General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEvery word I have heard from Bernie Sanders
regarding domestic policy and priorities could have been lifted idea-for-idea from nearly any domestic policy speech made by
Franklin D. Roosevelt,
Harry S.Truman,
John F. Kennedy,
Robert F. Kennedy,
Hubert H. Humphrey,
Lyndon B. Johnson, or
Paul Wellstone.
Explain to me again why he is on the "fringe" of the Democratic Party.
Dyedinthewoolliberal
(15,577 posts)The reaction to Bernie is an indication of how far right the politics and dialogue have been moved in this country...........
lunatica
(53,410 posts)The teabaggeratti used to have the decency to hide. Sara Palin invited them out of their homophobic, sexist, putrid closet just like Pandora opened that ill fated box and voila! - here we are in Idiocracyland.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)lunatica
(53,410 posts)The OP asked, "Explain to me again why he is on the "fringe" of the Democratic Party."
My response was to explain why everything lurched to the right since the time of those Presidents.
uwep
(108 posts)and not a Democrat, unless he changed his party affiliation recently.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)Bernie Sanders was still talking about lifting the cap which used to be a traditional Democrat idea.
but for the sake argument he is running for the Democratic nomination for all intents & purposes he changed his party affiliation.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)lunatica
(53,410 posts)The OP asked, "Explain to me again why he is on the "fringe" of the Democratic Party."
My response was to explain why everything lurched to the right since the time of those Presidents. So far to the right, as a matter of fact, that Bernie Sanders looks too leftist now.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)imnew
(93 posts)He's a man of principle
That is a very uncommon trait in all parties
Triana
(22,666 posts)Or, maybe it was him. IMO, he IS our generation's FDR.
FINALLY. A candidate with some common sense. He may not win. But at least he showed up. Unlike too many of the rest.
madokie
(51,076 posts)there is no way the masses won't turn out for this man. Lie, Cheat and Steal will not work well enough for the republiCONs to win this one. I say that with the same fire that Bernie has leading him.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)and honest man of principle that somehow became President. FDR was pretty solid, his first new deal only addressed banks but did include regulations such as Glass-Stegall put it was progressives that pushed the "Second new deal" which led to Social Security, WPA, and the Housing Act known better by Section 8 of the 1937 Housing Act. There was also things that was just rhetoric
Tax policy
In 1935, Roosevelt called for a tax program called the Wealth Tax Act (Revenue Act of 1935) to redistribute wealth. But there was more rhetoric than revenue in that proposal. The bill imposed an income tax of 79% on incomes over $5 million. Since that was an extraordinary high income in the 1930s, the highest tax rate actually covered just one individual John D. Rockefeller. The bill was expected to raise only about $250 million in additional funds, so revenue was not the primary goal. Morgenthau called it "more or less a campaign document". In a private conversation with Raymond Moley, Roosevelt admitted that the purpose of the bill was "stealing Huey Long's thunder" by making Long's supporters his own. At the same time, it raised the bitterness of the rich who called Roosevelt "a traitor to his class" and the wealth tax act a "soak the rich tax".[91]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal#Second_New_Deal_.281935.E2.80.931938.29
He also compromised with the Southern bloc to expand new deal benefits to benefit African-Americans while overall a great President Truman is truly impressive. Because of his no nonsense solving problems Committees led him to be a popular figure who FDR agreed when ad adviser suggested him for VP for reelection. As President he had a Committee on Civil Rights during an election year
From Harry Truman and Civil Rights: Moral Courage and Political Risks
Four months later his committee comes in with a report, 178 pages, beautifully documented. Its the blueprint; 35 explicit recommendations. He publicly embraces them all. Doesnt hesitate. Embraces them all. Washington Post headlines call it an explosive revolutionary report and the President just two months from the election year with a Republican Congress embraces them all. The next year he goes to his Congress, January 7th. When you start a presidential campaign year, the State of the Union is your kick-off speech. He says to the Congress, still Republican-controlled Congress, Ive got five priorities. The no. 1 priority is civil rights reform and by the way, Im going to tell you members of Congress more about it in the short term. Twenty-five days later, February 2nd, he sends the first ever comprehensive civil rights bill to the U.S. Congress, a proposal--10 points, everything, anti-lynching, voting rights, end of discrimination in interstate commerce, comprehensive civil rights bill. This is an election year. First ever. By the way, this legislation finally gets adopted in the heat of the civil rights upheaval in the 60s, but Harry Trumans there first with the blueprint.
Not surprising, a month later Gallup conducts a poll and this is where it really does become shocking for a politician--82% of those polled by Gallup opposed Harry Trumans civil rights proposal, 82%. And I have to read you Harry Truman on polls, because it really says it all, [were it] that more politicians felt this way. These are his words, not mine. I wonder how far Moses would have gone if he had taken a poll in Egypt. What would Jesus Christ have preached if he had taken a poll in Israel. Where would the Reformation have gone if Martin Luther had taken a poll? It isnt polls or public opinion of the moment that counts. Its right and wrong and leadership. Men with fortitude, honesty and a belief in right, and by the way, at that point, obviously House member Lyndon Baines Johnson was taking polls because a month after all this happens he launches his campaign for Senate, his second and ultimately successful campaign and who is public enemy no. 1? Harry Trumans civil rights proposal. He calls it a sham and a farce. So it was widespread political opposition to Harry Truman. This is an election year. Harry Truman is unflinching. He has no intention of backing down.
<snip>
At this point, Harry Trumans popularity is not increasing at all, I can assure you. The Republicans on June 24 hold their convention in Philadelphia. Come up with a dream ticket. The dream ticket for 48--Thomas Dewey, Governor of New York; on the other coast of the country, Earl Warren, Governor of California. There was so much concern in the Democratic leadership that Harry Truman could not be elected largely because of civil rights that a number of leading Democrats tried to recruit Dwight Eisenhower to be the nominee for the party. That finally collapsed. Its only on July 15th a week before the Democrat convention. That convention takes place in Philadelphia like the Republican convention. Its a free-for-all. Why? Harry Trumans civil rights proposal. Theres a fight over the plank that is legendary. Harry Truman puts forward a plank that is constitutionally anchored and calls for legislation. The state rights Democrats respond with a regressive proposal and Mayor Hubert Humphrey from Minneapolis comes in with a very explicit plank that tracks Trumans February 2nd proposal to Congress. Its a fight that would shatter the party. The more explicit plank prevails by 69 votes.
<snip>
Harry Truman makes a great speech. He wasnt a great orator but he outdid himself this night and he blamed all the ills of the country on the do-nothing Republican-controlled Congress. He also said Republican Congress, you want to make the country right. Ill give you a chance. Come back to Washington. Im calling a special session, the Turnip Day Session. Be back in un-air-conditioned Washington on July 26th. Well meet for two weeks and well see if you can deliver on your plank. No reason you cant. Youve got the leadership. Before that session started, however, the party really fragmented. July 17th then South Carolina Governor Strom Thurmond creates the Dixiecrat Party. Two days later Henry Wallace who had been FDRs vice president creates the Progressive Party. Essentially the Party is shattered. Two of the three prongs that Democrats had relied on, that FDR had relied on for his four victories are gone, the Progressives, the Southern Democrats.
The Turnip Day Congress starts on July 26th, un-air-conditioned. Cruel to do that to bring everybody back when they should be running for office, and Harry Truman was relentless. The first day back in he hits them with a political 2 x 4. He issues two Executive Orders. He doesnt need their approval, so with one, 9981 he integrates the military of the United States and what most people dont remember and historians overlook, he simultaneously issues Executive Order 9980 which integrates the vast federal bureaucracy. He essentially undoes what Wilson has done in 1913. The federal government is now integrated. The Turnip Day Session, of course, advances no agenda. Its a debacle for the Republicans and he constantly reminds people and he returns to Independence, Missouri, for the month of August because campaign started mercifully after Labor Day in those days, and he goes home to Independence with his wife and daughter who he loved, and just about everybody in Washington thinks when he comes back after campaigning, hell be a lame duck president. No one thinks Harry Trumans going to be elected president.
<snip>
Now, Harry Truman could write some nasty letters when he was irritated. He took a week before he answered this letter and I must tell you, this letter to me was one of the most instructive things I found in my research. Ill just read an excerpt of a long letter. Dear Ernie. Im going to send you a copy of the report on my Commission on Civil Rights and if then you still have that antebellum, pro-slavery outlook, Ill be thoroughly disappointed in you. The main difficulty with the South is that they are living 80 years behind the time and the sooner they come out of it, the better it will for the country and themselves. When a Mayor and a City Marshall can take a Negro Sergeant off a bus in South Carolina, beat him up, put out one of his eyes and nothing is done about it by the state authorities, something is radically wrong with the system. I cannot approve of such goings on and I shall never approve it as long as I am here. As I told you before, Im going to try to remedy it and if it ends up in my failure to be reelected, that failure will be in a good cause.
http://www.virginia.edu/uvanewsmakers/newsmakers/gardner.html
He is known for the Fair Deal & civil rights reforms he could enact with executive orders & court victories(helped by Truman's Supreme Court appointees). He has ahead of his times for American Presidents & remarkable courage that you don't see from politicians of today -- I see Bernie Sanders with similar respect & integrity attributes.
The last of his kind to live out his Post Presidency as a poor man
Once out of office, Truman quickly decided that he did not wish to be on any corporate payroll, believing that taking advantage of such financial opportunities would diminish the integrity of the nation's highest office. He also turned down numerous offers for commercial endorsements. Since his earlier business ventures had proved unsuccessful, he had no personal savings. As a result, he faced financial challenges. Once Truman left the White House, his only income was his old army pension: $112.56 per month.[177] Former members of Congress and the federal courts received a federal retirement package; President Truman himself ensured that former servants of the executive branch of government received similar support. In 1953, however, there was no such benefit package for former presidents,[178] and he received no pension for his Senate service.[179]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman#Judicial_appointments
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)a straightforward champion of the ordinary man and woman. The buck stops with Bernie, just like it did with Harry.
Triana
(22,666 posts)WHERE is this hellbent determination in today's Democratic party? Where are their SPINES and their VOICES?
FDR was this determined as well.
Yes. Sanders. That he's the only one is completely unacceptable. Sanders isn't unacceptable. I wholeheartedly support him BECAUSE of this spirit. But where the HELL are the rest?
carolinayellowdog
(3,247 posts)whereas the 1% defines the responsible centrist bipartisan Serious People
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)seem to think he's Mao.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)they'll vote for him instead of Sensible Centrists.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)We talk of Republicans voting against their self-interest all the time. And yet, here it is...
Not really.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)on where the American people are on the issues. Poll after poll proves that.
Let's start the opposite meme, THEY are on the fringe, any candidate who is Corporate Funded is FRINGE as far as an overwhelming majority of the American people are concerned.
eloydude
(376 posts)So far to the right they might as well call themselves Republican and drop the pretense of pretending to be Republican Lite...
I want to go back to the left.
mstinamotorcity2
(1,451 posts)Bernie. And have no problems with him. But everyone knows that for some reason they have turned the political process into " who's turn is it??" We do have primaries. And I would love to see a real scrap for the nomination.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)And Bernie will not fight dirty. I hope I am wrong. We need to get these ideas out.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Who in their right mind anymore, believes campaign rhetoric as opposed to a candidate's record and/or who is funding them?
We've come a long way since the Bush years and are a lot less influenced by the words they say, no matter how good they may sound, and far more influenced by their actions and who is funding them.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)anyone suggesting that we take care of the PEOPLE will seem fringe.
immoderate
(20,885 posts)The parties are detached.
--imm
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)I don't think any member of the 100-person Senate really could be considered "the fringe".
TexasBushwhacker
(20,202 posts)He warned us about the military industrial complex.
He supported large infrastructure projects like the interstate highway system.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)The Turd Way crowd wants to take it apart.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)JoeLaValle
(12 posts)Cal33
(7,018 posts)silence him.
Pharaoh
(8,209 posts)is mostly owned by a few huge corporations and a bunch of billionaires I think.
Its in their economic interested to ignore him, until they can't, then the knives will come out.
global1
(25,253 posts)They realize that Bernie's message resonates with the People. No BS - just the truth. They know if they give him the visibility that he might just walk away with the nomination and the Presidency. Then their gravy train is over. So they have to minimize him and make him look like a joke before he even gets started. We have to come to Bernie's aid. We have to talk up Bernie. We need to help him raise money. He has a shot here folks. Let's make it happen for him and for us.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)Kablooie
(18,634 posts)By today's standards.
Barry Goldwater is a good example of a mid range left-wing liberal today.
PatrickforO
(14,576 posts)But I'm with you. Every word I've heard from Bernie makes me want to vote for him. I gave him some money and as the primary season heats up, I'll give him more. I'm not sure it will do any good, but the guy genuinely cares about policies that benefit the American people. So whatever comes of it, I will be supporting Bernie.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)so add Nixon to your list and please, please drop the Kennedy brothers.
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bernie-sanders-obama-sounds-like-bush-and-clinton-117717922196.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/05/bernie-sanders-michael-froman-tpp_n_6419874.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000013
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/06/1355859/-Bernie-Sanders-To-Obama-Admin-Let-Me-See-The-Damn-TPP-Draft
As I've said before, that some people live for this kind of thing, but I find it repulsive. Matter of taste I guess.
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)And that's just the Obama stuff.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)proved herself the absolute master of the racist dog whistle during the latter stages of the nomination battle.
Or maybe a psychologist would call it 'projection'.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-05-07-clintoninterview_N.htm (Emphasis added)
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)KingCharlemagne
(7,908 posts)"Pot, meet kettle."
cui bono
(19,926 posts)you couldn't have posted a better endorsement of Bernie standing for true Democratic values. Also a stellar example of how he's not afraid of standing up to TPTB in order to fight for the working people of this country.
Why you find someone standing up for the 99% repulsive should make you question what policies and ideals you stand for and which party/candidate/politician is the one that is representing those.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Here's an example of how:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026649703
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Look into it.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)And also what are the dog whistles he's employing?
You have yet to explain anything. Can't discuss anything unless you explain what you are talking about. I don't see any use of dog whistles nor Sanders being reactionary. Please elaborate.
As to your OP that you linked to, what does that have to do with this conversation?
In any case, regarding your OP, it is a hot mess. You are actually arguing that Sanders and Warren must give fast track authority in order to just see what the TPP actually is? And that somehow the TPP doesn't exist yet? Wow.
Nevermind your other OP though, let's stick to you pointing out the dog whistles and reactionary behavior you are talking about. I don't see it. Oh, and let's add to the explanations how Sanders is being dishonest.
Response to ucrdem (Reply #23)
Hiraeth This message was self-deleted by its author.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)secondary to personalities and want to make discussions of issues into discussions of personalities. "Sen Sanders doesn't like the TPP therefore he must not like Obama."
Democrats by their very nature disagree on issues. That's a good thing.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)... I still remember how the execrable Cokie Roberts used him to smear Howard Dean when she said something like "candidates like Al Sharpton or Howard Dean, who are out of the mainstream."
The corporate media's reaction to Bernie is all too predictable. We have to win the old-fashioned way, without the aid of big media or big money. We need to think outside the (idiot) box and we need to think outside the buck.
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)... a democratic socialist ?
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)The point of the OP is that Bernie's message is classic, traditional Democratic boiler plate. Your post doesn't seem to address the OP at all.
PosterChild
(1,307 posts).... someone who identifies themselves as a "socialist" is auto-magic-ly, ipso-facto-ly, a fringe, minority figure in American politics.
If his message is simply classic liberal boilerplate, why doesn't he simply call himself a classic liberal Democrat and avoid the ideological albatross of "socialism"?
There is either more to being a socialist than simply being a Democrat or there isn't. If there isn't, why bother with distinguishing oneself as such? If there is, then he deserves to be considered "on the fringe" of the Democratic Party. In fact, he is so much so that he assiduously avoids calling himself a Democrat even though he us running in the Democratic primary for the nation's highest office. An office which would make him the head of the very Democratic party he alienates himself from.
If being "fringe" is a detriment, all I can say is that he did it to himself.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)are the lowest common denominator bogging down our political system.
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)... specific policy stances. We elect officials so that they can excersize judgement and leadership into the future. "Labels" indicate a candidate's ideology and sense of justice, which will guide her future performance in office. Specific policy stances can be shared across ideologies; while important, they are incomplete indicators.
Ideology and sense of justice are very important considerations and so called "labels" provide that important information.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)of them and teach people what they actually are and mean.
The right wing thinks liberal is a bad word. I'm proud to be a liberal. I'll tell anyone who wants to listen that I'm a liberal. They can't change what it is and people will only believe them if we shy away from being proud of what is good and right.
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)....my take is that you can run a educational campaign to teach the American public all about socialism, or you can run an effective political campaign to get elected president but that you can't do both.
I too, am a, liberal, but I am not a socialist and I'm not going to vote for one.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)The "sense of justice" and ideology of the Party runs from Paul Wellstone to Zell Miller.
You are imbuing Party labels with the ideal qualities you project.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)And why not call his stance what it is? Just like Obama called himself a moderate Republican and most of his policies are exactly that. I much prefer a democratic socialist. I like SS, medicare etc...
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)....an exclusive manifestation of "democratic socialism". They are programs to "promote the general Welfare" as the constitution puts it. Even a "moderate Republican" like Obama supports them. You might as well try to take credit for the interstate highway system.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Mnpaul
(3,655 posts)so what are we going to do about it?
Anyone can answer.
mother earth
(6,002 posts)GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)We must put the past behind us and move forward!
valerief
(53,235 posts)truth, reigns in America.
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)ohnoyoudidnt
(1,858 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)He's not "pragmatic."
Stryder
(450 posts)$
35 year voter here. First candidate I've ever given cash.
kentuck
(111,102 posts)but he is like one of those old-timey Democrats.
If he is on the fringe, then where is the middle?
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)before Ronnie Raygun. Even a moderate conservative like Ike thought trying to dismantle the New Deal was batshit crazy. Now it's the New Normal for "centrist" Democrats.
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)He calls HIMSELF a socialist.
Is "socialist" a smear ? Or a legitmate characterization of his ideology? And if that is his ideology, how does that distinguish him from traditional democrates? And if it does, why shouldn't he be considered fringe?
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Democratic politicians becoming whores/slaves/puppets of the Corporate State.
Such politicians are more in love with the money and fortune they will be entitled to once they enable their Masters to enslave and kill us.
So our nation faces among other deadly threats:
Monsanto GM death crops,
And endless wars in which the uninformed go off to fight in wars where they are very poorly equipped and their military leaders do not even have a strategy to win.
Jobs, including customer service jobs, are offshored, while people here are so very much in love with the idea that buying Apple's I phone is somehow helping themselves, when in fact doing so is destroying the planet, enslaving people in third world countries to produce product, at extremely low, slave wages, and on and on.
Fracking has been brought to us by both Republican and democratic politicians. I mean, look at how Ed Rendell sold out the state of Pennsylvania and now has an executive position inside an extremely profitable Texas Energy firm. Hillary Clinton's Stat3 department was eager to bring us the Keystone XL Pipeline.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Iwillnevergiveup
(9,298 posts)he's on the cusp.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)But so far his supporters are, IMO.
Vinca
(50,278 posts)Bernie is what most Democrats used to be.
madokie
(51,076 posts)except being our next President.
I might be totally broke by the time he takes the oath because of giving his campaign all our money but at least I'll feel I have a future lying ahead of me. Who else can I say that about? Not a fucking person is who
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Actually it a measure of the honesty of those saying it. If someone makes the claim you will know them to be a liar. [URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)malthaussen
(17,202 posts)All those listed except Wellstone died before most of the people now living were born. That means a) they're history, since anything that happened before one was born is history, and b) they are an anachronism.
It is a sobering thought that landmark cases such as Miranda and Roe v Wade were settled over 40 years ago. That means, among other things, that most of the population has never lived without them, takes them for granted, and does not feel the same urgency to protect them that those of us who lived without them do. IMO, of course.
-- Mal
CanonRay
(14,104 posts)yellowwoodII
(616 posts)Elizabeth Warren would be my first choice, but, yes, I think that I will vote for him.
Just one question that I would ask of any candidate, since this is my priority.
Where does he stand on Iran sanctions? I haven't heard an answer to that. When a candidate answers that, the answer reveals a lot about what I want to know.
treestar
(82,383 posts)He has no original ideas, but only repeats those of Presidents from more than 40 or more years ago?
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)so maybe Bernie might
jwirr
(39,215 posts)raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)When I look at the polls of what average Americans want, and the positions of Sen. Sanders, I see him tracking straight down the middle.
The only thing pulling us away from those intentions is corporate cash. This is what every investor in Wall St silently funds & supports. Corporate attacks against our democracy, our environment, our labor laws, our criminal justice system, and our future.
While others are trying to GOTV and discuss the importance of electing good people and defeating bad initiatives. They are funding the very attacks against us. Funding propaganda, lobbyists, climate change deniers, restrictive voting, redistricting, corporate apologists.
They are the only ones holding back the future we strive to create. Every dollar an extra brick in the wall against glimpses of reality.
villager
(26,001 posts)n/t
pnwmom
(108,980 posts)He has made a point of differentiating himself, by insisting on the label "Democratic Socialist" instead of "Democrat."
This wasn't something other people did to him. He put himself on the fringe with a label that only a few percent of Americans choose.
And he could still change that -- but last I heard he was still describing himself as a "Democratic Socialist."
PosterChild
(1,307 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)like to see him step up, declaring himself the old democrat of the 80's no more.
i think it is a miss step.
i think he should be working to be inclusive, not exclusive or fringe.
i hope he re thinks this. it concerns me, he might be taking himself out of the race, when it is not necessary.
i think he could mainstream, totally debunking the socialist issue.
just... my opinion. one among the many
elzenmahn
(904 posts)...and I think his message is quite inclusive as it is. He takes positions that the vast majority of Americans agree with, so how is he "fringe"?
By "inclusive", do you mean pro-bank or pro-corporate? Both of those entities represent EXACTLY THE PROBLEM that we face as a nation, and he's taking them on.
I think Bernie is doing just fine.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)and not he is running for pres, now. i explained why i thought it was the wrong direction.
we will see.
i can be equally wrong, and that is fine with me. better he make it thru as a democratic socialist, true to self.
pnwmom
(108,980 posts)And in the decades since he started using the term, fewer and fewer people are comfortable with it. Since the fall of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the Communist party, socialists have now become the far left. He wouldn't be considered a fringe politician if he, like Ted Kennedy, for example, or Jim McDermott, just called himself a Democrat.
elzenmahn
(904 posts)I would submit, because he saw the same sell-outs by alleged "Democrats" (read: Third Wayers) that we did - and up-close and personal.
He's doing just fine. It's the US of A that needs to get over its phobia of "socialism".
pnwmom
(108,980 posts)to change the label to Democrat -- a label that was good enough for FDR and Ted Kennedy -- that doesn't put him on the fringe than to change the minds of millions of voters about "socialism."
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)jimlup
(7,968 posts)despite the people. We are no longer a true democracy. I have become convinced of that.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)http://blog.4president.org/2016/2015/04/dnc-chair-rep-debbie-wasserman-schultz-statement-on-bernie-sanders-2016-announcement.html
The power structure is fine with Sanders and has already put him on the debate schedule. This strikes me as a bad idea but that's just me.
True Blue Door
(2,969 posts)Which proves that Bernie is not "on the fringe" of anything. It proves that the media is on the far-right fringe.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Somehow all of America has been convinced that the liberalism that worked for everyone, that in many cases was not even seriously questioned because it was to clearly just the right thing to do, is now some kind of wacky alien thinking impossible to contemplate.
In the meantime, mainstream Republicans routinely suggest and even try to implement things like abolishing the IRS, eliminating all right to abortion, trying to start a war with Iran, or shutting down the federal government to put a stop to ... healthcare.
Our frame of reference is gigantically off. Normal grownup countries don't snicker at ideas like protecting labor or worker pensions or building infrastructure. They don't spend their time "debating" whether science about evolution or science about climate, or whether the earth has maybe only been a few thousand years.
We have to fight for the idea that banks can't just gamble with everyone's money, take it, then extort whatever loss THEY might have suffered in the process back out of the taxpayers. And we're not winning that fight.
It's just possible the pendulum is finally ready to swing back a little closer to reality, but in the meantime it's interesting to see people snickering at the idea that anything contradictory to the mountains of hyper-capitalist nonsense, which nobody actually believes anyway, is just too impossible to contemplate.
It is possible. The insanity bubble just might burst. History will not remember Bernie Sanders-type ideas as amusingly radical. It will wonder how the loopy, trickle-down, frack the earth, "center-right" nonsense that comprises our present status quo got so radical, and why it took so long for us to do anything about it.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)As much as we my admire the Democrats you mention, I have to wonder if any of them could get the Democratic nomination today. Having Sanders in the race will give Democrats an opportunity to choose between at least two different concepts of what it means to be a Democrat.