The bernie platform is we need a revolution.

[boston bean]

He basically admits to all he doesn't have any plans other than that.

Healthcare - revolution
Immigration - revolution
Money in politics - revolution
Drug costs - revolution
Criminal justice - revolution

Just revolt people.

I think we need a few more details.

[jfern]

1. Hillary has experience with aiding actual revolutions

She supported the $2 trillion Iraq war that led to an ISIS revolution.

[dinkytron]

19. Hee-hee. Good one.

[HassleCat]

2. No revolution!

Stick with the status quo. Don't wade into that deep water! Stay in the shallow end.

[Bjornsdotter]

3. Yawn......

[Lucinda]

4. Details matter.

[RiverLover]

72. They do, and if you want them & not just to recite today's Hill meme of the day

Here are some details for you~

On the Issues
https://berniesanders.com/issues/


Hillary is Status Quo.

If you want a different outcome for all people including minorities & gays, you have to do something different.

Getting $$$ out of our govt and putting People First would sadly be revolutionary, don't you think?

[Lucinda]

78. Thanks for the link!

[RiverLover]

80. My pleasure, Lucinda!

[Punkingal]

5. He's exactly right.

[uponit7771]

6. Sanders revolution includes too many asterisks, and when you ask for details and specifics you

... get mostly flamed.

Sanders gets asks for details he gives non answers

[oasis]

44. The revolution will have a collosal price tag. THAT we do know.

[Ron Green]

64. You think we can afford the status quo?

[AgingAmerican]

7. FAIL

Just because you refuse to look, doesn't mean the details aren't there. You have been led to water and you refuse to drink. That's on you.

[AtomicKitten]

9. +1

[NowSam]

11. You said it better than I ever could

Thanks.

[saltpoint]

30. Marco Rubio Syndrome. Water's there,

but the person is unable to actually drink it.

[TCJ70]

8. I'm glad you at least...

...got a cursory understanding of step one from the Town Hall! You see the core of Bernie's message: Government is out of whack in its priorities, let's swing those priorities back towards Americans...All Americans.

You're so close!

[hoosierlib]

10. Unless we win the House and Senate...

It doesn't matter how good of a plan Hillary has 8f she doesn't have a House and Senate in Democratic control Hillary inspires no one, is politically polarizing and turns off independents and millenials.

Bernie is out best chance...

[Ken Burch]

12. HRC's plan is settle for tiny increments and that's all there will ever be.

Small gains and maintaining the status quo are basically the same thing.

The existing economic system will never allow compassionate or humane values. The way it crushed all the freedom movements after 1967 proves that.

What matters is identifying the big problems. The details will emerge from that.

[daleanime]

18. More like ask for tiny increments....

and settle for losing more ground. Which would be a win-win in her book.

[Luminous Animal]

13. Horrors. That the people rise up and demand action on that which is harming us.

His details are that we work together to make all of our lives better.

Together.

https://vimeo.com/153640576

[saltpoint]

28. Succinct and right-on. eom

[Gothmog]

14. Sanders got fewer votes than Obama in Iowa

Where is this revolution?

[BlueCaliDem]

21. I know! That's just sad.

A Barack Obama he is not and will never be.

[Ron Green]

66. Thank goodness.

I've been sorely disappointed by this president, after working hard for him twice.

I don't want that again.

[BlueCaliDem]

85. Well, since you're in the minority, does it really matter how you feel?

Nope.

[JeffHead]

38. So did Hillary.

Where is this enthusiasm.

[BlueCaliDem]

62. Unlike Bernie, Hillary Clinton never shouted out for a revolution.

That's the difference.

[elias49]

73. Haha She's doing status quo and still couldn't match votes.

Now THAT'S the saddest part!

[Jefferson23]

15. Yep, details:

Hillary Clinton, Jeb Bush Still Favorites of Wall Street Banks

Executives and employees of the biggest bank institutions in the country have continued to put their money behind two candidates in the 2016 presidential race: Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Jeb Bush.

From April through September, Clinton, the Democratic presidential frontrunner, raised $636,065 from employees (and their spouses) of Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Barclay’s, Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, UBS and Wells Fargo. Bush, the former Republican presidential frontrunner, pulled in $606,453.

After starting his campaign on June 15, Bush has nearly caught up to Clinton’s total fundraising from big bank executives. From July through September, Bush raised $253,503 to Clinton’s $203,456 from these donors.

Campaign Contributions From Big Bank Executives & Employees

http://billmoyers.com/2015/10/23/hillary-clinton-jeb-bush-still-favorites-of-wall-street-banks/

[morningfog]

16. The system is rotten. First, we tear it down. Then rebuild.

[daleanime]

17. No amount of details....

would ever satisfy you. But please keep running with that. Have a lovely evening.

[workinclasszero]

20. Bernies platform is pie-in the sky BS

If by some miracle Bernie was elected president his followers would be up in arms and ready to primary him after 4 years because not one thing he has promised to his acolytes will ever get passed in that time!

Not one thing!

[BlueCaliDem]

23. You'd think his older supporters would understand that, but no.

I believe their support of him has more to do with their hatred for Hillary Clinton - a hatred that's akin to how Republicans hate her. And the sad part is, they don't even realize it.

[workinclasszero]

25. I think you hit on it

Its the pure hatred of Hillary Clinton.

A sick thing the far left shares with the far right.

Hell Ted Cruz and fox news are out there cheering Bernie on even as we speak!

[BlueCaliDem]

33. It's just my opinion based on what I read here and other places I frequent. Their posts are

more about attacking Secretary Hillary Clinton than convincing people to support Bernie. The vitriol in those attack posts of the Democratic front-runner is over the top but it's telling. Then when they completely ignore how Karl Rove spent millions in attack ads of Hillary in Iowa (and got no bang for his buck) while going radio-silent on theBern, or pretend it's not even happening, that tells me all I need to know about them and the motivation behind their support.

[NanceGreggs]

70. That's been the big tell for me ...

... the fact that there are far more anti-HRC posts from BS supporters than there are posts about their own candidate's positives.

This becomes especially apparent when any questions are raised about Bernie's behaviour, or that of his campaign.

The theft of HRC's data, using unauthorized logos to deliberately mislead voters to believe he had endorsements he didn't have, campaign workers posing as union members - the responses to these proven activities is always, "Well, Hillary did ____," as though that somehow excuses Bernie's actions.

If the best defence one can offer is "but look at Hillary - she's worse", it certainly leads one to wonder whether the motivation is more about tearing down one candidate than supporting a different candidate.

[workinclasszero]

74. "the fact that there are far more anti-HRC posts from BS supporters"

... the fact that there are far more anti-HRC posts from BS supporters than there are posts about their own candidate's positives.


Right. They cant talk about how Sanders plans to implement all of his grandiose plans because as the OP stated, its all "we need a revolution" BS

Bernie is telling his followers exactly what they want to hear and has zero plans on actually getting any of it done.

I believe the republicans are setting up Bernie because he will be a super easy target when they turn the full weight of the right wing hate machine against him.

But if he was elected he will become a most reviled president, probably a one termer because he will never get any of his plans through the house unless its controlled by the democratic party which his followers seem to hate.

They insult and revile ally after ally after ally, continuously.

People are not going to forget this bernie bro garbage after the election, you can count on that!

[NurseJackie]

76. Yes ...

This becomes especially apparent when any questions are raised about Bernie's behaviour, or that of his campaign.

... such things are either ignored, or hidden. Go figure.

[noiretextatique]

36. actually it has nothing to do with Clinton. I am 57

i had the pleasure of voting against ronald reagan in my first election, in 1980, when many so-called Democrats voted for him, including some here. quite possibly some in this thread. anyway, i don't "hate" Clinton, however, i am not interested in more of the same either. i think the country needs a massive change, and Sanders is the only candidate talking about the issues of importance to me. end of story. i find it particularly OFFENSIVE that many Clinton supporters here claim that opposition to her is some rw conspiracy from the left, especially since some of her supporters used to be bona fide right-winders, before awakening. as for me, i joined the green party during the second clinton administration (NAFTA, welfare reform, prison-pushing, etc), but i've always voted for Democrats in national elections. what i realize is i want a better party, a better country and a better future. that's why i support bernie sanders.

[BlueCaliDem]

43. Then consider yourself an exception to the norm.

I'm a Democrat who supports Democrats and the Democratic Party. I'm totally not interested in some 'new and improved' experiment from the Left that would undoubtedly give the White House and Congress to the Koch bros - as has happened in 2000 with Nader and the Green Party (who were funded by Bush's wealthy donors, btw). I don't do scorched-Earth strategies. They never work.

I've learned that Republicans have ONE single goal in mind: destroy the Democratic Party. And I'm not going to be a part in that. I will vote for the strongest Democrat who can defeat them and keep them miles away from ever taking the White House again, even when I don't agree with that candidate 100%. Purity over people is not my thing.

[amborin]

49. if you really care about the Democratic party, then vote for a real democrat, not someone who's

Indebted to giant corporations, billionaires, hedge funds. Vote for someone principled, who takes a stand and puts the interests of ordinary Americans first. Someone who won't promote bad trade deals that allow corporations to shift jobs overseas or lower wages or pollute the environment. Vote for someone with integrity, who has the courage of their convictions, not a flip flopper with their finger in the wind.

[BlueCaliDem]

54. I do really care about the Democratic Party. That's why I'll vote for the strongest Democrat.

And a real one at that.

You disagree with my choice, and that's fine. But we both understand that no one single candidate is perfect. Although I know you're pointing out perceived flaws in Bernie's opponent, they're just that: perceived flaws. AND she is a true Democrat.

He made his first flip-flop when he decided to run against Hillary Clinton as a Democrat instead of an Independent Socialist or Democratic Socialist, or whatever he's calling himself lately (seems to change) when he shouted from the roof tops that he'll never be part of the Democratic Party. Now he's become one out of political expediency.

No one is promoting bad trade deals. Paul Krugman doesn't believe it's a bad trade deal - and he would know. Perhaps, you should read up on the TPP, specifically Chapter 9, yourself - but I know you won't. It's tedious, long, and full of legalese. You trust Bernie when he says it's bad, I trust President Obama and Paul Krugman who both say it's good and it will work in the best interest of Americans and our country.

As for being a "flip-flopper", there are more instances of flip-flopping by Bernie than by Hillary. I can list them for you, but I doubt you'll believe them. So I guess after answering your inquiry, we're done here.

[Armstead]

67. Krug man was I'm favor of all the bad trade deals

He's big on free trade...

[BlueCaliDem]

69. I'm not trying to be belligerent or attempt any sealioning here, but, can you give

me the links where he's said he was in favor of NAFTA and CAFTA? I believe you're confusing him with Robert Reich, but I could be wrong. If you can provide me with links that he's been in favor of all trade deals, please provide them so that other DUers may read for themselves.

This is what he said about the TPP as recently as October 2015:

But the WH is telling me that the agreement just reached is significantly different from what we were hearing before, and the angry reaction of industry and Republicans seems to confirm that.

What I know so far: pharma is mad because the extension of property rights in biologics is much shorter than it wanted, tobacco is mad because it has been carved out of the dispute settlement deal, and Rs in general are mad because the labor protection stuff is stronger than expected. All of these are good things from my point of view. I’ll need to do much more homework once the details are clearer.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/tpp-take-two/

I trust President Obama and Paul Krugman - especially with his credentials - to know what they're talking about, over Bernie's unqualified opinion. With Krugman's credentials, wouldn't you?

Paul Robin Krugman (born February 28, 1953) is an American economist, Distinguished Professor of Economics at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, and an op-ed columnist for The New York Times.[2] In 2008, Krugman was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his contributions to New Trade Theory and New Economic Geography.[3] The Prize Committee cited Krugman's work explaining the patterns of international trade and the geographic distribution of economic activity, by examining the effects of economies of scale and of consumer preferences for diverse goods and services.

In the end, and at worst, should TPP be as good as President Obama is promising us and as good as Paul Krugman believes it to be, proving Bernie wrong, the latter can always fall back on the excuse, "I'm not an Economist".

[uponit7771]

53. +1, Pixie Dust Politics (tm) because Sanders hasn't practically outlined HOW... he's going to

... address getting things past congress, getting the HC system in the US to take less etc

[MrChuck]

22. A fair response if you're open to that.

The reason that this revolution is necessary is an answer to a question that keeps getting asked.

That is: How will you get these policies through a Congress that won't even approve new shoelaces for Obama?

He answers, we need to kick do-nothings out of Congress and elect legislators who aren't taking big corporate donations.

That is the revolution.

Get it? Got it?

Good.

[BlueCaliDem]

24. Fair assessment (or wishful thinking), but here are the facts...how does he intend

to "kick do-nothings out of Congress" when he doesn't even bother to fundraise for them? Hillary Clinton raised a whopping $18 million for downticket Dems...guess how much Mister Revolution has raised? Just guess.

The more I look at Bernie, the more I see a guy with a huge hat but zero cattle.

[MrChuck]

29. I don't mean to insult you

but that "big hat no cattle" meme is realllllly Republican.

Anyway, Hillary supporters are hypercritical of Senator Sanders answer to the question of how he'll help get Congress back and more progressive. They couch it in his statement that has been attached to that book about how the POTUS let progressives down. (sorry I can't look up the title. Watching Hilldawg right now as I type)

He says that the next POTUS will have to do a much better job staying engaged with the voting public, speaking directly to them, giving them marchuing orders come election time. It's something we never see from the White House and I look forward to seeing it happen.

Also, $18 million dollars is a drop in the bucket compared to what will be needed. The former Secretary has access to many more lucrative donors than does the Senator and it is only right, and in alignment with the "ethics" that may or may not be implied in taking the kind of money that she has, that she send some downward. I'm certain that when the Senator finds himself in the position to stop looking over his shoulder at the former Secretary then he'll be glad to shake it down.

[BlueCaliDem]

39. Not exclusively, and if the shoe fits, why not? So...not insulted at all.

Anyway, Hillary supporters are hypercritical of Senator Sanders answer to the question of how he'll help get Congress back and more progressive.

And with reason. I know which book you're talking about; the one he wrote a blurb for. Yeah. That wasn't smart, but okay...
That said, if popular and beloved President Obama couldn't change Congress or even keep a Congress that could help him, what on god's green Earth makes Berners believe he can? He's in Congress now. He's getting a helluva lot more media exposure without the negative from U.S. media than Hillary Clinton. No better time to call for a revolution than NOW. So why isn't he?

He says that the next POTUS will have to do a much better job staying engaged with the voting public

Why wait till he's POTUS? Why not start the revolution NOW? Nothing is stopping him...that is, if he were really interested in making changes in DC rather than his campaign coffers...

Also, $18 million dollars is a drop in the bucket compared to what will be needed.

Exactly! It's just a drop in the bucket and Hillary really can use some help there. Now with his newfound popularity, he should be fundraising for downticket Dems unless, of course, he really doesn't care. That said, that $18 mill drop in the bucket is still $18 million more than Sanders has raised for downticket Dems. I mean, IF he's serious about becoming president, that is, which I don't believe he is.

[MrChuck]

46. I can see that you're unmoved

I think the Senator will make an effort that I don't see being made by presidents. I think he will engage the public in a way that others have not. A major criticism of the Obama presidency has been that he dismantled his machine when he got into office. The Senator pledges to keep his intact. And he does little else but call for the revolution so I don't understand your question "No better time to call for a revolution than NOW. So why isn't he? "

The revolution has started. He has raised his campaign dollars from small donations and not from giant corporations expecting favors in return. He is making changes in DC even now without being elected and he still continues to be an engaged senator.

There has been tremendous effort on the part of the Senator to gain traction in his race for the nomination. I think that he has done a tremendous job and the point is coming when his responsibilities will include raising money down ticket. At this point though he is lucky to be where he is and I feel lucky as well.

Gotta go home to the family. Have a great night.

[BlueCaliDem]

50. As are you.

The revolution has started. He has raised his campaign dollars from small donations and not from giant corporations expecting favors in return. He is making changes in DC even now without being elected and he still continues to be an engaged senator.

Who would've thought that to start a revolution, all you had to do was fundraise for yourself with small donations?

Anyway, at this stage, you're not going to convince me that Bernie will be good for the country and I won't convince you that Hillary Clinton will. At this stage, most people's minds are already made up - and that includes PoC, a vital demographic for any Democratic candidate.

Bernie can well take New Hampshire next week, but that's where his campaign will end. He nor his supporters have convinced PoC to come to his side, and after NH there's Nevada and South Carolina - two States with a far more diverse population than either Iowa or NH. Without the minority vote, I don't see a pathway for him to the White House. So I predict that beginning next week, his revolution will come to a slow but inevitable halt.

For the majority of Americans, keeping Republicans out of the White House and Senate is more important than a revolution.

Have a great night, too, MrChuck.

[redstateblues]

52. Bernie has no plans. Just bumper stickers

I hear no plan to take back congress. You would think he'd raise money to accomplish that.

[uponit7771]

57. +1, Sanders right now has good marketing not a good plan

[BlueCaliDem]

60. That's the gist I'm getting, as well.

For all his talk of revolution, I see him doing nothing but talk - in easily digestible soundbites. He's raised no money for his supporters to recruit Liberal candidates for the Senate - and considering that this time around there are 24 senate seats up for grabs, you think he would - nor push them to find strong Liberals for the U.S. House. Just talk. Lots of talk. He hasn't even raised a single dollar for down-ticket Dems. Hillary Clinton, in contrast, has raised $18 million for them already.

[uponit7771]

56. Sanders can NOT start the revolution now because he's a rock thrower!!! They sit on the sidelines

... proffering that the guy who can't get anything past the historically gerrymandered GOP congress be primaried because he compromises with said congress too much

[Recursion]

48. It's a Molly Ivins quote

I wonder what she would have made of this primary so far.

[BlueCaliDem]

61. Thanks, Recursion. I didn't know that.

I'm wondering what she would've made of this primary so far, too.

[workinclasszero]

32. Do you think that's going to happen overnight?

I bet most of the people that back Bernie think all they have to do is get him in the white house and canceled college debt, free health care, 15 plus bucks an hour etc will follow in a few weeks or months/

It would take a decade at least and in the meantime the bernie bros are abusing the very people they need to get any actual bills passed into laws.

[PyaarRevolution]

41. On student loans.

While I would like my loan cost discharged it's not going to happen and I didn't believe it would happen. That being said, I'll be covered down the road as well as up and coming people going to college. It won't happen immediately with Bernie getting in but will happen as the Congress shifts to a clear majority in both houses.
Additionally the medicare for all won't benefit me like you think, I believe in Herbology for treating most ailments that come up. Now do you think I'll be covered?! No but it will still make things better for others and provide more jobs, without all that wasted money tied up giving the head of United et al getting a nice bonus.

[BlueCaliDem]

45. Exactly.

I'll take that bet, by the way.

Ask them why they support Bernie (especially Millennials) and they start espousing their true reasons. Seriously, they believe that all they need to do in order to have their college debt canceled, get free health care, get $15 plus bucks an hour, etc, tax the rich more, is get Bernie into the White House. Sadly, the only thing they'll accomplish is getting him into the White House so he can retire four years later with nearly $200k and a nice golden parachute not afforded him as a Senator.

What these Millennials fail to realize is, everything they want from Bernie need changes in domestic policies, and that requires Congress to cooperate. It's why Hillary Clinton continues to say - and justifiable so - that she's "a Progressive who likes to get things done". And she means it.

[uponit7771]

55. Then Sanders does NOT understand what a Historically digitally gerrymandered GOP congress is...

... and that's a damn shame

[BlueCaliDem]

63. Oh, I'm certain he understands it. I'm also almost certain he's counting on his supporters not

knowing it. If they did, they wouldn't support him.

[saltpoint]

26. Your other post about Hillary

not being owned is getting the shit kicked out of it.

You might want to attempt a rescue or something.

[BlueCaliDem]

27. He's done NOTHING for said revolution - except fundraise for himself.

He's all hat, no cattle, and anyone who understands those facts (Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Progressives are on the up and up - it's why the majority doesn't support him) will not support his fly-by-night campaign that will crash and BERN come Super Tuesday. In the meantime, however, he's fundraising as hard as he can - for himself.

[NoJacketRequired]

31. I'll say this

It's easy to support a revolution when you have nothing to lose.

It's easy to vote on a pipe dream candidate when you have nothing to lose.

It's not as easy when you're a Muslim and the other side is foaming at the mouth and wants to create a database to track you.

It's not as easy when you're an immigrant and the other side is waiting for an opportunity to deport your whole family.

This Government relies on compromise to be able to function.

[workinclasszero]

40. You got that right

A damned republican in the white house picking 3 or 4 hardcore reich wing judges for SCOTUS will impact my family long after I'm gone.

A fascist party in control of the government scares the shit out of me and running a weak and untested nominee like BS is akin to suicide for me and mine.

But yeah the upper middle class will be in good shape in any event so they roll the dice on our futures.

[uponit7771]

58. +1, I've said it for months that the people who are screaming Bern it all down are the ones who can

... afford to have him not ellected

[bigtree]

77. +1000

[Alfresco]

34. This is what he really means when he says "political revolution."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1016&pid=122030

"...Sanders has indicated he's willing to use his fire-and-brimstone act not simply to influence a presidential election, but also to lay the groundwork for something of a "political revolution." "Let me ask you," he says, his gangly frame struggling to contain itself to our couch, "what is the largest voting bloc in America? Is it gay people? No. Is it African-Americans? No. Hispanics? No. What?" Answer: "White working-class people." Bring them back into the liberal fold, he figures, and you've got your revolution...

[R B Garr]

68. Haha, I bet someone would get a post hidden if they

quoted Bernie himself about "white working-class people" for his revolution. In fact, I'm pretty sure people have had posts hidden for saying that was his main focus. He says it himself right there.

[Alfresco]

71. Bernie will not say this now but I think it still defines his idea of a political revolution.

[NurseJackie]

75. You're correct, of course.

[Avalux]

35. Quit lying about Bernie. It's getting really ridiculous. n/t

[treestar]

37. The revolution was in 1776

I guess this means Bernie does not like the system we have. What he proposes instead, we don't know. Does he plan to misuse the Constitutional powers to revolutionize to a system he approves of?

[Jefferson23]

42. That is a silly thing to say, Sanders is going to misuse Constitutional powers?

You can't believe that.

[treestar]

79. Then Revolution means nothing

If he is not going to change the system.

He has not made any proposals about that, either.

So it's a possibility he would use the Executive power in a way not previously done.

[Jefferson23]

82. Your statements indicate you are confused. You support Citizens United?

I doubt you do, and that is what this fight is about, a political revolution
to begin a fight to bring back a functioning democracy.

That takes grass roots efforts and organization and years of work, and
it involves the bully pulpit to get people involved after they vote.

Political activism to address gerrymandering, to get red states blue again.

[whatchamacallit]

47. We do

[pinebox]

51. The Hillary platform is *I* need a revolution

[redstateblues]

59. It's revolting!

[Armstead]

65. Have problems with listening comprehension?

[LexVegas]

81. I have all the details I need about him and his plans. Not qualified. nt

[AgingAmerican]

83. No it isn't

And you know it.

[JPnoodleman]

84. Only in America are Bernies Policies considered "Revolutionary,"

Most of the civilized world already accomplished much of this decades ago.

[RiverLover]

86. ^^^ Thread WIN