinely call not just attacks, but right wing attacks.

Attacks should be met with responses that put things in context if they are valid. So, I'll try

1) Bernie ' s age. Both Bernie AND Clinton are old for candidates. Who is likely to weather the stress of being President of the two is hard to tell. Women, in general, live longer, but HRC showed far more fatigue as Secretary of State than JK, Conditions Rice, Powell, or Albright and she suffered a concussion. Bringing up this issue, gives the advantage to O'Malley. ( i think Webb and Chaffee are also both over 65.)

2) Bernie has a son out of wedlock. From the timeline, that son was born to a serious committed relationship when both were single and thus eligible to be married. Having a first spouse guilty of periodic episodes of adultery may offend the same people. For me, the latter is a more serious failing for that first spouse candidate as it violates trust and potentially destroys a relationship.

[Bobbie Jo]

133. Oh I know

but when you're surrounded by people who agree with you (on this site) you can engage in all of the double standards you want.

[George II]

294. I'm not worried at all.

[RichVRichV]

98. Your concern is noted.

It's very simple, I've been reading here since long before 2012. I just haven't had any reason to post until Bernie declared. I simply don't like the corporate candidates that control most of our party.

And not all of my posts have been to slam other DUers. Just the posts that deserve it. There's been a lot of garbage slung by Hillary supporters in the name of concern. So that part has kept me busy lately.

A lot of Bernie supporters stay out of the primary forums because of the negativity. I, however, believe all unfounded accusations should be challenged lest they become accepted as truth.

Normally my responses are more in depth; but in this case there were already plenty of responses. I'm just tired of attacks that begin with 'I like Bernie but', or 'I support Bernie but', or all the other variants. If you want to attack Bernie just be honest about it. Quit acting like you have some great concern for him (that was a general statement btw, not at you). It would be more convincing if the concern trolls ever actually said something positive about Bernie. But it's all attacks all the time from them in the name of 'concern'.

[Sheepshank]

100. You must be very concerned for Bernie...I would be too

Your trite punitive response to the op doesn't help him in any way shape or form.

[RichVRichV]

108. I think you need a dictionary.

I haven't tried to punish anyone. Mostly laughing at the lightly veiled attacks being passed off (poorly) as concern.

Btw, your attempts at goading with insults are too obvious. Don't try so hard.

[Sheepshank]

109. Your subtlety is noted.

Haa haa haa

[RichVRichV]

238. As everyone keeps saying,

General is for electing the Democrat, primary is for choosing the best one.

[RichVRichV]

260. I consider all the Dem candidates

capable of beating any of the Republicans.

Why? You got some magic 8 ball telling you otherwise?

[MADem]

130. Oh bull--you apparently don't know what "concern trolling" is.

Take a look at the avatar of the OP. Now, ask yourself which candidate the poster likely supports.

OK, got that fixed in your mind?

Now, UNDERSTAND THIS: a lot of us who support Hillary Clinton do NOT DISLIKE Bernie Sanders. A lot of us LIKE HIM JUST FINE. He's simply NOT OUR FIRST CHOICE.



There's a LOT to like about him--he has many good ideas, usually votes with our caucus, and is plain-spoken. Hell, Hillary Clinton liked him well enough to donate money from her political action committee to his Senate campaign, to ensure that he was elected to the senate. So hey, if HILLARY likes him well enough, why shouldn't we?

Pointing out his weaknesses is not "concern trolling." "Concern trolling" would be if someone with a big fat BERNIE~~~!!! avatar and sig line came forward and expressed those concerns.

We can LIKE Bernie without thinking he is the BEST choice for the Presidency. Calling people "concern trolls" when they support another candidate is something that other sorts of internet disruptors might do--so you should really not do that kind of thing, lest we start thinking that about you.

[calimary]

224. Excellent post, MADem!

Certainly describes this Hillary supporter. I like Bernie Sanders a lot, too. But I'm a pragmatist, as well, and I just feel rather strongly that Hillary is the better bet.

[MADem]

228. Thanks!

[Admiral Loinpresser]

261. See post 258 for a rebuttal of every point. n/t

[tavalon]

113. Knock it off

If you have nothing to say, don't say anything.

[Kalidurga]

3. I dare no I triple dog dare the Republicans to make Levi an issue.

The Republicans are going to call any Democrat a socialist. They even called Obama a socialist and he is far from being a socialist. I don't care about the age issue. I do want Bernie to go for two terms if he can, but if he can't I am sure he will have a very able VP that will be able to run and win his or her first term and that person will go two terms.

And Bernie does have proposals to pay for his plans. One tax the rich and two reduce military spending down to sustainable levels. Some parts of his plan will cost very little other parts will save tax money. The one where college is free will pay off when the graduates earn higher incomes and pay more in taxes than they would if they were working at low wage jobs and collected tax breaks in the form of EIC benefits.

I don't give a rats behind who pushes Democrats to the left it's something that needs to be done. I can't imagine why you resent the push to the left, unless you are enjoying the 3rd way.

[emsimon33]

5. Well said!

Thank you.

[DCBob]

8. The difference is Sanders admits he is a socialist.

Most normal people realized the RWingers calling Obama a socialist was non-sense but with Sanders its true. Even though we as liberal Democrats have no problem with the term "socialist", a large majority of the voting public does.

[Kalidurga]

9. They won't when they realize they are socialist.

Almost everyone has been to public schools. Almost everyone knows someone who is or is themselves on Social Security or gets medicare. Many people even people in high paying jobs use public transportation. Nearly everyone uses public roads either directly by driving on them or because they are dependent on retail establishments for their goods and services. Many people have local paid fire fighters. Many people have been to a county hospital. Almost everyone has been to a public park, national park, or other public space. Most people favor raising taxes on the wealthy. Most people would be appalled if they understood how far in the worlds vital statistics the US has fallen because we didn't keep up with many of FDRs programs which were working very well btw and that was the reasoning behind dismantling them. The United States used to be number one or near number one in life expectancy now IIRC we are 37th, 67th in infant mortality, 28th in literacy rates, and number one of nations that are industrialized in income inequality.

[BooScout]

10. With all due respect....

Most Americans are not as enlightened as we are and have no idea that America has socialist programs. Sadly this includes a lot of people who vote Democratic. I'm talking about the general population not someone on DU who actually is aware of this fact.

[Le Taz Hot]

28. You swear fealty to a political party and consider yourself enlightened?

Alright then.

[BooScout]

52. Last time I checked.....

...this place was called Democratic Underground, not the Swinging Underground.

[Le Taz Hot]

101. Read the rules again.

One does not have to be a registered Democrat to post here.

[BooScout]

208. you old dawg you!

[DCBob]

11. That's a major mindset change and is not going to happen between now and election day.

Its a huge negative for Bernie.

[okasha]

241. Given that they've been oblivious

to their "socialism" for the last century, what makes you think the lightbulb is suddenly going to come on now?

It's not going to happen. The retort to your assertion will be that they've been paying for--ie., buying--those services with their own money.Their beef is that "people who don't pay for them" are "welfare queens" who get to use them anyway.

And raiding lower-middle and middle class retirement funds to pay for some of his programs is a monumentally bad idea.

[Kalidurga]

247. Everyone I talk to gets it and most the people I talk to are conservative family members.

I don't think people are as stupid as they get credit for.

[tecelote]

279. The US Military is the largest Socialist system in the world.

[madokie]

16. America is a socialist Democracy as it is today, when it comes right down to it

look around you, its everywhere, from Social Security to Medicare to Medicaid to Welfare to food stamps to unemployment. We the people like the socialist state we are. Deal with it.
Bernie Sanders will be our next President, Get used to it.

[DCBob]

19. LOL.. "we the people" don't agree with you..

[madokie]

22. Thats assuming that we're talking about and comparing

a socialist goverment to a democracy, we aren't. What we have today is a socialist democracy. it began in earnest with the new deal and its here to stay. Not only to stay but to get stronger. Capitalism has about brought out country to its knees once before and would again if we don't wake up to what is going on.

Change the question more in line to what we are, a socialist democracy, and see what the answers would be.

[DCBob]

23. I doubt most voters would know the difference.

The fact is Bernie calls himself a socialist which I assume means he is promoting socialism... so the question is worded correctly as it applies to how most people feel about Bernie's socialist label.

[madokie]

26. Thats not what you stated as truth though

Back tracks are always a little off and easy to identify

Bernie does not call himself a socialist in the vein of socialism but rather in the vein of what we are now a socialist democracy. Big difference in the two.

So far not one person I've talked to except a few here on DU has even brought up that he identifies as a socialist democrat. Not one single person in real life has.

[DCBob]

37. Since we are mincing words here I thought he calls himself a "Democratic Socialist"??

not a "Socialist Democrat" as you stated. I think there is big difference there for those keeping track.

[madokie]

41. Matters not which comes first

The meaning is the same

Talk about mincing words. Geeze Louise get real

[DCBob]

49. Are you kidding.. there is huge difference..

Democratic Socialist = A democratic type of Socialist.
Socialist Democrat = A socialist type of a Democrat.

Two very different animals to me.

[madokie]

54. Whatever

one and the same

Semantics is all you have, is that it?

Good day I've got work to do this morning.
I can't take any more of this nonsense.
peace

[TM99]

110. Before lecturing others, you might

want to read up on any differences yourself.

http://www.dsausa.org/what_is_democratic_socialism

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121680/bernie-sanders-democratic-socialist-not-just-socialist

[okasha]

242. Double talk.

What in heaven's name is a socialist not "in the vein of socialism?". I am a socialist, and I find your assertion here utterly meaningless.

[kacekwl]

56. I don't think people care

if he is a socialist , democrat , independent . All that matters is what he says and how his policies will help them and the country as a whole.

[Sheepshank]

78. Then you are sticking your head in the sand

Look at the charts above...people very much care. Look at my signature line...what the majority of the voting constituency understand about socialism is not what the .0001 of the U.S. population, here on DU have discussed and have clarified.

[Mnpaul]

168. The charts above

show Democrats evenly split on socialism/capitalism. That shows that Democrats understand that our country is run on a mixture of the two. Republicans(and some Democrats) want to shift that mix more towards capitalism to pay off their donors. Doing so has negative effects for the rest of us.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

263. If this terrible label is hurting him,

why is he surging in the polls and doing so well in his own state among conservatives? He is also doing very well nationally with veterans. I guess they didn't get the memo from Joe McCarthy.

[tavalon]

118. The New Deal: Socialism in action

We need to hammer and hammer and hammer that one home. It needs to be a meme.

[MADem]

269. I think they're asking people to react to the word--and Frank Luntz and his "Words that work" crew

would go out of their way to exploit the "socialism" label -- and use Senator Sanders' own declarations, on video, to drive the point home--to rile up their base.

Make no mistake. Just because the reality isn't terrible doesn't mean that the PERCEPTION is not perceived as such.

The GOP won't "change the question." They'll use that impression to their advantage--and we all know this.

[madokie]

276. the republiCON base aren't in our camp anyway

they're not going to vote for whoever the democratic nominee is no matter if it was st ronnie brought back from the grave with a D after his name, It ain't going happen so they're not a worry to us.

Most people, Democratic voters that is, realize what we have is a democratic socialist type government already so the socialist label won't scare any of them off. Like I said the ones who it will will not vote for one of us no matter anyway so why worry with them. We dont need them to win this election, in fact we'll win this election in spite of them. That you can bet on.

[MannyGoldstein]

46. Remember when "Progressive" was a dirty, scary word?

Like, four years ago?

Now the word's so in demand that even Neoliberals like Hillary are claiming title to it. LOL!

People often wake up when they need to.

[DCBob]

61. Well shit.. "progressive" to the ignorant masses is a new Walmart down the road.

But socialism carrys some strong negatives that wont go away easily.

[Sheepshank]

79. Bernie doesn't have a few years to change internal thinking of thie US population.

He should have started years ago....by your own reckoning

[MannyGoldstein]

80. Who else is going to change it?

A Neoliberal?

Change can happen quickly, when people are desperate.

[tavalon]

117. Wow, I think you just proved that Republicans are old

I agree, actually. Old, tired and worn out. It's time for a change, methinks.

[99Forever]

32. Down this road again Bob?

I've already explain this to you. Weren't you paying attention?

Check your watch. It's not 1952, you aren't Tailgunner Joe, and the Red Scare tactic hasn't held air for about half a century. Join us in the New Millennia.

[DCBob]

34. Sorry if the truth is difficult for you.

When it comes to "socialism" the ignorant masses don't like it.

[99Forever]

38. In what Universe is your OPINION called truth, Bob?

That's beyond ridiculous.

[madokie]

44. Pluto maybe

I really don't understand the line of thinking.

Not yours mind you

[99Forever]

47. More like Universe Hillary...

.. as a short perusal of both this guy's AND the OP's profiles and recs show pretty damn clearly.

Do these characters really think we can't see them for exactly what they are?

[madokie]

48. I'm sure they do

denial is not only a river in Egypt

[DCBob]

66. Not my opinion.. it's the voter's opinion.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251439015#post19

[madokie]

278. linking back to one of your earlier post is laughable

thats a bunk poll and you know it.

Desperation on your part is all I'm seeing here

[DCBob]

293. Here's another poll.. but you probably wont like it either.

[riversedge]

302. Whow. Thanks for this post. I do

take most polls with a grain of salt but those numbers are so revealing. There is a 10 pt spread between an atheist and solialist!!

[daleanime]

50. Most of the people with a real problem with the word "socialist".....

are never going to vote democratic, period.

But don't worry, we love you anyways.

[DCBob]

67. I am talking about this as an issue in the general should he somehow win the Dem nomination.

[daleanime]

68. Me too....

what a surprise.

Although, I think it's 'when' and not 'should'.

[DCBob]

70. Ok, so you are saying those types wouldn't vote for Democrat regardless.

Perhaps, but I think this will impact some independents who might have voted for Hillary if she were the nominee.

[daleanime]

73. You believe Hillary would have a stronger appeal with independents?

Really?

[DCBob]

83. Yes. Not sure what the laughing is all about... I guess you don't keep up with the polls.

She has huge lead over Sanders with Independents.

              Total Dem Ind
Clinton     57% 65% 46%
Sanders   14% 11% 18%

This is from the recent CNN/ORC poll.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/06/30/trumpbushclinton.pdf

[daleanime]

89. Is it the same as a month ago?

[DCBob]

92. This poll was taken June 26-28.

[daleanime]

146. And the poll from May?

[DCBob]

160. what about it??

[daleanime]

177. Was it the same?

Or did it change in just one month?

[DCBob]

179. I have no idea?

[daleanime]

181. Because that's what's important....

not where things are now, but where are they going. Have a lovely day.

[DCBob]

183. So you know? Not interested in playing games.

Get lost.

[daleanime]

190. Excuse me, I was neither rude or disrespectful....

I asked a question that you couldn't, or didn't want to, answer. So I repeat-have a lovely day, you kind, caring person, you.

[DCBob]

244. Sorry, but you are not excused.. if you have something to say.. just say it.

No need to play childish games. Most of us don't have time for that.

[daleanime]

248. No problem, I'll be as patient with you as necessary....

Post#83 you use a poll to try to convince me that Hillary is more popular with independents.

Post#89 I asked if it was the same as a month ago.

Post#92 you informed me that the poll was a couple of weeks old.

Post#146 I pointed out that what I was asking about was the polling data from the month before.

Post#160 you wonder why.

Post#177 I told that I wanted to know what it was to see what kind of change had happen.

Post#179 you responded that you had no idea? And I have to admit that the question mark made me wonder, were you unsure if you know? Well, not really very important.

Post#181 I told you why I was interested in the earlier poll, and I repeat. It's because where we are right now is not important, the only poll that really counts is the one taken in the election booth. Polls taken before can be interesting and/or useful, but their just snap shots and a series them provide an improved picture, but still just a picture.

And having seen from Post#181 that you didn't know, question mark, I ended with have a lovely day.

Post#183 and to my lovely day you responded that you didn't care for my 'game playing' and that I should "Get Lost."

Post#190 I pointed out that I have been neither rude or disrespectful. And continued to offer you a lovely day.

Post#244 you throw my courtesy in my face. Again accusing me of 'game playing'. Is that some kind of sad projection? That any one willing to hold a discussion with you must be playing a game. That has to be rough. I feel quite a bit of sympathy for Hillary supporter on DU. Let's face it, when you're out numbered 9 to 1, it's got to be tough.

And if you were really worried about your time management, you would have taken the first lovely day out of here.

So sorry about that again, feel free to reject my sympathy, you've proven that you need it.

And for the third time, have a lovely day, you kind, caring, non-game playing person, you.

[DCBob]

249. WTF?

[daleanime]

251. Short version, you have my sympathies, you've proven that you need them....

and have a 4th lovely day, you kind, caring, non-game playing person, you.

[DCBob]

254. WTFF? Sympathies? You are one confused individual.

[daleanime]

257. No, just a sympathetic one...

you kind, caring, non-game playing person, you.

[tavalon]

116. Easily solved

Just say: Did you like Roosevelt? He created Social Security. It's a socialist program.

Hopefully that is the end of the discussion.

[daleanime]

178. Some folks seem to just want it to be a problem....

not really interested in addressing it.

[tavalon]

114. Yup, seems they have a Levi in their closet too

Wasn't he somebody's baby daddy?

[Stevepol]

216. Proposals to pay for his plans.

The two you have are excellent: tax the rich and reduce military spending. He has mentioned those, especially tax the rich.

But there are a couple others he mentions too: a transactions tax on Wall Street, Closing down the tax loopholes (change the tax codes) which allow the tax havens in the Cayman Islands, etc., Getting rid of the cap on social security would also add to social needs w/o adding general taxes or making unwarranted changes in retirement age, etc., This might also qualify as a way of adding revenue and avoiding unnecessary pain for the old and those considering retirement. Though this might be a different matter since Social Security isn't really government revenue dependent. Social Security is an insurance program funded by the FICA tax solely.

Thanks for the post. The original poster who said that Bernie never mentions how he will pay for his ideas apparently doesn't listen very closely to Bernie's speeches since he mentions how he would pay for these things in almost every speech.

[Kalidurga]

222. Oh thanks I was just going off the top of my head and didn't go back and listen to the last speech..

I had heard. Those were the two ideas I remembered straight off. Going back yes he did indeed mention the transaction tax, closing loop wholes and getting rid of the cap on Social Security.

Now as for the question of Levi Sanders here is the what the triple dog dare is. If they want to make him an issue I would suggest to Bernie and Levi that they make him a prominent member of Bernie's campaign staff if Levi is cool with that. I would have him also do a social media photo bomb or whatever you call it when they dump a lot of pics on the social media with Bernie and Levi together. I am sure they were together for the Rolling Stone article. Bernie has never hidden Levi from the public, in fact Levi has been photographed with Obama, you can't really go more prominent than that in politics.

In a society where there is rampant divorce and the out of wedlock birth rate approaches 40% or more I don't think we are going to find to many people are going to be shocked or care. I strongly suspect there could be a horrible backlash on anyone who wants to push this issue especially from children who were born out of wedlock such as myself and my children. Heck I found out at a family reunion a great many of my family was born out of wedlock half my cousins. My own mother was conceived prior to my grandparents getting married. My father's oldest sister was conceived prior to his father marrying his mother, he was their third child so it he was born under the blessing of the state of Michigan.

If I had the social network I would create a fan group of such people something like #BastardsforBernie. All my cousins would at the very least love the name of the group.

[udbcrzy2]

4. Our elected officials are aging

There are many in congress that are aging. They all seem to go in there and do their job. I'm not the least bit worried by that. He is in good shape, heck he did an 8-hour filibuster once.

As of July 12, 2015, 5 senators are in their 80s, 18 are in their 70s, 32 are in their 60s, 30 are in their 50s, 14 are in their 40s, and 1 is in his 30s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_Senators_by_age

[Wilms]

6. Carlos Danger wrote as much yesterday.

It was on Yahoo! Finance.

[emsimon33]

7. A person I know who is a political illiterate brought up this age thing up with Bernie this evening

My response was, "Guess you voted for Meg Whitman, then, since Jerry Brown was elected governor at 73." She didn't, of course, but that shut her up.

I am also old enough to remember that JFK was attacked by some for being too young to be president.

Some us are just plain tired of Neoliberals and 3rd Way "Democrats."

[madokie]

18. The whole of the 'CON party attacked Jack Kennedy as too young

and beholden to the pope to ever win the white house. Yes I typed Jack Kennedy as that was the name he was called in the press all during the time he was running against tricky dick.
I remember this election well. In fact it was the start of my interest in politics as I look back on life.

[femmedem]

12. Political parties are a way to organize to help candidates win elections.

So when Democrats choose a nominee, what matters isn't a candidate's party affiliation, but our own values and our own platform, and who we think is most likely to effectively fight for what we believe in. It's the voters' D that matters--not the candidate's--and what that D means to them.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

13. I like your Carlos Danger handle much more.

'BooScout' just doesn't have the same ring.

[BooScout]

15. Huh?

[Cha]

236. They're accusing you of being someone else since they can't handle what you're saying.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251437922

[BooScout]

240. This is just sad....

On this thread I've been stalked, told I couldn't have a say because I'm an American living abroad, told I was someone else, been insulted, been cursed out with foul language for not responding to someone's post fast enough to suit them, and had a copycat thread put up to mock me for voicing what I consider to be valid concerns, amongst other things.

Whatever happened to civilized debate and discussion?

[Cha]

243. IOW the typical MO. Now you know. I've seen it so many times it's just boring.. sorry

you expected civilized discussion.

I can't say what I really think or chances are I would get a hide.

Suffice to say.. you have every right to speak your mind as an American living abroad. We have plenty of members who are not Americans voicing their Opinions on American politics on this board. I welcome them all.

Btw, you handled those posters with style and class.. does not go unnoticed.

[BooScout]

246. Thanks!

That's nice of you to say.

[artislife]

60. +1

That's what I thought. He should really read the reactions to that thread

[Cosmocat]

14. I would challenge the "not a nagative campaigner" concept

I think people arent really thinking that through when they connect it to "going after republicans."

Bernie in fact is one of the most aggressive attackers of republicans in congress.

Frankly, he goes after them pretty much everytime he talks.

It just is not bombastic like Alan Grayson, his style is just routine and matter of fact.

He goes after Rs a LOT more than Hill, who literally does not do it unless it is some polltested quip for the most part.

[DCBob]

17. There are alot of major question marks about Sanders..

which makes him a risky candidate if he somehow miraculously wins the Dem nomination.

[madokie]

20. Lets hear these major questions that make him a risky candidate

so far all I've seen is a bunch of made up bull. None of which had an ounce of truth to them and fell by the way side once they seen the light of day. So I ask you to list some of these "major questions" that makes Bernie a risky candidate. Your words bro'

He explains in easy to comprehend words how he will pay for all the things he proposes. No more tax breaks for the rich and corporations, no more tax havens for the rich and connected and most of all making the rich and corporations and well connected pay their fair share. Pretty much covers any and all proposes he's made so far.
Bernie Sanders will be your and my next President, Get used to it! Its happening

[DCBob]

21. Here are a few off the top of my head..

-- he's a self-identified socialist
-- his lack of appeal to AA voters
-- his extreme approach to banking reforms
-- his lack of foreign policy experience
-- his age
-- his oddball past

Need I go on.

[madokie]

24. Please proceed

Not one of these are even a worry. He is a declare socialist democrat. He has great appeal to the AA community. His approach to the banking system is foremost with what most voters want to see happen, His lack of foreign policy experience is a non starter. His age is of no concern to me or most voter. Young voter are loving him as they get to know him. What odd ball past are you going on about?

Please proceed

I didn't realize I'm a socialist democrat until he brought it to my attention. You can bank on many others who will identify with that statement

[DCBob]

33. I know you wouldn't worry about any of these things..

but these will have negative impact in a general election should Bernie somehow win the Dem nomination.

Here are a few more..

-- his negative demeanor will turn off a lot of voters
-- his appearance (I know this is shallow but many voters are affected by this)
-- he is an old white male (I know this is also shallow also but it's a factor)
-- he is simply not inspiring to a majority of voters like Obama was or Hillary could be.

[madokie]

39. Geeze man

are you for real? I mean is this what you have in your tool box?
I'm done with this if this is where we're heading

Okie dokie here goes one more time

He does not have a negative demeanor
His appearance is fine. Looks like a hard worker to most of us
His age means diddly squat
Tell the people who are filling every venue that he is not inspiring. Tell me that your candidate is inspiring and I'll call bullshit on that.

I know way more people who simply will not vote for Hillary than will and you know why, they don't trust her. Not only do they not trust her they feel she will continue on the same path that got us in this mess to begin with. The old money talks and bullshit walks bull. Money does not have a vote. People do

Have a good day DCBob, I plan too.

[Depaysement]

53. Look at the screen name

Pretty much tells you all you need to know.

[madokie]

57. I know

[Depaysement]

58. !

[artislife]

55. Gee, if you just switch genders

You would have a list that fit H

[redstateblues]

264. The Bronx accent will be a big plus

In the South

[TM99]

25. Replies and rebuttal.

--He is a Democratic Socialist
--Says who? A few DU Third Wayer's? His minority support is growing daily.
--Extreme? You mean like allowing the crooks who crashed our economy to not get punished but instead rewarded? His positions are similar to Iceland's and wow, they are doing fantastic now.
--He has enough experience from his House and Senate days to overcome any limitations there. I much prefer that to a neo-con like Clinton (We came, we saw, he died!)
--He is in perfect health. He is not that much older than Clinton. Really a non-starter for most people who follow positions not facile popularity.
--Oddball past? Like what? Marching for civil rights in the 1960's? Supporting gay rights in Vermont and in the 1990's. Supporting Jesse Jackson for President? Sounds just fine to me.

[Renew Deal]

30. He says he's a Democratic Socialist.

You can argue the other stuff, but there is no argument there. I'm not holding it against him as most Democrats are are Democratic Socialists. They just don't say it.

[TM99]

31. That's what I said.

He is not a 'socialist'. He is a 'Democratic Socialist'. They are two very different beasts.

[DCBob]

36. And your regular everyday uninformed voter is going to get that difference??

[TM99]

40. Yes, of course.

Uninformed does not mean stupid. Educate the voters through ads, campaigners, and debates and viola! Those uninformed voters are now informed.

See how easy that was.

[DCBob]

51. yeah.. right. You forgot we live in a "Fox educated" world.

[TM99]

75. Not a lot of Democrats

seem to get their news from Fox.

Are we targeting the Tea Party GOP now?

[DCBob]

84. General election issue.

[TM99]

86. Again, so what?

Dems and progressive independents don't watch Fox for anything other than entertainment.

[DCBob]

90. Are you interested in keeping a Democrat in the WH??

[TM99]

91. My only interest is in getting

the right Democrat into the White House.

No I don't just want a neo-liberal neo-con with a D after their name as our next President.

[DCBob]

93. Hillary is not as liberal as Bernie but she is far more liberal than any GOPer.

In fact she was ranked 13th most liberal Senator near Patrick Leahy and a bunch of others who are often considered liberal.

http://voteview.com/SENATE_SORT110.HTM

[TM99]

97. Yes, indeedy, Hillary Clinton

is one hell of a super liberal.

[DCBob]

102. So the question is do you want to go with a "number 13" liberal who will likely win the WH or..

go with the top dog liberal and risk losing it all? You feel lucky??

[TM99]

105. Yes, I will take the risk.

You believe she is the likely win. I do not.

And she wins, we get just another status quo New Dem. No thanks. I am ready for a top dog liberal as you put it.

[madokie]

275. Hillary Clinton will hand this election to the worst of the worse if she is our nominee

Money is not what we base our votes on and thats all she has going for her is her ability to rub shoulders with the rich and well connected to get money from them. hardly a virtue I'd be proud of..
I agree with you.

[SwampG8r]

298. Look at you all about party unity and

Electing democrats!
I'm glad you changed your ways!
I will go tell Kendrick Meek youre sorry you spent so much effort making sure Florida didnt elect Democrats instead of the republican you were so busy working to elect as our senator here.
Remember the republican charlie crist?
So when did the importance of electing democrats finally become important to you?

[BooScout]

42. Precisely! n/t

[kacekwl]

62. Really don't

think they care at this point. Democrats , republicans have all screwed them in the past so labels don't matter anymore.

[daybranch]

74. I love your speaking the truth

but until our party leaders get over their running to the middle we are screwed. so lets make our coup soon, we have primaries wherein we can elect democratic socialists or democrat activists or progressives or whatever you want to call us. You know the guys who championed Obama, the best of the 3, and now want to continue moving the party to the benefit of the people.
So a big -Me Too!

[Le Taz Hot]

104. "His oddball past?"

I consider that a plus.

[frylock]

252. -- his extreme approach to banking reforms

oh noes!

[gollygee]

301. I know, right?

#1 reason why I'm voting for him.

[gollygee]

300. What is his "oddball past?"

And #3 is why I like him. #1 is fine with me, certainly better than a neo-lib capitalist. He's working on #2, thankfully. Good advisors can help with #4, and the fact that he actually doesn't want to be at war is better than a lot of politicians too. He's old but that doesn't mean he wouldn't rock as president. I wouldn't vote for someone younger but worse.

[uponit7771]

268. Guns, can his stance... NOT LOSE votes in south side KC or Chi Town!? I doubt it dearly

[madokie]

274. Not at all

He's pretty clear on where he stands on guns and poll after poll says the majority of the people in America have the same concerns
I don't want to take your guns but I do want to make it harder for some to have guns and thats a stance most people take. I have a large family a family of many hunters who do it to put meat on the table, not so much cause they have to but because they feel its a safer alternative than the beef or foul that you buy at the grocery store. None of them have a pistol as a hunting weapon or as a home protection weapon, they have rifles and shotguns for that. I personally don't own guns but thats personal with me. I'm a 15 month Vietnam Veteran who has seen up close and personal what a gun can do to human flesh. So I opt out of having them around me.
Bernie's stance on guns is not a worry with any of these family members so that is a fail on your part sorry

[uponit7771]

288. Guns are NOT a worry in South Side KC? Chi Town, Fifth Ward?! You KIDDING?! These are predeomantly

... black areas that are relatively drenched in gun violence and you're saying someones stance on guns that leans towards protecting the makers is

"...not a worry..." to those families?!

This is what some folk are noticing, the black and brown communities are being dismissed by Bernies campaign or his supporters...

This is already STARTING to look like Kerry Part 2... losing black and brown votes vs the last election

[madokie]

289. I did not insinuate anything of the kind

Look like kerry 2 by aching ass. Go back to Hillary and feel good about a person who is not and I repeat is NOT on you side on any issue. Damn sure ain't on my side thats for sure.

Kerry 2 You are funny and not in a good way.

[uponit7771]

290. More dismissiveness vs addressing the obvious that Bernies gun stance isn't going to play well were

.... guns have ripped apart peoples lives on a frequent basis.

Not one of the dem candidates can throw a stone

NOT ONE

[madokie]

291. You have no idea

either you're not paying attention or are being obtuse on purpose

I've better things to do with my time than to continue this discussion with you.
Have a good evening, I plan too

[uponit7771]

292. More condescending ad homs,indicator of a weak position on the issue of Bernies stance on guns

[BooScout]

295. When they have no counter to the debate....

They take their toys and go home.

[HERVEPA]

287. Bull

[still_one]

27. The answer as to why Sanders is running as a Democrat, and is quite simple. He told us he will NOT

be a spoiler and split the ticket as a third party.

[Renew Deal]

29. If Sanders won, his presidency would resemble Pope Benedict

One term as a caretaker and then get out voluntarily.

[frylock]

253. Oh, okay..

so now we've moved from Bernie Sanders = Rand Paul Buchanan to Bernie Sanders = Pope Benedict.

[marble falls]

35. Sanders has been caucusing with Democrats sincehegot into office, he's voted with....

Democrats over 90% of the time. If he quacks like a Democrat, if he swims with the Democrats, if he's accepted by the DNC as a candidate: whats your problem with that. If the Democratic Party can embrace Lincoln Chaffee or Charlie Flipping Crist - why should it matter to you?

If the five year age difference bugs you: Hillary will be 73 years old before her second term is over with three more years to go. How will she have the stamina to effectively do the job?

[99Forever]

43. Says the person...

... posting from Wales, who's Favorite Group is The Hillary Clinton Group.

Disingenuous much?

[BooScout]

69. I am a US CITIZEN

I may live abroad, but I still get to vote for president last time I checked. Nice of you to check out my profile and try and use it against me though. You could have just looked at my avatar and my signature and figured out where I stand without going to the trouble of sleuthing out my profile.

[rainy]

45. He is a true democrat, believing in the things that are consistent with

Democratic principles. It's the present democratic party that has strayed from the founding principles of the party. So there is no problem with him running as a democrat. As the two party system is set up no third party candidate gets any attention and doesn't have a chance of winning with no run off voting laws.

[Thinkingabout]

170. If he is a Democrat why does he still have I behind is name as a congressional member?

[rainy]

280. Because the Democrats in office are the

real imposters not representing Democratic values but representing corporate values.

[Thinkingabout]

283. He does not represent Democrat values on every issue.

[corkhead]

59. Granted, this one has a little more honey with the vinegar, but your avatar was a dead giveaway

I have lost count of these "I love Sanders But..." thinly veiled attack posts. Looks like a "concern post" but I suspect your concern is more with the trouble your candidate is starting to have.

[99Forever]

63. I have a suggestion for you.

When you come upon this "I love Sanders But..." or some form there of, stop reading the post and instead, pull up the poster's Profile. A quick check of their Favorite Group and their Recs will tell you all you need to know as to their honesty and credibility.

Then laugh at them.

[corkhead]

64. You mean laugh at the fact that this person pathetically rec'd their own OP?

Last edited Sun Jul 12, 2015, 10:03 AM - Edit history (1)

Update: The OP is no longer rec'd by its author so at least I know I am not on ignore.

[R. P. McMurphy]

65. "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." W. Shakespeare

Don't worry about labels. We've lived in fear of those far too long.

Instead, embrace the truth. The sweet aroma of truth emanates from Bernie.

[wendylaroux]

164. Ooooh Nice!

Poetry and politics all in one!
And I agree 100%.
People who are doing just peachy keen should definitely vote for Hillary,
and the rest of us,should vote Bernie.

[seaglass]

71. I think he is the opposite of a DINO, a Democrat in everything but name. Howard Dean would agree,

Congressional D's would agree as he has voted 98% with them, Democrats have instructed VT Dems not to challenge him, Schumer and Boxer have campaigned for him and HillPAC donated to his Senate campaign. He also chose to run as a D so as not to be a spoiler and will support whoever wins the D primary. I think that is enough evidence that the Ds are on board with him and they probably feel he is helping the Ds in generating some enthusiasm in a primary that could have been boring and keeping the left engaged. As an unenrolled voter who always votes D, I personally don't have a problem with him running as a D, considering all of the above.

[daybranch]

72. some republicans say the party left them an that is why they voted for Obama

I grew in a home that always voted for democrats. I was so proud as a young man that the Kennedys and LBJ supported civil rights. I fought in Vietnam as our government squandered our country's wealth dooming the War on Poverty to a lack of funding. Both parties supported that war and many that came later. This did not make me more supportive of and Democrats or the party. Then Carter a conservative Democrat came in while I applaud his morals and his desire to end the hatred and continued violence of the middle east, his unwillingness to apply Keynesian economics for the benefit of our people distressed me very greatly. I saw the party move more and more to the side of big business. Then Ronald Reagan came along and preyed on the insecurity of poor white male democrats who saw their positions of male family dominance threatened by feminists and women in general, particularly in a new economic environment where they could not be sure of their jobs and therefore their ability to lead and control their immediate families. In order to salve their egos, they drank whatever kool aid would support their decision to abandon the more traditional democratic economics of Franklin Roosevelt. Republicans gave these men, what they needed, scapegoats, and a new economic theory called trickle down to rationalize their switch. Yep many working class male Dem's moved to racism and false economics to justify their switch. Today although many of their children move back to the democratic party, they continue to hold many of the racist views towards people of color and display an elitist attitude that republicans exploit. I listen to democrats in their own echo chamber and it is amazing to me so many are filled with cognitive dissonance as they continue to harp on the poor as responsible for their own situation. That brings me to Clinton and no president to my knowledge was ever as successful at exploiting class differences and waging war on the poor, He was the epitome of a business only friendly President and no name is more fitting than slick Willie. His pushing of NAFTA and reductions of the safety net for the poor stand as testament to who he worked for. The DLC and 3rd Way democrats were a total betrayal of a Franklin Roosevelt economic system. It became very clear that Democrats too much cared about their donors and little about their constituents. Then came Obama, who pirated the populist ideas of John Edwards and created an image of real change, easily convincing activist democrats that he would champion causes that would benefit the poor and disenfranchised, because after all did not African Americans, his apparent race, suffer disproportionately. But Obama to has been a disappointment, he has done many good things but most only allowed to keep the poor and the middle class exploited but not to the point of fighting back with property destruction etc.. Today we see more and more a police state where the very rich with the almost rich control the middle class and our governments local , statewide , and national. Obama institutes some changes to end some of the most egregious economic discrimination but their enactment does nothing to challenge the domination of the rich. Neither do the Democrats. Young people and many many progressives recognize rightly that both parties' leaders are owned and without great change in the leaders and the party direction, we are all screwed. Bernie Sanders reflects the beliefs held dear by progressives for decades. He attracts the populists and the activists within the party who put peoples welfare ahead of party dogma and marching in line. That is why he is the future of the Democratic party. With us to spread his message of support for our people over the interests of corporations, the banks, and the rich 1 percent he has an army of truly committed and experienced activists and meanwhile attracts more and more of the disenchanted young and others.

[Thinkingabout]

152. The Third Way and DLC total betrayal of Franklin Roosevelt ecomonic system?

The Third Way members are democrat and liberals. They get together as a think tank and work for the best for working people despite what you hear some say here. Every business needs a business plan, the Third Way has a business plan. Does Bernie Sanders have a business plan? If he does he has not presented it. There has to be more than saying he is against something, he has to have a plan to go forth. Don't down those who plan, get the no planners to get a plan.

[global1]

76. What Disturbs Me About You Is This.....

While Bernie (I) wasn't running for President and was caucusing with the Dems and voting with them 90% of the time - that was just great - what a guy Bernie is.

Now because he has decided to run for President as a Dem - all of a sudden that's not good enough for you. And you have the gall to call him a 'party outsider'? I wonder who's tone has changed here?

The other candidate seems to be scrambling to move to the left all of a sudden. Is it because maybe the focus groups and the poll numbers are troubling? Who's tone has changed because she's "in it to win it"?

You bring up negative campaigning and say that Bernie is not a negative campaigner. I bet somewhere in your past you criticized 'negative campaigning' and 'negative ads' saying that is a 'terrible thing' and national politics shouldn't be so 'brutal' - that it should be about issues. Seems like you are justifying Hillary and allowing her to attack negatively because she's been attacked 'negatively' so it's ok to do it now.

Well maybe because Bernie hasn't been investigated 8 times about clap trap - that he's chosen to take the high road and not attack his opponents negatively and only comment on their stances on issues that matter.

No one has to start yelling to Bernie SOCIALIST! SOCIALIST! SOCIALIST! because he's already called himself a Democratic Socialist and is proud to wear that title.

I'll bet you even gave Bill Clinton a pass when he said "he didn't have sex" with that woman. You probably said things like Bill's private life is 'none of anyone's business'. Then you turn around and slam Bernie for having a child out of wedlock? Come on - disingenuous much?

Come on - all I had to do is read the first sentence in you original post to know that this was going to be an attack piece on Bernie. You are not fooling anyone here.

Why is it that it turns out that we Democrats are our own worst enemy when it comes to primaries? Why do we promote cheap shots at our allied opponents - just giving fodder to the Repugs to use against our chosen candidate when the primaries are over and a choice has been made.

Learn to 'play nice' BooScout. Learn to 'play nice'. Being BRUTAL is not very becoming of you.

[BooScout]

82. Not an attack piece at all...

It brings up legitimate concerns that he will face IF he were to somehow win the nomination (which I don't expect him to do btw).

I didn't slam him for having a child out of wedlock, it makes no difference to me, but one would have to be naive if they think the rabid right will not use that and his self professed socialist description of himself against him. Just as they did with Bill Clinton.

So far the right has stayed quiet about him......and they will continue to do so.....because it is in their best interests to let him get as far as possible in the primaries....but make no mistake......eventually they will pounce on him.

I have merely pointed out what is down the road for him when he faces Republican criticism.....and that will be on a national stage, not a message board primarily frequented by friendly liberals and progressives.

[global1]

94. The Repugs Will Pounce On Any Dem Candidate That Makes It To The Nomination.....

so you saying they will pounce on him is no surprise.

I don't suspect the Repugs will lay off Hillary should she be our nominee. Or any other of the Dem candidates that might make it to the 'bigs' Do you?

Who is more pounceable? (that's probably not really a word)

You say that your posting was not an attack piece at all - huh!!!! Yet - in your response here to me you can't resist taking another shot at Bernie with your comment in parens - (which I don't expect him to do btw).

You are not fooling anyone here. We're on to you. We'd all be better served to let nature take its course and let the Rpugs do the pouncing when the time comes - and not give them fodder for their ultimate pouncing of our Dem nominee.

[BooScout]

95. LOL.....

Trust me.....the repubs are well aware of his weak points.

It is not an attack to say I don't expect him to take the nomination, merely a statement of what is in all likelihood to be the case. I don't expect his campaign to advance much past the first couple of primaries. Neither do most political analysts.

[LuvLoogie]

111. The Republicans have been pouncing on Hillary since at least '92.

And she's still standing and strongly positioned to defeat them. She has defeated them in the past, defeated them in the present and is still polling to beat them in the future. She is the most investigated candidate in history, with more investigations and political daggers coming from the right and, more recently, the left.

100's of millions of dollars have been spent on trying to take her down. Do you think Bernie would last twenty days in the national grinder, let alone twenty years? They will rip on him, rip on his wife and rip on his son. Don't you remember what they did to Chelsea, Amy, Sasha and Malia?

It's a legitimate OP.

[arcane1]

227. Why waste all this time with concerns over someone you don't think will win in the first place?

[seaglass]

115. Why don't you try that again minus the personal attacks? n/t

[Sheepshank]

85. With the likes of Trump & Cruz Dems have a real opportunity to shave off Rep voters

Their message of hate, inciting violence and intolerance has opened up some eyes. I'm thinking the Huntsman type of Republicans. They are sorely disappointed and are second guessing their party affiliation. I've seen these comments growing by the day. These people are ripe to vote Dem but they will not vote for what they perceive is a socialist. No way no how. I suppose they may just sit out the election altogether which will help Dems anyway. But I sure would like to do some major ass whipping in the Generals. A clean and clear decisive win is a great political advantage for future bills, and I don't think Bernie is the one that can do that.

[LWolf]

88. You understood wrong.

"It was my understanding that Sanders was initially in this race to drive the party left. With all due respect, is that not a job for an actual Democrat, not a party outsider? And now it seems the tone has changed and he's in it to win it."

1. Sanders has always been "in it to win it." If you thought otherwise, you weren't listening to him.

2. With all due respect, the Democratic Party is currently over-run by neo-liberals, who have no intention of moving the party left; they're the ones who've moved us to the right.

3. Sanders was never in it to drive the party to the left. He will move the nation to the left.

4. This "outsider" has been working with Democrats for a very long time, and as a democratic socialist he fits the non-neo-liberal people based wing of the party just fine. The only thing he's outside of is the neo-liberal wing currently in power.

[historylovr]

122. Thank you. I was going to ask the same thing but you put it better than I could.

Last edited Sun Jul 12, 2015, 12:17 PM - Edit history (1)

[onecaliberal]

107. I like Hillary, BUT...

Corporations banks and lobbyists have bought and paid for her. This country cannot take one more second of these polls.

[tavalon]

112. He can't win as an independent

He has been a Democratic Socialist throughout his tenure in Congress. It is a natural fit for him to use the Democratic moniker. Republican certainly isn't. Most liberals believe in Socialism, they just don't call it that.

Honestly, he is the most liberal "Democrat" we've had since Roosevelt. And Roosevelt implemented many socialist programs - programs that are hallowed now. Yes, Social Security is a socialist program - not nearly as much as I would like it to be but damn socialist nonetheless.

Socialism isn't a bad word, honest. Just fire back that Roosevelt was a socialist. It's an easy and effective comeback. You like Social Security? You like socialism.

[rock]

119. I too worry about how he would pay for these things

If he were proposing huge cuts in MIC and a deescalation of military activities and purchases, I might be convinced. Even here when I say huge, I mean(say) 5% a year for 10-15 years.

I may as well say something on negative campaigning especially since I think that is Bernie's best trait. Negative campaigning is popular because it works. It really shouldn't, but we have informed and educated the population to be rather ignorant (misinformed, uninformed) and to think with their emotions. Critical thinking really needs to be taught; one cannot learn it without a heavy effort being put into it. If you think about it you can see that whatever bad traits a candidate has does not make his opponent one iota better. To see my point imagine that the opponent is A. Hitler*. No amount of criticizing the opponent improves A. Hitler as a candidate.

* Alice Hitler

[artislife]

120. You know when you see a title like this

It really means, I didn't know that guy would actually jump in and challenge our H. I don't like him for that. Didn't he and his minions get the memo that even though we are a party that in the 30 years or so only gives a candidate ONE shot, we are making the exception in H. That means no one is to jump the queue! The nerve...

[CTBlueboy]

121. Ageism anyone ?

Here a question I have for HRC and her supporters :

IS Libya today a better place or when Gaddafi was in power ?
Does she truly regret voting for the Iraq or because was its politically better for her ?
If she support campaign fiance reform why is she accepting money from the PACs ?
Does she support breaking up banks?
Will she take vow and not take any fund from Wall st?

[ljm2002]

123. "with absolutely nothing proposed on how to pay for them"...

...that is a false statement.

For example: When Bernie Sanders proposed making tuition free at all public universities and colleges, he specifically said he will pay for it by a small transaction fee on automatic trading.

Since you don't know that, it is apparent that you are assuming your conclusions. Not a strong way to argue.

You can't be bothered to actually know Sanders' positions and whether or not he has proposed ways to pay for his proposals. BTW, he is the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee. Do you think he might, just might, have some notion of how to pay for things?

As far as the Socialist! Socialist! Socialist! issue -- they've been hurling that at Obama for years, to little effect. Bernie Sanders does not run from who he is and that is his biggest asset. These epithets will roll off him like water off a duck's back.

As far as the child out of wedlock -- have you noticed the dramatic social changes that have been happening recently? In a society where the majority of people are for gay marriage, and where the Supreme Court ruled in favor of it -- how seriously, really, do you think that will harm his chances? Has he been responsible in his handling of that situation or not? That is the real question, and I believe the answer will be that he has acted responsibly towards his child.

Sure, the honeymoon period always ends. I believe that Bernie Sanders will withstand the criticisms from within and without his own party. But it is ultimately up to the voters, during the primaries as well as during the general election.

What I don't like is the fear-mongering. You think Hillary Clinton won't be subject to the same Republican BS attacks? Of course she will. Any Democratic candidate will. And your own BS about "he is using the party to run" is just that, BS. He is running as a Democrat specifically to avoid running as a 3rd party spoiler. It seems you would prefer he do the 3rd party thing... right? But he is not, so that criticism is not open to you, so you are criticizing him for "using the party". Bullcrap.

[retrowire]

124. I'll keep this short

1. he's running democrat because an independent has never and will never win. he's got to play by the rules of a divided government if he hopes to change anything.

2. he is brushing off the "socialist" tag just fine. I mean, if YOU understand what it really means then why not inform others? add that to the fact that a recent poll shows that people are more accepting of the word socialism and less accepting of the word capitalism these days. its not scary anymore. plus, to paraphrase Bernie's way of brushing it off "people always refer to me as a democratic socialist. I ask, why not refer to my opponents as democratic capitalists or republican capitalists?" I love it.

3. age doesn't matter, if you're worried about the old grumpy white guy image look at it this way... old grumpy white guys from the past were baby boomers or people from worse generations. Bernie is from the generation of activists and world changers. plus there's another old white guy who's doing things awesome lately... the pope! and if you're worried about health, he used to be a professional runner. so he's got a good heart.

hope this helps!

[Bluenorthwest]

125. This makes me think you don't know much about Bernie's time in Congress nor about the Democratic

Party. The largest Democratic Caucus within the United States Congress is the Progressive Caucus, a caucus co-founded by it's first elected Chairman and Convener, Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who remains in the Caucus as the only Senate member. The Progressive Caucus is of great value to the promotion of progressive legislation and for organizing issues that matter most to minority populations.
So Bernie has not only 'caucused with the Democrats' he was instrumental in the building of the largest and in my view most important of the Congressional caucuses in our Party, the Democratic Party.

Compare what he did inside the Congress to enhance the ability of Democrats to advance progressive legislation to the record of any 'real Democrat' you wish to pick. Bernie did more for the Democratic Party than many who wear the kicking donkey pin on a DNC tee shirt.

[MADem]

207. PROGRESSIVE is NOT a synonym for DEMOCRATIC.

Some of the foremost "progressives" in the history of the United States have been Republicans--or something other than Democrats. In fact, the "PROGRESSIVE PARTY" was founded by a guy who wanted a new slant on Business as Usual Republican Party politics--a fellow named Teddy Roosevelt (who was NEVER a Democrat). The Progressive movement has its roots in the REPUBLICAN Party, in actual fact--Robert LaFollette was a mover/shaker in that regard.

Right now, the GOP is overwhelmed and bullied by tea partiers, religious extremists, and other nut jobs, but that hasn't always been the case and it is unlikely to be the case forever. In fact, when these assholes start dying off in numbers, I would not be surprised if the GOP reboots to their old school ways and become less hated and returns to the abolitionist 'party of Lincoln' POV they once held eons ago. I probably will not live to see that, but who knows?

The very small wing (more like a few feathers on a wing) of the GOP that fired up the "Log Cabin Republicans" are also firing up a "progressive Republican" mindset. These are the "crunchy cons" (Republicans who like organic food, clean water, care about the environment, etc.) and those who favor a progressive POV (see https://www.facebook.com/ProgressiveRepublicans - they describe themselves as socially liberal/fiscally responsible and favoring 'free enterprise'--fwiw).

Don't make the mistake of thinking that Democrats (or Democratic Socialists or 'lefties') own the words "progressive" or "liberal." We don't. We are a big tent. FWIW, Senator Sanders has said he is not a Democrat, and he has also said he is NOT A LIBERAL. So, there ya go.

The GOP is a smaller tent--but make no mistake, they are CHANGING. It's just a small rumbling right now--they are still overrun by idiots--but there are hints that they are getting ready to hit the reset button. We may eventually see a day when "liberal Republicans" aren't afraid to pop their heads up, too.

You know what they say, plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. Or to put it another way, what goes around, comes around. Nothing stays the same forever....

[Martin Eden]

265. What kind of DEMOCRATIC Party do we want?

When it fails to represent progressive values; when it has a cozy relationship with the Wall Street players who crashed our economy; and when its leaders help enable a war for oil & empire that enriches the MIC while destroying the lives of patriotic citizen-soldiers on the basis of lies, then the DEMOCRATIC Party has ceased to represent the interests of The People it takes for granted at the ballot box.

First and foremost The Party must be loyal to The People -- not the other way around.

The extent to which Democratic voters and others support Bernie Sanders is the extent to which they have come to understand the above.

[MADem]

267. "Progressive values" mean different things to different people.

Is it a "progressive value," for example, to cozy up to the military-industrial-congressional complex, to include those entities who are responsible for the manufacture of our nuclear arsenal, for constituent benefit? Or is it simply realpoitik? Is it a "progressive value" to disfavor reasonable gun control in a nation that is overrun with weaponry and has an asinine record of gun violence? Or again, is it simply bowing to constituent preferences--realpolitik, again?

What does "The Party must be loyal to The People" even mean? It sounds like something Chairman Mao might say. "The People" are not a borg--they have different priorities, different outlooks. What's good for the urban dweller might suck for the person living in the countryside. What the youth want, the elderly might not.

I think a fairer 'slogan' might be "The Party must be sensitive to The People's competing priorities, and attempt to find points of agreement, as well as compromises, when needs must."

See, what you might regard as "loyalty" another Democrat might regard as a betrayal. We're a big tent. We don't all think with a single mind. Democrats can disagree and still be Democrats. And, as we're learning, Republicans (who invented that thing called "The Progressive Party&quot can be "progressives" again -- they're hens' teeth, but they are out there and growing. I'll still stick with the Democrats, other lower case labels notwithstanding... thanks anyway...!

[Martin Eden]

285. A crashed economy and disastrous wars mean different things to different people, you suppose

Repeal of Glass-Steagall and bailing out banks too big to fail with no real strings attached and no prosecution of Wall Street fraudsters while average Americans lost their homes is good for some Democratic voters but not others under the Big Tent you describe?

A war based on lies that killed nearly 5,000 American soldiers and a million Iraqis and is costing US taxpayers $3 trillion while igniting the growth of ISIS and making the Middle East a much more dangerous place is good for some Democratic voters but not others under the Big Tent you describe?

Which Democratic voters benefit from the above, exactly?

That's a damned small tent, IMO.

Our electoral system is thoroughly corrupt and dysfunctional. Far too many politicians on both sides of the aisle represent the interests of the deep pocket campaign financiers, and far too many Democratic politicians play that game while taking Democratic voters for granted because the other party is too odious to consider and we only have one choice in a two party system.

There's a betrayal going on here, but not the one you're trying to spin. Loyalty must be earned, and when that loyalty is betrayed it is forfeit.

[MADem]

286. No--I think a crashed economy means the same to pretty much everyone.

It's the rare bird who makes hay in that scenario--thieves and people who sell stuff that fell off a truck do well in that environment.

War is a profit-making enterprise for people like Boeing and Lockheed Martin and those clowns that make guns and bullets, and body bags and military uniforms, and it can provide an engine for the economy, but it's an engine that is fueled by blood.

Our electoral system is what it is--complaining about it isn't going to change the outcome of the next election. The time to complain was well before the Citizens United decision, but that horse has left the barn.

As I've said, the only way to get past all this money in politics is for a tipping point to be reached, where politicians get sick of raising money all the live-long day, and donors decide that they aren't getting enough bang for their buck and decide that the whole exercise is just Not Worth It. It'll take a long time before we get there, I suspect, but who knows? That day may one day come.

I don't appreciate your "spin" characterization. I'm not "spinning" anything. The Democratic Party is a Big Tent, big enough to allow Bernie to compete for their nomination even though he's not a member, but they're not so big or stupid that they'll give him more propers than he deserves in the organization-- because like the song says, to get love you have to GIVE love.

He has never, not once, lifted a finger to help Democrats get elected. That's fact. He has never, not once, raised money for Democratic PACS or candidates. He has never, not once, managed a fundraising PAC of his own to use to help Democrats get elected to Congress or even local offices. He has never, not once, gone out on the campaign trail and stumped for a Democratic candidate for office. He has never, not once, held an administrative Democratic Party leadership position in the House or Senate. This isn't a "slam," this is fact.

He has made the deliberate CHOICE to not grab his oars and help row our boat, and that's fine. No one has demanded that of him. Now he wants a ride down the river--and we're gracious enough to make room for him, but he's not getting the best seat in the middle of the boat--that's just the way it is.

He could try getting a better deal from the GOP, if we're being so "mean" to him. You know what they'd tell him to do--the words "pound" and "sand" come to mind.

I'm just telling it like it is, you don't like my opinion, so you're engaging in some snarky characterization. Not buying your assessment one bit, there. You haven't told me why the Democratic Party should be 'loyal' to Bernie Sanders ('just because' doesn't cut it), you haven't shown me any Democrats who have demonstrated their 'loyalty' by endorsing him (in fact, HRC has garnered a number of 'liberal' Congressional endorsements, so there goes that thesis), and--like it, or not-- endorsements DO count.

No one is being "betrayed." People stick with the people who have helped and supported them in the past, not some person who has never helped them or their friends, and who articulates a laundry list of gripes and proposes no realistic path to any solutions. I can complain all day, too, with verve and vociferousness--that and a couple of bucks will buy me a cup of coffee. Gee, make me POTUS!! I can recite a list of Things That Suck, and wave my arms and pound the lectern, too!!

[MADem]

128. It's a shame your polite opinion has been met with personal insult and invective.

This is why we can't have nice things, I guess....!



I notice that when the reasonable issues you raise can't be countered, the 'go to' is to call you a name.

Consider that an expression of 'concern' from those who disagree with your thesis.

[BooScout]

132. Thanks....

I appreciate your comments.

[Bluenorthwest]

134. I pointedo out the gaping hole in the OP's knowledge of the Party and the person, offered a whole

bunch of information and got bupkis in return. No one got called any names, and yet the OP simply could not tell me why being the first chairman and co-founder of the largest Democratic caucus in the United States Congress does not earn any 'Democrat points' from the OP. Inside the Congress, Bernie has done more for and with the Democrats in the Congress than most of the Democrats in Congress. And yet the OP, whom you present as kind and honest, says this: "He is using the party to run. Why after 73 years does he only now decide the Democrats are good enough for him?"

Co-founder and first elected chairman of the largest Democratic caucus in Congress. Member since 1992, but he's using the Party he only now decided is good enough for him? How is that grounded in any sort of reality?

[MADem]

137. If the shoe does not fit you, I would encourage you to not try to cram your foot into it.

There's plenty of invective directed against the OP in this thread.

I'm not going to go back and read it over and try to find something to call you out, that's not my interest.

But you go on ahead, if you have a mind, and read every post in this thread, and then try telling me that some DUers aren't being absolute shits to the poster.

It is, yet again, another occasion that is just not DU's finest hour.

[Bluenorthwest]

192. And look how your pal goes after me. Look at that. Does not respond in any way to all that I wrote

and fucking asks me about my 'credentials' as a Democrat. And you do not see that as objectionable behavior because it is from your side. It's shitty ass, passive aggressive nonsense.

Your pal writes 'the Democrats were not good enough for him' so I say 'gee he founded the largest Democratic Caucus in the Congress in 1992' and I get 'what are your credentials'.
Intellectually dishonest and personally insulting.

[MADem]

196. Look, I was responding to the post that STARTED THIS THREAD--if you want a fight, I

suggest you look elsewhere.

I wasn't talking about YOU, my comments were not about YOU, I really have no interest in what YOUR differences of opinion with regard to who did what, when or where. My comments were about PERSONAL INSULTS, like calling someone a sock or a troll or "less than" because they lived abroad. Read the entire thread (as I said, before) and note the amount of PERSONAL invective directed at the OP for SIMPLY holding an opinion and expressing it politely.

So you can take all that "your pal" stuff and hie away with it. My "pal" (and this person is not my pal--I really don't know this person but I appreciate the reasonable tone of the OP) has an opinion and you don't like it--I get that. I am not so much concerned about my "pal's" opinion as I am about the shitty comments directed at my "pal" for not holding the opinions that some here want my "pal" to hold.

In most venues, that's called bullying. It doesn't reflect well. Whatever happened to disagreeing without being disagreeable?



Great job illustrating the point I was making, though....!

[BooScout]

203. you need to calm down...

And read what I wrote to you.....running all over the place using foul language about me and my opinions does not help your case.

[BooScout]

138. And please share your credentials....

Regarding your expertise of the Democratic Party.

With me its as simple as the fact that he is not a registered Democrat and despite 50 years in politics he never has run on a Democratic ticket before.

[William769]

182. in all fairness I respect Bluenorthwest opinion, to me he's one of the good guys.

We might not always see eye to eye on everything, but he has got my respect and I hope that you take that into consideration.

[BooScout]

200. I will if he will...

And I just told him so.

[Le Taz Hot]

262. You and I agree maybe 5% of the time

and I agree with Bluenorthwest about 50% of the time but I wholeheartedly agree with you here.

[Bluenorthwest]

189. So rather than respond to what I offered, you question my record?

You can't answer for yourself, so you turn that spotlight on me You did not even offer the common courtesy of a response to what I said, perhaps you did not even read it. You just attacked.

What is your standing to question my 'credentials'? Is that always your response to being shown new information that does not fit your strident narrative? To insult people? Are those your credentials? I mean, it is you who posted this sermon, I gave you a response. You did not offer the same respect.

[BooScout]

199. you questioned or rather condemned my own knowledge first....

I think it's only fair that you qualify your credentials that allow you to make such a judgement. You provided no new information to me. Being a founder/member of a caucus does not make him a member of the Party. He is not a Democrat and will not become one unless it is absolutely necessary for him to get on a ballot in a primary.

I've answered for myself all over this thread of now close to two hundred replies, pardon me if I did not give your reply the individual attention you desired and missed your first post.

And fwiw, you attacked my position first when you got mad that I did not respond to you personally. My op raises what I and others consider to be valid concerns regarding Sanders.

...As to offering you the same respect, when you offer me some respect rather than jump on me and disparge my knowledge then perhaps we can have a meaningful discussion.

[Cha]

235. And, who couldn't have predicted that?

[MADem]

266. No one wants to discuss even sincere concerns.

It's all food fighting and name-calling.

I thought the OP was a reasonable laundry list, it addressed specific points. One can agree/disagree about them, and about how the voting public might regard them, but it's not a load of speculation along the lines of "I THINK he might do this or that," or "I heard his wife holds View X, ergo, he must also feel the same way!"

Ah, well...! Come ON, General Elections! This primary picking and scratching is getting tiresome. The sooner that happens, the sooner all the socks will be rolled up and put back in their drawers, and the agitators who are here for other reasons will have to change tactics.

[Cha]

273. I know.. they feel so strongly about their candidate.. I would think they could be able

to come up with legitimate sure-fired rebuttals to all of the OP's concerns and anyone who is asking questions about their candidate.

Going to be a long one, alright.

[aintitfunny]

129. If You Like Sanders...

While you make that statement you fail to demonstrate it.

I like Hillary Clinton. I just don't get excited. If she is the Democratic nominee, I will vote for her, I will work for her during the General Election to help her get elected. I will not be excited about the potential for change. I would anticipate little change. I could see a reduction to Social Security under the guise of saving it, happen during her tenure. I would anticipate changes to Medicare, not in a good way. I anticipate no change in the Democratic leadership, which is no more than establishment and center focused. They have helped the Republican Party take control of Congress. I am not excited about any of that, but if she wins the election and becomes our first woman President, I will be delighted to be wrong. I did notice that you did not express that you would work for Bernie Sanders should he win the nomination.

In that regard, I hope that Bernie Sander's rising popularity, and his truth speaking along with the lack of rhetorical nonsense, would be seen as a guide for candidate Clinton. I hope those who follow her would acknowledge, appreciate and even admire what he is accomplishing, what he is saying and why people are flocking to see him and hear what he has to say. He is speaking to what people want.

I don't care if you go along with the corporate press and label him as anti-establishment. Does this mean you are establishment? I disagree with the premise that he is running as a fresh face, and he certainly is not playing the system. He is reaching out to the disenfranchised middle class, giving them hope that there is a chance to stop the continuing downhill slide.

When you say he doesn't have a way to pay for his proposals, I would question that you have really listened to him.

If you imagine that fathering a child out of wedlock, many moons ago, would have any negative impact, I end up smiling. How many people do you know in the real world where perfection exists? Not even in the right wing, bible thumping, crazy world of bubble enclosed, uninformed, souls does such perfection exists. Having been a single mother, it doesn't make me even blink.

One of my concerns about Hillary Clinton from a non-policy standpoint, is that she has and continues to attract ugly rhetoric from the right. It was what stopped me from supporting her in the last election. I thought she was too divisive. What a laugh. After experiencing Barack Obama and the vitriol he has faced, you may have a point about the teflon coating. I disagree that the Clintons were ever the "darlings of the left". I am on the left and I would have liked them to move further in that direction rather than push toward the center. When voters are not provided a clear cut choice, the Republicans win.

I don't like ageism anymore than sexism or other anti-isms.

He certainly answers all the questions thrown at him, and is quite clear and backs them up with fact. It has not slowed him down.

Sanders will energize the party, he will energize the voters and the non-voters. This will help the Democrats whether or not he is the ultimate nominee. I do hope that he succeeds. I want the revolution he speaks of. But if he doesn't I will vote for Clinton and support her election. The same holds true for O'Malley or one of the other candidates, within the bounds of reason.

[William769]

131. He's still not actually a Democrat.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but isn't he still an Independent?

[99Forever]

135. You stand corrected.

Run along now, there's important bullshit to spread elsewhere.

[William769]

136. Show me where he is a declared Democrat, then I'll stand corrected.

[99Forever]

139. Find it yourself.

I'm not your secretary. Do your own freakin' homework.

[William769]

140. So then you can't. Ok.

[99Forever]

144. Try looking up the definitions of can't and won't.

Then figure out which it is. Even a Hillary Fan should be able to do that.

[William769]

147. Try this.

You lose.

[99Forever]

148. Don't care.

Bu bye.

[William769]

150. Typical.

[BooScout]

154. did he mean don't care

Or can't care or won't care?

[99Forever]

155. Yes you are.

Very.

[William769]

157. So I guess you really didn't mean bu bye?

Well I won here so you have a nice day.

[99Forever]

161. Guess I didn't.

But I have to ask, just exactly is it you "won?"

[ConservativeDemocrat]

206. Well that's obvious

He won the argument. And he also showed that you have absolutely no credibility.

You make dubious assertions and they try to shift the burden of proof to those who question your dubious assertions.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[99Forever]

210. Is that what happened?

Well ....

... I'm fucking crushed.

Reality Based Community, bwahahahahahaha.

Cool story bro.

[BooScout]

151. I really wish individual posts had a LIKE button.

[William769]

156. It's on my website. Feel free to use it when needed.

[BooScout]

159. Thanks!

[onehandle]

209. That's fantastic! nt

[Bobbie Jo]

174. lol

You crack me up.

[BooScout]

141. I think you upset someone.

I hate it when that happens.

[William769]

142. I don't.

[BooScout]

143. I'm the op....

I have to play nice to set an example.

[99Forever]

153. And you would be wrong again.

But then, it's what you are best at.

[BooScout]

158. nah.....I'm usually correct....

But I know you really don't, won't or can't care.

[99Forever]

166. It's don't and you aren't.

Hope that clears up your apparent confusion.

[BooScout]

169. Does this mean you care?

I'm touched!

[99Forever]

172. You are most certainly touched.

On that, we can agree.

[BooScout]

175. It's not nice to call names....

Specially after I gave you a hug and everything.

[99Forever]

176. Names?

You said you were touched. I just agreed, you most certainly are touched.

[Cha]

239. Rofl :)

[MADem]

145. He has said otherwise, so I am afraid YOU stand corrected.

He is a "Democratic candidate" for the Democratic party nomination, ONLY because Democratic party officials have consented to include him in the primary process--but make no mistake, he is not a member of the Democratic party. In fact, he specifically refused to run as a Democrat in his senate race.

Yet, anyway. He has said he will "do anything" to get on various state ballots, and if that involves a declaration or some other process, he will probably jump through that hoop.

But right now, he's still an independent who calls himself a 'democratic socialist' or something on those lines.

That's very rude to say that someone is spreading bullshit, when they are right, and you are wrong.

[William769]

149. Thank you.

[MADem]

162. The poster has made an incorrect assertion, and won't provide proof because there isn't any.

Sanders has been quite vocal about keeping his independent status. He wants to thread the needle in such a way that he is sheltered under the Democratic umbrella while still maintaining his "other" status. One of his common complaints down the years--even when the Democrats have helped to fund his campaigns--is that the parties are "too alike" to suit him.

His campaign staffers have said that if there's a problem getting on the ballot in any state, he will "do whatever it takes" to get on the ballot. I take that to mean that if his arm is twisted, he'll say "OK, I want to be recognized by the state party Democratic officials as a Democrat" and hope that they give him a non-papal blessing in that regard. But he has NOT done anything of the sort yet.

[William769]

163. Agreed.

And that's the reason I don't trust him and will do everything in my power to remind Democrats the he is in fact not a Democrat and should not be treated as one.

[BooScout]

165. My point exactly n/t

[Little Star]

171. +1000000000000000000

[calimary]

223. Cannot dispute this.

It's a valid point. NOW he comes home? But still maintains it's really not home anyway.

I never completely trusted those who come to Congress and the Senate claiming they must have an "I" after their name.

Unfortunately, we're stuck with a two-party system. So you're either one or the other. No, I don't like it, either, but that's what we've got, and that's what we have to work with, and we're stuck with it.

How does that line go? Is you IS or is you AIN'T? Almost sounds like being a "little bit pregnant".

I guess the one comfort I take is that Bernie has declared openly that he's not going to run as an independent and thereby be a spoiler allowing the CONS to move back into the White House. THAT is a good thing. But "Independents" - with the "I" after their name? My instinct is to respond with "and who are YOU kidding? Trying to have it both ways? And just how long will it be before we can count on you caucusing with the other party, since you won't go full-on for ours?"

All an Independent can do is sway things that are the other guys' ideas - one way or the other. Seems to me no Independents have enough clout yet to make any difference with their own.

[hrmjustin]

180. How is he corrected? Sanders is not a Democrat but an Independent.

[Bobbie Jo]

184. It isn't.

Around here, just saying "corrected" is enough.

[hrmjustin]

185. Lol yes it is funny to watch.

[99Forever]

186. Sennator Sanders is a declared candidate for the Democratic Party's..

... nomination for POTUS. PERIOD. EOD

You and your cohort are just plain wrong, wrong, wrong.

[hrmjustin]

187. He is not a registered Democrat. Are you claiming here is?

[99Forever]

211. Registered where?

Good grief. It's getting freakin' deep in here. Better put on my hip-waders.

[hrmjustin]

212. Forgive me for using logic and facts. I know it was very mean of me.

You are aware that Sanders identifies as an independent?

[99Forever]

213. Way to dodge the question.

Couldn't see that coming?

[hrmjustin]

214. Seems like you are dodging and wasting my time.

When you want to have a real discusxion with facts let me know.

[99Forever]

215. Hey, if you can't or won't answer the question, just say so.

And just what the fuck is a "real discusxion?" Is that different from an "unreal discusxion?"

[hrmjustin]

217. Sanders has made clear his whole career he was never a member of the Democratic Party.

He registers in the Senate as n independent who caucuses with the Democrats.

Can you refute that?

[99Forever]

218. That wasn't the question.

Obfuscate much?

[hrmjustin]

219. Vermont does not have registration by party.

Does that answer your question?

[99Forever]

220. No.

And it actually blows your whole argument to Hell.


But, please proceed.

[hrmjustin]

221. Actually it doesn't because Schunlin, Leahy, ans Walsh identify as Democrats.

Sanders does not.

Look it up.

[99Forever]

225. ...

I've had better conversations with a sack of hammers.

Denial truly is not just a river in Africa.

[hrmjustin]

226. From your posts i didn't think you were capable of having one.

Get the last word if you need to but i know getting somewhere with you is not possible.

Cheers.

[99Forever]

229. ....

[zeemike]

270. Jury results.

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

"I've had better conversations with a sack of hammers" is an incredibly rude thing to say to a DUer--personal insult, mean, abusive. Disagree w/out being disagreeable.


You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Jul 12, 2015, 11:52 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Oh, come on. This is tame by DU standards.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: There are ways to disagree without being disagreeable. This is not one of them.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Oh, for Pete's sake. Skins need to thicken up some. It's not even 2016 yet.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If things like that offend you then you need to get off the internet...skin is way too thin.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Insult
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[Maedhros]

193. Yeah. So what?

He's the better candidate - who cares if he's a Democrat or not? What matters is policy, not labels.

[William769]

195. What matters is I am A Democrat.

I like the Democratic party. He knows he doesn't have a rats chance in hell without the Democratic party which makes me like him even less. He wants to use something that he is not part of.

If he's the better candidate then why is he at the bottom of the pack?

That's your "so what?"

[Maedhros]

204. The Democratic Party is a tool for getting things done.

It's silly to be loyal to a tool - you use it as needed, then put it away when another tool is required.

Tribal nonsense is just that: nonsense. "He's not one of us" is possibly the most pathetic reason to oppose a candidate.

[BooScout]

281. It's not Bernie's tool....

He's borrowed it without asking or paying for it.

[frylock]

255. Wow, really? Link?

[silenttigersong]

167. II like Hillary I really do But

I do not trust her,my liking her is what is sold to me by soundbites and the crafting of her image.Authenticity is what I admire in a can. didate.This is what Sen.Sanders represents.

But in reality ,I like is a disengenois polite phrase .

[djean111]

173. Awwww - Anthony Weiner - AKA Carlos Danger!!!!! (that name begs for exclamation points) - beat ya to

this. Or is this meme going to be repeated until the next meme is manufactured.
Oh, and who is "we"? You don't speak for anyone but yourself. And Carlos Danger. Barf. What was anyone thinking?
And I am still in love with Bernie's candidacy. I sure as hell don't see any other candidate I could support.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

188. Has Sanders actually said he entered the race to drive the Democratic Party left?

He may have, and I missed those words coming out of his mouth. Very few "actual Democrats" are doing it, so I applaud Sanders in his efforts. He caucuses with the Dems, so he's not exactly a 'party outsider,' but nice try. He co-founded the Congressional Progressive Caucus working with liberal Dems, so again, no on the 'party outsider' and your second paragraph is pretty much bullshit.

Let Republicans attempt to crucify him. He'll tell them to stuff it in no uncertain terms. More "Do I look like Hillary Clinton?", please.

[elleng]

191. No need to ask any more questions, Martin O'Malley has been a Democrat since birth,

is 52 years old, and you can learn much more about him here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1281

[Maedhros]

194. "I like Bernie BUT..." always precedes nonsense.

I am unmoved by your arguments.

[arcane1]

202. Your "understanding" is false. He has been in this race to get elected, period.

[PotatoChip]

205. He did us Dems a HUGE favor by not running as an Independent.

One only needs to look to Maine's embarrassingly awful Governor- Paul LePage, for empirical proof that NOT having an Independent split the non-wacko vote is a very good thing for the general election. If he makes it there...

[gwheezie]

234. I agree

No matter what happens, I'm glad he's running as a dem.

[bobbobbins01]

230. I can't help but feel like this is a complete joke

It hits every single talking point already levied against him, but turns it up to 11, and does so under the guise of false concern. Lets see how many complete falsehoods and distortions i can find at a cursory glance:

"he is running on the premise that he's a fresh face" - nope, hes been backing all his talk with his progressive 40 year record.

"it seems the tone has changed and he's in it to win it" - nope, he said he was in it to win it from the moment he entered the race, there was never any tone change whatsoever.

"We know that Clinton is prepared to attack her GOP opponent's position on the issues and hammer home on them." - Bernie would do the same, he is about the issues so yes, we would of course hammer home the issues of his opponents. He's pretty masterfully doing it now.

"absolutely nothing proposed on how to pay for them" - nope, this is a straight up fox news socialist talking point, and I'm sure you know as everyone else who is paying even one iota of attention knows, he has explained numerous times how he'll pay for them.

"When they start yelling SOCIALIST! SOCIALIST! SOCIALIST! at Sanders will he be able to do the same?" - They already are yelling socialist socialist and yet he's still on the rise. This is just fearmongering.

"what else is out there on him?" - Oh my god! He could have some horrible secret we didn't even know about! He could have a 3rd nipple! He could be 1/6th Inuit! All just baseless speculation and fearmongering again. You act like the Clintons having had so many scandals is an asset when you have a candidate right in front of you that is scandal free. Heres one for you, what if more info comes out about Bill Clinton's trips on the Lolita Express during the general election??? Blah blah blah blah...I can't believe how ridiculous a post like this is...and now everyone can say to you "I can't believe you were just asking valid questions and everyone got so offended..." as if your intentions were pure. If you have issues with a candidate, don't be a coward, just come out with it. Drop the wankery and hand-wringing.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

245. I don't know why we rise to the bait

[bobbobbins01]

271. Yeah, I should have kept my mouth shut

I try to stay above getting into this kind of bullshit, but this just drove me nuts. I need to count to 10 and calm down.

[restorefreedom]

231. remember forrest gump

stupid is as stupid does.

now neither bernie nor hillary is stupid. the point is that he has been a DEM through and through on his record. he has been more of a Democrat than many of the Democrats in Congress.

are these really kind of discussions we are going to be having until the primary is over? Sad.

[Scootaloo]

232. Youre a serious person with seriously serious concerns that seriously need to be addressed seriously

Noted.

[FlatBaroque]

250. And, you know, we have to make HARD choices.

So we have to ask HARD questions that require HARD answers.

[gwheezie]

233. I think it's a legit concern for any dem running

I think it's part of trying to win, anticipate what the opposition is going to throw at you.
Hillary has been able to withstand decades of attacks. If Bernie continues to gain support, its coming his way. I don't know how he'll do against the coming onslaught but I'm sure his campaign is getting prepared.

[aikoaiko]

237. That is what the primary race is for -- for him to prove he is the best candidate overall.

I initially dismissed him completely as a cranky Kucinich, but I've been impressed with his leadership and development of followship. He is doing the things that need to be done at this point to overtake Hillary at NH and IA. Hillary's bulldogs are already lowing expectations in those two states and even consider 2nd place finishes for HRC when it was once unthinkable.

But when it comes time to vote in your primary or caucus, that is when you should decide.

That's what I'm doing.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

258. Response by paragraph:

Paragraph 1: We agree.

Paragraph 2: He didn’t run because he felt the Party was good enough for him. He decided to run because no one else was running on his policicies and he felt that the American people would respond to his message. They have.

Paragraph 3: Your understanding was incorrect. From the beginning his stated purpose has been to win the presidency.

Paragraph 4: Factually incorrect. He intends to raise a transaction tax on Wall Street which will raise hundreds of billions of dollars. He intends to raise the salary cap on SS to about $150k/yr, so that we can increase current benefits. He will eventually roll out his wealth inequality taxation program so that the wealthy are paying their fair share of taxes.

Paragraph 5: Bernie will attack the GOP in the general in the same way he is now, by attacking their regressive, billionaire-favoring policies.

Paragraph 6: Clinton backers cannot lecture us about sex scandals, just as Donald Trump can’t lecture us about hair! Bernie Sanders has the highest ethics of any presidential candidate in my lifetime. He’s the only candidate on either side of the aisle who isn’t rich.

Paragraph 7: Bernie is in excellent health. I bet he could beat HRC or Donald Trump in a 5k race.

Paragraph 8: I agree we need to ask serious questions. Your questions so far are neither serious or informed.

[mvd]

259. Well, I will answer them

1) I welcome him to our party. It's good he is running in our Party instead of as an independent who could split the vote, and I think he was always serious about winning. Plus, it has already affected Hillary's tone for the better.

2) Haven't heard Hillary be more specific. He thinks the social security income tax cap should be lifted, which is a great idea. He always talks about taxing the rich, closing tax loopholes, and limiting defense spending.

3) Sanders has shown he can mix it up if he needs to. More with the press, but I don't think he wants to damage Hillary too much.

4) It doesn't matter if Sanders is left or not; he'd be labeled an extremist anyway. See his wonderful reply to Boehner's accusations.

5) Sanders is quite healthy. If he is the right guy, age shouldn't matter. He'd likely pick a younger VP.

[riversedge]

296. k

[Little Star]

297. k&r

[mmonk]

299. If you don't like him running as a Democrat, you have a beef with the system as

it is now. Today, unlike in the past, the two parties control who gets exposure and who doesn't. Many years ago, it was non-partisan groups such as The League of Women Voters who decided who could get into debates and thus, get coverage for their ideas and message.

[JNelson6563]

303. It's proof, imo, that he's a realist.

If he is serious about winning he had no choice.

[SolutionisSolidarity]

304. Democrats are hoisted on their own petard on that one.

They've always insisted that primaries are the only acceptable venue for anger at the Party's direction, then they cleared the field for Hillary. Did they really expect for those of us opposed to neoliberalism to do nothing? As to Bernie's age and personal life, Republicans can say what they want but they loved Ronnie. He was old as dirt and wasn't such a perfect family man either.

[taught_me_patience]

305. the fact that he's running a democrat it's honor

He knows he's not going to win and doesn't want to ruin the national with a third party run. I respect him a lot for that.