Bernie is too Liberal?

[npk]

Disclaimer: I expect that this post will quickly be hidden. But since I rarely post much these days, I will take the hide. At least I can say this and people can read it and decide themselves whether it is worthy of the “true” ideals of what this website were founded on.

Bernie Sanders is the candidate that this country, a large portion of this country, says it has been waiting for. Sanders is the candidate that was supposed to galvanize and connect a growing far left American wave of progressiveness that has been held in check for far too long. Sanders is Michael Moore's wet dream come true. He is the epitome of fighting against the traditional capitalist structure that has seized America’s wealth and redistributed that wealth into the bank accounts of the 1 %. Sanders is what, in large part, DU was founded on. He doesn't pander to center-right constituency groups. He is against Super PACS in all forms. He is the voice of the 1960's revolution that was left interrupted and incomplete. He is the quintessential socialist candidate that America's left., it's true liberal base, say they have been waiting to embrace. And yet there is a disconnect. There is a feeling that Sanders is too liberal, too far left. That he is unelectable in a general election. Maybe this is true!

What Clinton's rise to front runner so far this primary season all but confirms is something that I and many others have always believed. That America's left is skittish when it comes to true progressive reform. What it really says is that this country is not ready to truly embrace far left ideology. It means in this country our great “swath” of the majority, and the rest of “the people” are safe and secure with a center-right country. Lets not rock the boat because there is chance it might tip over.

Hillary Clinton is a conservative in every true meaning of the word. Notice I did not call her a republican. Clinton is the very embodiment and reproduction of the moderate wing of the conservative party that no longer exists. The absence of a true moderate on the conservative spectrum has allowed Hillary to appeal to a wider group of independents and RINO’s who cannot bring themselves to truly embrace the far right wing dogma and ideology which runs deep and in stream of the base the GOP and cow-ties to social issues alone, but still they cannot bring themselves to declare that they embrace far left socially liberal ideology that encompasses a much broader range of true progressive values; which leaves them squirming from the very thought.

What most of us know is that Hillary will, by all accounts, move to the center right on economic policies if and when she is elected the next president of the United States. On social issues we know she will tread a little more lightly into that deep end than her husband did. She is not stupid. She saw how her husbands inability to stand firm on those “liberal” far left, progressive social issues made him a target of “annoyance” from the far left he tried to ignore and drown out, and ultimately galvanized the right, a right that was all too happy to wade into that slosh. Bill’s missteps were fodder for a republican party that needed a spark to get them back on track on social issues like abortion, gays in the military and of course the moral ethics that the GOP love to trot out whenever their candidate front runner needs a boost.

Bill Clinton’s failure to run on his true convictions and allow the center-rights “so called progressives” to dictate his policy was the greatest failure of his presidency. Many of Bill Clinton’s policies were then disastrous for many people in the country that then and now are some of the more vulnerable, often misbegotten constituency groups in America. Yet today “we” are told to now trust that Hillary will get it right. That she will not go center-right when she is elected and instead will bring about true economic and social reforms in this country that a great many of us have been waiting for. We can trust that these things will happen, or we can make them happen. One candidate is essentially ready to do just that. He is not beholden to large special interest groups or super Pac’s to get elected. He truly can call himself a “progressive” since day one. We can make it happen, but it appears that a great many of us are just not ready.

Maybe we will never be ready and that is the problem.

[99th_Monkey]

1. K&R nt

[PatrickforO]

2. I forget who, but somebody once said that Americans never embraced socialism because

they are frustrated millionaires.

But a question, npk...do you think that the actual number of people supporting Bernie is being systematically hidden by the huge, bloated, corporate owned propaganda organs, the statisticians-for-money and so on? Because we keep seeing poll after poll after poll saying oh, Hillary is WAY ahead...but no one seems to be getting discouraged.

The media, by the way, has been blacking out Bernie in Iowa.

The truth is NO ONE in the establishment wants Bernie in there and they will fight tooth and nail to keep it from happening. Consider the American presidential 'horse race' in this light:

- Americans are thoroughly, profoundly fed up with the status quo
- The right wing crazies are supporting a chest pounding quasi-fascist nationalist
- More people than they will allow us to see, but a huge, hidden groundswell on the left and in center support Bernie
- The establishment does not want either Rump or Bernie anywhere near the White House, because
- They are making their move to go to a corporate government through TPP and TISA, so

Oh, oh! ISIS has committed an act of war.

Yes, that's it! WAR!

Yes, let's have another WAR! That will do it - keep everyone in line...

What if?

I'm gonna caucus for Bernie in my state, and I'm NOT gonna get discouraged because the corporatists want us to be discouraged and to believe Bernie can't win.

Because he can. We each have one vote and we can make it happen.

[npk]

6. To your point yes the corp media has a strong interest in Hillary

She is playing to their strengths of course because they, the "media" view Bernie as an unpredictable loose cannon, which is shamelessly funny because Bernie Sanders is, if anything, an open book. His principles have never changed. He has never had to explain why he has lied on so many different occasions and changed his beliefs to appeal to a wider moderate/electorate. The great unknown is what Hillary will do once and if she is elected president. But I think the corp media will and have hedged their bets in the same way they did with Obama. They know at the end of the day that she will play ball, and that is what they care most about.

I am not discouraged, just bewildered at the reaction Bernie has received.

[aidbo]

13. You may be thinking of Steinbeck.

“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”

Though, this article says it may have been misquoted.

http://anti-imperialism.com/2012/10/08/on-steinbeck-socialism-internet-quotes-and-the-need-for-materialist-analysis/

The original citation is likely a misquote from a passage of his book America and Americans and Selected Nonfiction, a collection of Steinbeck’s work as a journalist:

Except for the field organizers of strikes, who were pretty tough monkeys and devoted, most of the so-called Communists I met were middle-class, middle-aged people playing a game of dreams. I remember a woman in easy circumstances saying to another even more affluent: ‘After the revolution even we will have more, won’t we, dear?’ Then there was another lover of proletarians who used to raise hell with Sunday picknickers on her property.

I guess the trouble was that we didn’t have any self-admitted proletarians. Everyone was a temporarily embarrassed capitalist. Maybe the Communists so closely questioned by the investigation committees were a danger to America, but the ones I knew—at least they claimed to be Communists—couldn’t have disrupted a Sunday-school picnic. Besides they were too busy fighting among themselves.

Rings truthy to me though.

[DCBob]

3. I would tend to agree this country is not quite ready for a Democratic Socialist to be President.

However, I do think many of Bernie's ideas have struck fertile ground with a large percent of the electorate and could have gone much further if things were a bit different. I know its shallow but a big part of Bernie's problem is simply his image and style and where he is from. A younger, more charismatic person from a larger more diverse state would have helped tremendously. Also Bernie is bit too one-dimensional. Almost everything for him revolves around economics.. that's not good enough for someone trying to be the President of the United States and the leader of the free world. Hopefully in the next election there will be someone who can carry the progressive banner effectively and also be charismatic and broad enough to win.

[NurseJackie]

4. +1

[redruddyred]

9. all the "real socialists" are sanders/corbyn's age

politicians from another era.
you could not be elected as a farleftist these past 30 years, not as a newcomer anyhow.

[MaggieD]

12. Yep

And the fact that his solutions are too extreme for the electorate. And he just doesn't have the broad base experience or interest in crucial areas that are important to many of us. So yes, he's way too one dimensional.

I think I actually might like the guy even though I don't think he's the best choice for president if his supporters weren't attacking HRC 24/7 here and all over the Internet. I can't help it, but his supporters are a HUGE turn off to me.

[Dem2]

20. Good post

I'm not that optimistic that another candidate as good as Bernie will come around any time soon. It's a shame he doesn't appear to have the combination of qualities needed to get the nomination.

[Bread and Circus]

5. Awesome post.

[Hydra]

7. Bernie is not liberal enough for me

So I see the comments that people are afraid to tread a little left of true center to either be absurd, or as a sign that the Right has won.

I do think Bernie could be a massive step in the correct direction though. Hillary is only offering more of the same, despite any triangulating she attempts to do. She thinks the system is working. Burnie thinks the system is savable.

I think it needs to be burned down.

[redruddyred]

8. I am a New Deal Democrat

in today's world, this would make me a Sandersnista.

I understand "freedom" in the context of FDR's famous four freedoms speech: freedom of speech, worship, from want and from fear. (well said mr roosevelt)

too many democrats imagine sanders unelectable, furthermore, there is a not entirely incorrect impression that he's something of a grandstander while Ms Clinton is a competent grinder.

I understand the criticisms of Bill, but also remember fondly back to my childhood when we had president who was supremely competent, and handsomeandcleverandfunny. we took that for granted maybe.

the 90s weren't like today, there wasn't the same level of political consciousness. OWS (A Failure! A Failure!) hadn't happened yet. no 'SJWs' to mock on 4chan. I'll undoubtedly receive some flack for this, but I wonder if we didn't in some way deserve bush. "inoffensive" legacies such as himself seem to be the result of colossal political apathy.

[Hepburn]

10. Yep, New Deal Dem here, too. Totally. n/t

[no_hypocrisy]

11. Me too.

If I can't vote for Henry Wallace or Adlai Stevenson, Bernie will do.

[Hepburn]

24. Amen to that! n/t

[MrMickeysMom]

14. Is it really that left of an ideology?

I've always thought, reading about the patterns that have run since the early 1930's with the kind of presidents produced to pull the economy back to reason (1950's to 80's), that we have once again gotten to the point of 1928. The only difference is that triggering wars to start the economy can't be considered anymore after they were considered without much resistance again and again and again and again...

We are at that point where "the powers that be" are everywhere when we know damned well, "we" will need to firmly show up to the revolution.

I couldn't agree more with Bill Clinton's folly. I see all the major newspapers and Op/Eds toting the line for HRC, but we AIN'T there with her.

Where I don't agree with you is the last line... WE HAVE TO BE READY, or we're done.

See you at the barricades.

[litlbilly]

15. What youre calling far left I believe is actually right down the center of what most Americans want.

It only looks far left simply because the move to the extreme right makes it look that way.

[brooklynite]

16. Funny thing...nobody bothered to alert on your martyred post...

Sorry.

[npk]

18. Not for the reasons you think

And trust me my intent was the complete opposite of martyrdom. I myself have no following here on DU, so there is no one to care if I cause my self inflicted demise. And no I am not asking for pity, just stating that 9/10 times posts like mine usually go straight into the trash heap. No doubt my fault though.

[Doctor_J]

17. If it's an even numbered day, Bernie's too liberal. If it's an odd numbered day,

Hillary is more liberal than Sanders. Get it straight

[AgingAmerican]

19. 'Liberal' is barely left of center

There is nothing 'extreme' about anything Sanders says or believes.

[npk]

21. But Sanders is "extreme" to most democratic voters, even those that say they are progressive.

Sanders is perceived as being far left, by the media, by many here on DU, and more importantly by the voters. Of course he is not taking an "extreme" position, not to us, but to many in the Democratic party they are not ready for "all" of his positions just yet. The country is at the center-right position, that is my contention. It is not left of center, not in reality. Bernie appears as a radical even by the standards of the non-corp controlled and financed media. He is an unabashed "socialist" and that is not a position that any normal moderate voter is going to take up. If Sanders wasn't considered "extreme" by even many in the Democratic party, he would not be fighting the uphill battle that he is having to fight right now.

[AgingAmerican]

22. What he states are common moral positions on basic issues

Simple honesty. Nothing at all radical about it.

It is unfamiliar politically, because we are used to pure bullshit.

[Juicy_Bellows]

23. Happy to REC

You said -

Yet today “we” are told to now trust that Hillary will get it right. That she will not go center-right when she is elected and instead will bring about true economic and social reforms in this country that a great many of us have been waiting for.

Many of her supporters (at least here) want her to stay center-right, just like them.

They got theirs and F you if you don't.