It's all about Bernie and feeling the Bern.....

[BooScout]

It's never been about the Democratic Party but only how Bernie can use the party to further his own self proclaimed Revolution. The Democratic Party has never been 'good enough' for him to join it and work from within to take it in the direction he thinks he knows best about....until now, when he has 'lowered' himself to come down to the party's level to take advantage of it and use it as a launching pad for his bully pulpit.

He espouses that he is for the 99% ....but is he really? If he wants to include everyone under his Revolution then why can he not expand his base? Why are the members of the African American and Hispanic communities not flocking to his banner? A few strategically placed faces of people of color in photos of Bernie pep rallies does not tell me he is expanding his base. He consistently polls extremely low with minorities, you know, minorities, the people who make up the backbone of the Democratic Party.

The Bern tells us that his economic Revolution will level the playing field for all of us, yet he does not tell us how he expects to get his Revolutionary ideas passed by Congress. Nor does he tell us how he is going to help Democrats get elected to Congress and regain the majority. Nor does he seem to understand that a Revolution to break down economic classism will not solve the problem of systemic racism that still persists in American society.

Why is someone who the Democratic Party was not good enough for (for over 50 years) now attempting to take control of the party? If the party hasn't been good enough for him, then he's not good enough for me.

[arcane1]

1. Well, with this post, you have proven one thing:

You either don't get it, or choose not to.

Your loss.

[Armstead]

22. I think it's the latter

[daleanime]

36. And I should forsake my viewpoint....

and adopt your's because.....?

[AtomicKitten]

2. Bernie is running because he's a better Democrat than most Democrats and he is concerned

... about the Third Way corporate takeover of the party machinery. It isn't ego; in fact, he would have stepped aside had Elizabeth Warren decided to run because he said they'd be running the same campaign.

[emsimon33]

60. Better the Bernie way than all those DINOs

Fast Track Voters:

Brad Ashford (Neb.-2nd District)
Ami Bera (Calif.-7th District)
Don Beyer (Va.-8th District)
Earl Blumenauer (Ore.-3rd District)
Suzanne Bonamici (Ore.-1st District)
Gerry Connolly (Va.-11th District)
Jim Cooper (Tenn.-5th District)
Jim Costa (Calif.-16th District)
Henry Cuellar (Texas-28th District)
Susan Davis (Calif.-53rd District)
John Delaney (Md.-6th District)
Suzan DelBene (Wash.-1st District)
Sam Farr (Calif.-20th District)
Jim Himes (Conn.-4th District)
Ruben Hinojosa (Texas-15th District)
Eddie B. Johnson (Texas-30th District)
Derek Kilmer (Wash.-6th District)
Ron Kind (Wis.-3rd District)
Rick Larsen (Wash.-2nd District)
Gregory Meeks (N.Y.-5th District)
Beto O’Rourke (Texas-16th District)
Scott Peters (Calif.-52nd District)
Jared Polis (Colo.-2nd District)
Mike Quigley (Ill.-5th District)
Kathleen Rice (N.Y.-4th District)
Kurt Schrader (Ore.-5th District)
Terri Sewell (Ala.-7th District)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.-23rd District)
Michael Bennet (CO)
Maria Cantwell (WA)
Tom Carper (DE)
Chris Coons (DE)
Dianne Feinstein (CA)
Heidi Heitkamp (ND)
Bill Nelson (FL)
Tim Kaine (VA)
Claire McCaskill (MO)
Patty Murray (WA)
Jeanne Shaheen (NH)
Mark Warner (VA)
Ron Wyden (OR)

[djean111]

124. The Florida people on that list will never get my vote again. NO MATTER WHAT.

My list of DINOs here - Nelson, Murphy, Wasserman-Schultz, Gwen Graham. Based on votes and/or membership in the New Democrat Coalition. I will not vote for a Republican, no matter what letter is on their team jersey.

[Agschmid]

72. +1

[TSIAS]

3. Agreed

We need more loyal Democrats like Joe Lieberman and Zell Miller representing our party. They've been Democrats for a long time, so they must represent our best interests.

[oasis]

9. Joe Lieberman and Zell Miller had their masks ripped off.

The snakes were forced to slither over to the GOP.

Our top three candidates would never stoop that low.

[emsimon33]

58. Well put!

Man oh man I was happy when they slithered back under the slime rocks from whence they came.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

127. Agreed...they couldn't slither fast enough. Unfortunately, that slime Lieberman keeps crawlin back out from under his rock to run his mouth. Had enough of that ass.

[SunSeeker]

4. K & R

[Cleita]

5. No he's not about today's corporate Democratic Party.

But he recognizes that third parties don't work in our system. We would have to bring instant runoff voting into play to do that. So recognizing that the party of FDR was the party of the working class, he is committed to taking it back to there.

[bunnies]

6. You'd rather he run as an Independent?

Maybe you should start a petition.

[arcane1]

10. The made-up smears are starting to exhibit a noticable lack of creativity

They've scraped the barrel until there's nothing left but splinters

[bunnies]

13. Maybe the splinters are large enough to use for shit-stirring.

Sheesh.

[arcane1]

21. They are proving to be increasingly ineffective at that task

[artislife]

32. Heh! nt

[djean111]

7. He is a better Democrat than all the DINOs we currently have in office.

Funny, if something like this was about Hillary, there would be screeching about HATE and BASHING.
In this case, so you don't like Bernie as a candidate - the great thing is you have one you like better. It's all good. Unless you believe this would change any minds. Then, well, fail.

[BainsBane]

8. The revolution rhetoric really pisses me off

I think he's appropriating it for his own political purposes. A new president is not a fucking revolution. The same with his trite invocation of the Koch brothers for absolutely everything, even when it has nothing to do with the subject. Last night I heard him promise to overturn Citizens United if elected. No, he can't honestly make that promise. He can't control who retires from the court. He could appoint judges, but even two retirements wouldn't lead to an automatic reversal of Citizens United. Nor is that alone enough to solve the issue of money in politics. It's pandering, same with his Super PAC claims, that play on the ignorance of voters. I find it untrustworthy.

[Armstead]

23. I auppose you'd rather he play the spoiler and run 3rd party?

My guess is that you'd be leading the pack with tar and feathers if he did that.

It is NOT about Sanders. He is a catalyst.

Call it what you will, if you don't think we need fundamental change to avoid becoming a truly feudal society, then you are welcome to continuing to enable more of the same old and obsess over personality politics. Which with the diredction we are heading is a recipe for disaster that will make 2008 seem like a garden party.

[BainsBane]

27. This is exactly what pisses me off

That he tells you all electing him is going to save America. What complete and utter bullshit. Even if you all don't know how government functions, he does. He's been in congress for decades without getting one piece of reform legislation passed. Yet you all think all you have to do is make him president and whazam, all is saved. If you don't elect HIM and HIM ONLY, feudalism. Give me a fucking break. That is exactly the nonsense that turns me off. He knows it's not true, just like he knows he can't overturn Citizens United and that it's illegal to take money from Super PACS. He tells you all what you want to hear. I don't like being bullshited. I don't like politicians who pretend they aren't politicians, that they are revolutionaries when they running to sit atop a capitalist state. Spare me.

[arcane1]

29. You have a quote for us?

I've never heard him say that. I have heard him repeatedly say that WE can save the country if we get involved in the unglamorous work of being active, engaged citizens.

Perhaps you mis-heard him.

[artislife]

33. Hillary 2016----Because you don't want things to change

It's catchy in a rather pedestrian way.

[emsimon33]

63. Actually, it is very perceptive!

Have you copyrighted it or can I use it?

[artislife]

66. I came up with it but you can use it! nt

[emsimon33]

67. I shall give you credit!

Very clever and very true! I AM impressed! A few words but they say it all!!!!!

[artislife]

68. Lovely!

It just may be her clearest message yet.

[emsimon33]

76. LOL

[BainsBane]

42. What did that poster just say?

What do people here say all the time? That thread about if not now, we have to wait until 2024 to save America from corporatism and oligarchy. Voting for Clinton, they insist, is a vote for oligarchy, like society rises and falls based on a president? What complete bullshit. The notion that anyone who doesn't support Bernie is a "corporatist" a "neoliberal" or "neo-con." That only Bernie can save black people, even as those same supporters are denouncing Black Lives Matter as a Koch conspiracy. I see a lot of hyperbole and empty claims from Bernie and bizarrely exalted expectations and insults from far too many of his supporters.

I also listened to that conference call last night to see precisely what he said. He said it's not about me, but then what it was about was getting volunteers to get him elected. To fight the "Koch brothers." To my mind, it's demagoguery, and I don't trust it for a second.

I found this the other day, and it captures much of what I see as behind the Sanders candidacy.

Ordinary workers won’t rise up against ultras because they take it as given that “the rich get richer.”
But the hopes and dreams of today’s educated class are based on the idea that market capitalism is a meritocracy. The unreachable success of the superrich shreds those dreams.
“I’ve seen it in my research,” says pollster Doug Schoen, who counsels Michael Bloomberg and Hillary Clinton, among others. “If you look at the lower part of the upper class or the upper part of the upper middle class, there’s a great deal of frustration. These are people who assumed that their hard work and conventional ‘success’ would leave them with no worries. It’s the type of rumbling that could lead to political volatility.”
Lower uppers are doctors, accountants, engineers, lawyers. At companies they’re mostly executives above the rank of VP but below the CEO. Their comrades include well-fed members of the media (and even Fortune columnists who earn their living as consultants).
Lower uppers are professionals who by dint of schooling, hard work and luck are living better than 99 percent of the humans who have ever walked the planet. They’re also people who can’t help but notice how many folks with credentials like theirs are living in Gatsby-esque splendor they’ll never enjoy.
http://business.time.com/2009/02/04/the-revolt-of-the-lower-upper-class-begins/

I have always known the notion of meritocracy is a lie. The American dream has never been more than an illusion for the majority. This is a nation founded on deep inequality, which is essential to its fabric as a capitalist state. Liberty for some was made possible by slavery for others. The only difference now is that it effects the white upper-middle and middle-class, who in the past benefited from that inequality. Bernie nor his supporters address the profound structural inequality that has characterized this nation from its inception. Instead, they situate it in time recently, just as their privilege has begun to decline. They openly and repeatedly long for the days when the rest of us were denied basic rights and lived in crippling poverty. And we are all supposed to stop everything because they feel a bit of what it's like to live in America.

Sanders base of support is overwhelmingly white, male and middle to upper-middle class for a reason. If I hear one more person prattle on about how $5k a month is so exploitative for interns or an "entry salary" or how hard it is to get by on $150-$250, I'm going to lose it. I do not care how hard it is to get by on amounts of money 90 percent of Americans will never, ever earn. My goal is not to restore them to what they see as their rightful place atop the capitalist world order. They go around insulting everyone who doesn't see the world through their narrow class-and race-bound lens. It's an incredible display of entitlement. The insults toward other DUers, toward the voting public, toward black activists, have made very clear they see far too many as inferior to them. They sure as hell are not getting my help restoring their privilege. Bernie isn't talking about me. He's longing for a time when my family could barely put food on the table, when I was working from age 10 to be able to pay to do laundry and buy school clothes and pencils. Those were the great days of "real Democrats." No. They were not.

[BooScout]

44. Eloquently put....

[RobertEarl]

107. unrec

Hillary Clinton's vacation includes Hamptons fundraisers
Tickets to the Burch brunch cost $1,000 to attend, and $2,700 to attend and get a photograph with Clinton.

[arcane1]

50. So, the answer is no. n/t

[BainsBane]

59. The answer is yes

The answer is that it is claimed 24/'7 on this site. He is making empty promises, claiming to be leading a revolution. I made myself quite clear, and your dismissal of my post mirrors perfectly the dismissal of the experiences of 400 years of subjugation of the poor, people of color, and many women have faced since the 17th century.

That is why I will not support the white upper-middle and middle class in their great and noble struggle to reassert themselves atop the capitalist world order. Upper 1 percent, 3 percent, or 10 percent. What difference does it make? It all excludes me and the vast majority of Americans.

[arcane1]

61. No it isn't. Show me where "he tells you all electing him is going to save America"

Since it pisses you off so much, it should be easy to do. And if such a statement exists, I will openly say it's wrong and that I disagree with him on that.

[emsimon33]

65. LOL!

[DisgustipatedinCA]

56. But you're still undecided, right? ;)

[emsimon33]

74. Actually, I think you misunderstood

You state: The notion that anyone who doesn't support Bernie is a "corporatist" a "neoliberal" or "neo-con."

Actually, I believe that people who are supporting Bernie think that Hillary is a "corporatist"/"neoliberal," not the people who support her.

I am not exactly sure why people support her other than she is a women. But to my mind, she is cut from the same cloth as Angela Merkel.

As for your description of Bernie supporters as "overwhelmingly white, male and middle to upper-middle class," I can only surmise that you see what you want to see. Most of the Bernie supporters I know are female (of a certain age) or Millennials.

Bill Clinton, who is probably the most intelligent president of my lifetime, did devastating harm to the African American community with the laws he signed into law ("just compromising&quot . I can not excuse him as I might Bush II (the village idiot) because Clinton is so intelligent. When I go knocking door to door in African American communities, I shall remind them of TANF, NAFTA, etc.

As for Hispanic/Latinos, Bernie received a standing ovation at La Raza. The Hispanic/Latinos with whom I have discussed Bernie like him. He just doesn't have the name recognition of Hillary but that will change.

Those of us who turned red states blue or purple with Dean's 50-State Strategy and those of the Occupy movement stand ready to change the status quo and fight to get our country back.

For those who scoff and say that it is all "bullshit," I say, who would have ever guessed that a pope would speak out as Pope Francis has.

Times are changing. And, I think that you have put labels on people and marginalized them ("Bernie isn't talking about me. He's longing for a time when my family could barely put food on the table, when I was working from age 10 to be able to pay to do laundry and buy school clothes and pencils. Those were the great days of 'real Democrats.' No. They were not.&quot . It is you who see through a narrow lens and who belittles those who do not share your viewpoint. You seem very frustrated and angry and for that I am very sad for you.

[lunamagica]

80. Wonderfully stated. I particularly love your last paragraph so much, that I'm taking

the liberty to quote it:

Sanders base of support is overwhelmingly white, male and middle to upper-middle class for a reason. If I hear one more person prattle on about how $5k a month is so exploitative for interns or an "entry salary" or how hard it is to get by on $150-$250, I'm going to lose it. I do not care how hard it is to get by on amounts of money 90 percent of Americans will never, ever earn. My goal is not to restore them to what they see as their rightful place atop the capitalist world order. They go around insulting everyone who doesn't see the world through their narrow class-and race-bound lens. It's an incredible display of entitlement. The insults toward other DUers, toward the voting public, toward black activists, have made very clear they see far too many as inferior to them. They sure as hell are not getting my help restoring their privilege. Bernie isn't talking about me. He's longing for a time when my family could barely put food on the table, when I was working from age 10 to be able to pay to do laundry and buy school clothes and pencils. Those were the great days of "real Democrats." No. They were not.

WORD!!!!

[ismnotwasm]

89. Impossible to recommend this post enough

A perfect summary

[Armstead]

116. So now you're quoting Fox News and Newsmax commentators? Okay

Doug Schoen is one of those Fox News Pet "Democrats" who get paid to go on the air to attack their "fellow Democrats" and reinorce Fox's Right Wing narrative. And a columnist for Newsmax.

Okay.

[BainsBane]

117. It is Time magazine

as you can clearly see from the link. I do not watch television. I do not know who appears on which entertainment network masquerading as news. I hear Dennis Kucinich appears on that same network. I understand he was a favorite around here eight years ago. Your post is an ad hominen. Clearly you have nothing of substance to say.

[Armstead]

119. Clearly you should look up who you are quoting and where they are coming from

I posted one of his pearls of wisdom seperatly.

[Armstead]

118. Here's some more wisdom from your source of astute analysis Doug Schoen

Among other things Schoen said that President Obama has divided the country along partisan lines, and should not have run for re-election, and that the Affordable Care Act had been a "disaster" for the Democratic Party.

With Patrick Caddel (a real piece of work and another Fox "Democrat&quot he wrote in 2010 that Obama should not run again:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/12/AR2010111202846.html

"....To that end, we believe Obama should announce immediately that he will not be a candidate for reelection in 2012.

If the president goes down the reelection road, we are guaranteed two years of political gridlock at a time when we can ill afford it. But by explicitly saying he will be a one-term president, Obama can deliver on his central campaign promise of 2008, draining the poison from our culture of polarization and ending the resentment and division that have eroded our national identity and common purpose.

We do not come to this conclusion lightly. But it is clear, we believe, that the president has largely lost the consent of the governed. The midterm elections were effectively a referendum on the Obama presidency. And even if it was not an endorsement of a Republican vision for America, the drubbing the Democrats took was certainly a vote of no confidence in Obama and his party. The president has almost no credibility left with Republicans and little with independents.

Obama can restore the promise of the election by forging a government of national unity, welcoming business leaders, Republicans and independents into the fold. But if he is to bring Democrats and Republicans together, the president cannot be seen as an advocate of a particular party, but as somebody who stands above politics, seeking to forge consensus. And yes, the United States will need nothing short of consensus if we are to reduce the deficit and get spending under control, to name but one issue..."

[Armstead]

30. What's he supposed to say? "Give and go home?"

All politicians promise the moon. It's part of the job description.

Good lord, show me a politicians who doesn't promise to make big changes, and I'll show you a lousy politician.

The difference is that Sanders is a lot more honest in his message about the cause and extent of our problems than most, and he actually proposes things that would make a difference.

Perhaps he should say "Elect me, and I'll just send you a T Shirt, and nothing else is going to change."

[ibegurpard]

37. our current front runner

"Good lord, show me a politicians who doesn't promise to make big changes, and I'll show you a lousy politician."

Won't make those promises and I don't even believe her incrementalism.

[Vattel]

38. No, you aren't listening to what he says.

He says that a president cannot radically change the system. Only the people can do that. That's why it would be a political revolution. It would be the people taking the power away from the 1%.

[arcane1]

39. Indeed, he has REPEATEDLY said a mere president can't do it all by themselves.

This is why I don't trust these types of posts. They reek of disingenuousness.

[sheshe2]

86. Hey Vattel...

Glad you finally recognize that fact for YOUR CANDIDATE.

Your Quote.

No, you aren't listening to what he says.
He says that a president cannot radically change the system. Only the people can do that. That's why it would be a political revolution.

Our President already said those words, long before the Bern. Yet he is hated and despised here. Why is the "Political Revolution of a White Man" more important to you than the one that was talked about by our Black President.

Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.

Barack Obama

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/b/barackobam409128.html#jcR1IUKYEUqJLd45.99

Do you see the hypocrisy here?

[Vattel]

88. Sorry, but I don't see your point.

What change was Obama talking about?

[sheshe2]

91. Why

Am I not surprised you would have no clue what I was talking about.

[Vattel]

121. Have a nice day.

[George II]

95. Then why is he saying, for example, that HE will overturn Citizens United?

[Bjorn Against]

99. He doesn't say he will overturn Citizen's United

He says he will appoint Supreme Court Justices who will overturn it. Please learn about what Bernie is actually saying before making inaccurate statements.

[George II]

101. Not an inaccurate statement:

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/10-things-bernie-sanders-said-in-phoenix-that-made-the-crowd-go-wild-7502562

“When one family, [the Kochs], spends more money than either political party [on the presidential campaigns], that’s not democracy; that’s oligarchy…I will overturn Citizens United and [reinstate] public funding of elections"

A DIRECT quote from Senator Sanders.

[Bjorn Against]

103. Ok I admit he worded that poorly

However anyone who has paid attention knows that the way he has promised this would happen is by appointing Supreme Court justices who will vote to overturn it, which is something the President would have the power to do.

[George II]

130. He obviously worded it the way he WANTED it to sound, like "HE" could do it as president.

[Bjorn Against]

132. You obviously know nothing about Bernie

If you actually listened to him in full rather than focusing on a single letter in a single quote you would know that he continually says he can not do this alone.

[BooScout]

129. I hate it when facts....

....intrude on the conversation.

[George II]

131. Yet another "inconvenient truth".

[neverforget]

40. "I don't like being bullshitted" and your candidate says this

“If it’s undecided when I become president, I will answer your question."

[Autumn]

46. "electing him is going to save America"? Where and when did he say that?

[arcane1]

52. Good luck!

[Autumn]

55. To see a person on DU lie like that just to slam

a Senator running for the Democratic nomination just floors me every time I see it. I guess I should get use to it because it's happening so often.

[arcane1]

57. Clearly he is doing something right!

[dionysus]

64. and yet you enthusiastically support a corporat candidate who has a history of riding the fence and

lying...

[BainsBane]

75. and that would be another example of what pisses me off

that I discussed right here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=482991

[dionysus]

97. i read that essay of a post before i responded. it's a bit of a gish gallop. you're quick to go

hardcore against bernie at the drop of a hat, when your own candidate has some serious shortcomings.

[cocainecowboy]

69. So you are saying you aren't willing to put up with the work to get Bernie elected?

That's exactly what Clinton was hoping for.

[dionysus]

100. they won't lift a finger for bernie... Hillary was supposed to win last time, but got smoked by

Barack... this will be PUMA: The Sequel where more Hillary supporters refuse to support Bernie, or even go as extreme as to vote republican out of revenge.

Sadly, I see Hillary winning. despite all her shortcomings she'll be hard to beat in a primary. as a bernie supporter, I won't be so bitter as to not vote for her in the general, because as bad as she is, she's better than the GOP clown car.

but it's funny, as much as an unelectable joke as Bernie is supposed to be, her hardcore supporters are raining down fire on him as if they are worried, all of a sudden.

I guess that's what happens when your candidate isn't perceived as honest or trustworthy, and makes stupid mistakes like a private email server. even if she didn't do anything wrong.. it's free ammunition for her enemies. you'd have to be very dumb (Hillary is not dumb) or very arrogant to do something like that...

[Sheepshank]

71. I do believe you have verbalized exactly they problem

The false promises and lies that do nothing more than politicalpandering. Exactly the thing that Bernie supporters claim is Hillary's methods.

The irony...the hypocrisy is so thick, some just are so mired in it they only know how keep digging...just look at the responses you are garnering.

[MannyGoldstein]

108. Might as well elect Trump or Perry, eh?

Good point.

[freshwest]

48. I get the metaphor of Koch/other money buying government influence, but gets voters on board first.

The people that always show up to vote, the fundies, RWNJs and the ones who know how to make a lot of bucks out of nepotism.

The ones who don't show up for this or that reason, or don't take the gamble to elect a winning candidate, are dilettantes who are hiding behind the 99%. Then once they 've got theirs, they always ditch them.

He knows he can't do it alone; Obama couldn't do it alone when Democrats bought into Operation Chaos 2009-2010, 2011-2012 and 2013-2014 and now 2015-2016.

But he worked around, just as FDR did when he said if they could not get the job done, he would get it done one or the other but keep trying. The quality of PBO and his clarity of vision allowed him to succeed despite great odds to begin the change.

Why do I think that Bernie will simply beat the lectern and not be able to handle it? Why do I think his supporters won't be of any help if he is elected?

Just the behavior and not the ideals that Sanders puts out. I agree with all positions that he espouses, but don't feel he's being specific except in terms of the policy he would enact with no opposition. There will be plenty of that.

[emsimon33]

62. Actually his record speaks for itself

As does Hillary's. And don't forget to note who they have placed in their campaigns and who is giving them the big bucks (In this case, Hillary has already tapped a Monsanto guy and at least 90% of her money comes from big donors.) Of the two, based on their records, I find Bernie far more trustworthy and so do other people when they are polled.

Yet, I agree with you that he can't do it alone. The first two years of his presidency may be difficult but in the mid-terms we can cull more of the DINOs and Republicans from congress and the senate until we get rid of the puppets and the sell-outs and take back the country.

In 2008, I walked over 300 miles in several states, door-to-door, for Obama, not because I believed his hopey, changey thing, but because I could NOT vote for Hillary.

In 2016, I will walk a million miles if need be, spend all of my retirement money to travel from primary state to primary state, do whatever I can to end the reign of Third Way, Neoliberal "Democrats'" control of the party.

Yes, you may not like the talk of a revolution, but then neither did Marie Antoinette.

[sabrina 1]

102. Then he's been 'appropriating' it for five decades. Kind of weird to claim that someone who

has been as consistent, a rare thing in a politician, as he has, is suddenly doing something he's done his entire life. Dems were only too happy to accept him caucusing with them for all these years. Why didn't they just tell him to 'get lost' THEN?

And NO ONE has made it more clear than he, that the PRESIDENT CANNOT DO MUCH alone.

I think you totally do not get what he has been talking about.

What he is doing is brilliant. He KNOWS the Presidency doesn't have the power to fight the now entrenched special interests. But he AND BIDEN both have stated that WE do, the people STILL have the power to help a president if they get involved in a POLITICAL Revolution. Something Dems have been begging for for years. Now that there is a chance to do so, it's odd that a few dems don't get it, or like it, no?

Which doesn't matter, millions of people who never heard of him until two months ago, definitely get it.

I can't believe how much support there is for him where I am eg, a rural area where no one ever talks about politics. I see that there are dozens of groups all over this state for him. And when I ask people why they support him, it's always the same: 'The man is honest, he's authentic, his record backs up what he is saying, I don't agree with him on everything, I'm a (fill in the blank) but this country is a mess and I'm going to vote for this guy because he UNDERSTANDS the people.

[neverforget]

11. Don't worry. Your status quo is in no danger.

[Avalux]

12. You should have been at my watch party last night. Maybe you wouldn't have written this post.

Over half those there were in their 20's, and we had a good mix of white, black and hispanic. I live in Texas and have heard similar reports from other watch parties in my city.

So what do I think of your post? Not much.

[NCTraveler]

14. in order to slay the beast, one must be in proximity to the beast.

It is a big part of what you are seeing and it goes hand in hand with the revolution verbiage being used. Sanders has had very limited effect on any national problems. He is outside of having any power to generate national change. That's not a bad thing to say. Few senators outside of those in leadership have that power. They do still have the ability in negotiations to bring home the bacon.

He is absolutely hitching on to something larger than himself in order to generate the change he believes in. It is somewhat respectable.

[arcane1]

16. Yes, he's counting on US to get involved.

When people get off their assess, and when they get those asses into the voting booth, progressives win.

It's not about him.

[Scuba]

15. Hey, if a pro-war, pro-Wall Street, pro-fracking, pro-TPP, pro-H1B Visas woman can be a Democrat ...

... so can Bernie Sanders.

[NCTraveler]

19. While I could make a slight distinction.

I'll leave it alone and just say spot on. I want Sanders in the party. He caucuses with us and like every other senator he has shown he will sacrifice on some principals if the legislation moves us forward.

[LondonReign2]

77. +10,000

[LWolf]

17. It's all about

deposing the 1% and giving the 99% opportunity to thrive.

As for the third paragraph, he's told everyone, repeatedly. He repeated it in the live stream last night.

I guess only those who are want to hear it will.

[whatchamacallit]

18. Which Democratic Party?

The democrats who voted for or against the TPP? This bogus brand allegiance has got to go. We can do better. Bernie's about what's good for America.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

20. He only likes wealthy racists!1!1!! And I NEVER hear him say bad things about Hitler or Idi Amin.

I'm glad you brought this up. It's just the sort of sophomoric hit piece I needed, and now I'm foursquare behind Hillary Clinton. He's just a horrible, horrible person. Thank you for saving me from myself.

[Dragonfli]

24. You appear to be angry because -

[ibegurpard]

25. OK

Vote for Hillary Inc.

[ladjf]

26. This post is a snarky piece of political crap. nt

[artislife]

35. Mid leveling snark at that.

[Juicy_Bellows]

51. Had to put on my dungarees to make it through. Nt.

[wendylaroux]

28. Boo Boo Boo

silly little boo.i want some icecream!!!!!

You are making me mad!!!!! NOT.

[BooScout]

31. Just had a black espresso ice cream ....

It was yummy!

[wendylaroux]

34. Yummm...

[freshwest]

45. Sounds like a powerful treat! You'll be up all night! n/t

[azurnoir]

41. Bernrage du jour - he's not REALLY a Democrat

while the whole time telling us how IT WILL BE HILLARY, if folks are so sure, why all the smears- seems like some just might be worried

[Stardust]

47. Well, someone had to pick up the "He's not a Democrat" mantle.

[NanceGreggs]

54. By his own admission ...

... Sanders is NOT a Democrat - "really" or otherwise. He is not a member of the Democratic Party by his own choice.

Why is it a "smear" to point that out? It's not like it's a secret, ya know.

[azurnoir]

90. He's running in this primary/election as a Democrat period

not as an independent, but thanks for making my point for me, if there's nothing to fear from him..........

[NanceGreggs]

106. It has nothing to do with fear ...

It has to do with someone making a factual statement.

Bernie Sanders is not a member of the Democratic Party. He never has been, and is not now. And again, that is by his own choice.

So I find it curious that so many of his supporters consider it a "smear" when someone makes that observation about a well-known and obvious fact.

[azurnoir]

111. again what part of he is running as a Democrat seems to go past you ?

now if you wish to purport the Democratic party as purist or whatever it is that is going on here , you say it's not a smear, then be my guest, myself I feel Democrats should be a bit more inclusive in who is accepted into the party, especially when they are progressives

[NanceGreggs]

112. "Running" as a Democrat ...

... and "being" a Democrat are two different things. What part of THAT seems to go past you?

No one has said that BS isn't "running" as a Democrat. But he's NOT a Democrat - and why does the mention of that fact upset you so much?

[azurnoir]

113. well if you wish to take the 'not one us' approach be my guest

not the way I'd choose to see Democrats represented but I guess I'm 'fringe'

[NanceGreggs]

133. I said nothing about any "approach" ...

I simply asked why you take issue with someone stating a fact about BS.

Why you find it necessary to extrapolate a simple query into assuming one is taking "an approach" is anyone's guess. But then I'm still wondering why you consider stating a fact a "smear".

[Armstead]

114. I suppose you'd rather have him do a Ralph Nader?

I think what people object to is the "damn if you do, damn if you don't" snarkiness of anyone who dares try to challenge the anointment of whomever the establishment has decided is going to be the symbolic opposition to the GOP.

Like Bernie is a jerk because he has chosen to run in the primary as a Democrat.

And, of course, he be attacked as a jerk if had decided to mount a challenge as a Green or a total independent because "Oh no! He might give the election to the Republicans!"

His real crime is that he is not following the script that ha been prewritten. "Support our Corporate Candidate. Don't mess up the Kabuki Dance that we have with the GOP."

[NanceGreggs]

134. A poster's comment that ...

... Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat was characterized as a "smear".

The fact IS that BS is not a Democrat. So I asked why stating a fact is a smear.

Try following the discussion. No one is talking about Nader, or Bernie being "a jerk", or "daring to challenge", or anything else you've included in your little tirade.

Bernie Sanders is, by his own choice and admission, not a member of the Democratic Party. That is a FACT, not a smear.

BS has made no secret of that fact, and has referred to that fact himself throughout his political career.

So why do so many of his supporters believe it's a "smear"?

[Armstead]

135. It's the tone

It's the tone of the OP (and others who are reflexively anti-Sanders) that gets the dander up.

It is certainly correct to say that Sanders avoided being a Democrat and preferred being an independent, but changed his mind when he decided to run for president because that is more practical and also that he didn't want to be a "spoiler" with a third party candidacy that would increase the chances of the GOP winning.

It is also possible to interpret that snidely, as the OP did, by saying that Sanders is preening arrogant opportunist, who thinks he is better than the democrats but decided to "lower" himself in a cynical attempt to advance his agenda and career, and "take over" the Democratic Party.

When it is presented in snide terms, that is going to evoke and angry response. And yes, misrepresenting his motives with that tone is a "smear."

[NanceGreggs]

136. I didn't realize ...

... that facts had to be presented in a certain "tone".

"Sanders avoided being a Democrat and preferred being an independent, but changed his mind when he decided to run for president .."

Again, not a fact. Sanders has not "changed his mind" about being a Democrat. He is still not a member of the Democratic Party.

[Armstead]

137. Facts can be presented any way one wants to present them

It's a free country (sorta).

But if one expresses oneself in snark, they will be responded to with snark, and possibly anger if there is a perception of misrepresenting motives or facts.

Whoever it is on what side of any issue or topic.

[NanceGreggs]

138. And some people persist ...

... in seeing facts as snark.

[Armstead]

139. That's flat out bullshit

I don't think you'll find any Sanders supporters who would respond negatively if someone merely points out the fact that "Sanders has not been a Democrat."

You're pro-level nitpicking and fingers-in-the-ear nyah,nyah "I can't heaeeer youuu" is an all too familiar tactic.

If you really don't see the snarky tone of the OP, then I'd suggest a course in Reading Comprehension 101. And if you don;t understand why his supporters didn;t simply say "You're right. He's not a Democrat" then you have absolutely no understanding of human nature.

But my guess is that you know those things already and are just trying to get a rise in a slightly more subtle way.

[NanceGreggs]

140. Despite your insistance ...

... on drawing all kinds of inferences from simple statements, I am not the least bit interested in getting "a rise" out of anyone.

I didn't respond to the OP, nor comment on its content. I asked someone why they thought stating that BS is not a Democrat was a "smear". It's as simple as that.

The fact that you think a simple query is fraught with all kinds of nefarious innuendo is your problem, not mine.

[Armstead]

141. Whatever...It's a fact.

I read what prompted it. And you were not making a simple query. You were being disingenuous.

I'd have a lot more respect for your response if you'd simply said that you don't approve of it, and therefore think it disqualifies him, or whatever your actual opinion was and treated the exchange on honest terms.

But in aloof true brick wall style,you simply make it personal on style over substance. And you keep repeating your assertion.

Let me spell it out for you.

The OP was based on an undiusputable fact. But the way it was presented was a snarky smear. It was responded to as such. End of story.

I would expect (and it happens) that if someone were to post an equally obnoxious screed about Hillary Clinton based on some "fact," her supporters would respond with righteous indignation and call it a smear, even though it is also stating a fact. That's totally normal behavior.

[NanceGreggs]

142. Again ...

I did not respond to the OP. I asked someone why they characterized the fact that BS is not a Democrat as a "smear".

There was nothing "personal" about it. If I characterized someone saying that HRC is a blonde female as a "smear", no doubt I would be asked why I thought so.

Why you persist in making this into something it's not is your own problem to sort out. I am really not interested.

Have a nice day!

[Armstead]

143. Because you are so stubborn...It brings out the stubborn in me

[Sheepshank]

78. Actually he's not a Dem.

Do you have a problem with the truth?

[azurnoir]

92. Nope it seems though some have a problem with him running as a Democrat

do you have the same problem with his support of Democratic policies?

[Sheepshank]

98. I have no problem with the clarification

I have problems with persons re-writing the reality and calling Bernie a Dem. He isn't. He's made it very clear he doesn't want to be a Dem.

[Sheepshank]

43. I have my own opinion for who is getting Berned. Nt

[Sheepshank]

104. Oh *snort* how clever

What an utterly amazing comeback. Articulate, on point and what an amazing zinger. Not.

[winter is coming]

49. No, it's all about ordinary schmoes and Bernie's efforts to help them.

It's not about crushing on a politician. It's not about "Party loyalty" or voting for the right colored jersey.

It's about us.

[okasha]

53. Money.

Teh Party haz it.

Teh Bern duzn't.

[LondonReign2]

79. Integrity. Honesty. Pro 99% policies

Bernie has 'em

Hillary lacks 'em

[LondonReign2]

70. Someone is feeling bitter tonight

[Sancho]

73. A quote...Bernie???

"Democratic revolutions are needed to dissolve the power now exercised by the few who control great wealth and the government. By revolution we mean a radical and fundamental change in the structure and quality of economic, political, and personal relations."
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
http://socialistparty-usa.net/principles.html

[Comrade Grumpy]

82. You say that like it's a bad thing.

[Sancho]

85. Heck no...not bad a bad thing...but sounds just like Bernie.

...and if you like Bernie, maybe you would like other parts of the Socialist Party platform?

That's your choice.

The OP started with a comment about Bernie's revolution. Several posts ask if Bernie is really a Democrat.

If you look at some Socialist Party literature, I think you can see the overlap.

[Armstead]

122. The only problem with Socialism or Capitalism is the darker side of human nature

They both need each other to rein in the excesses each can lead to when taken to an extreme.

Socialism can lead to excessive bureaucracy, and the development of an oppressive Oligarchy based on Political Power.

Capitalism can lead to a Feudal State, and the development of an oppressive Oligarchy based on Economic Power.

The problem, today is that we have gone far to far in the direction of Feudal Corporate Capitalism, without the necessary checks and balances.

In order to restore a balance we need a big doses of solutions based in ....er, call it Socialism or Liberalism or Progressive.

But we will never start to rectify that as long as efforts to restore that balance are labeled as "fringe left" or "extreme" while the perpetuation of concentration of wealth and power is labeled as "centrist" or "moderate."

[MuseRider]

81. Who ever said the Democratic Party

isn't good enough? I have never heard him say that. He just does not agree with some of what they do so he chooses his own path. Jesus, this is a crime? He caucuses with them and the DNC let him run as a dem so why this? Maybe he is good enough for them but not you? LOL. What a joke.

Surely there are better and plenty of other things to make up stuff about. This is just fucking ridiculous.

[postatomic]

83. I honestly don't know what the fuck he is doing

I have more respect for Jill Stein than I do Senator Sanders. At least she stands on her own merits and doesn't attempt to suddenly become a Democrat.

I noticed a few snarks in this thread. It seems it really isn't about supporting Sanders, it's about hating Clinton. Not exactly a thoughtful perspective.

Just my 34 cents.

[virtualobserver]

84. We get it....you prefer a candidate who promises nothing

and who doesn't stand against any of the things that her donors support.

[hootinholler]

87. That's ok

You'll still benefit when he's President.

Of course we'd rather have your help, but you'll still benefit.

[frylock]

96. It's all about Derp and feeling the Derp

[brewens]

105. Because he knows we need him. n/t

[Blue_In_AK]

109. No offense,

but you sound kind of whiny in this post.

[jfern]

110. Obviously he needs to reach out and expand his campaign to more people

He's been getting big turnout on campaign events and a lot of volunteers. And of course is much better on the issues than Hillary. But I do agree that there's a lot of work to be done for him to win the primary.

[Armstead]

115. I'm sure there's some PreFab Attack you've missed in that OP...

Just another kitchen sink "He's bad because (fill in the blank).

Well, I don't recall seeing the word "pony" or "unicorn" so maybe you missed a few

[Capt. Obvious]

120. What a shit show these threads turn out to be

Why didn't you add this to your KnR thread? Too humble?

People spend way too much time trolling each other. Everyone is better off not playing the game. Flames need oxygen to survive.

[BooScout]

123. Congratulations...

You have convinced me to end the k&r thread. If I am going to be attacked for such a thread as that then it's not worth the time and effort.

[Capt. Obvious]

125. Your KnR thread would be great

if you just linked to Pro-HRC threads.

It seems you mostly link to threads trolling Sanders supporters.

So congrats on ending the practice.

.....

Oh, I see you ended your KnR thread with a main course of victimhood and a side of dishonesty. Congrats on that too.

[cantbeserious]

126. No Citizen Need Settle For The Lesser Of Two Corporate Evils - Go Bernie Go

eom

[Myrina]

128. cough cough bullshit cough ....

n/t