Keith Ellison and Bernie Sanders: How To Remake the Democratic Party

[portlander23]

Keith Ellison and Bernie Sanders: How To Remake the Democratic Party
Keith Ellison and Bernie Sanders
In These Times

Bernie Sanders: The painful truth is that despite President Obama’s strong victories in 2008 and 2012, the Democratic Party has lost enormous political ground over the last eight years. The Republicans have just won the White House. The Republicans now control the Senate. The Republicans now control the House. Republican governors now control almost two-thirds of the statehouses in this country, and over the last eight years Democrats have lost some 900 legislative seats from one end of America to the other. That is the simple, indisputable truth. Clearly, whatever the leadership of the Democratic Party has been doing over the last few years has failed, and we need fundamental change.

Keith Ellison: If I told you that you had an opportunity to fight for people who felt vulnerable and scared in this Trump America, would you do it? If I told you that you had a chance to stand up and fight for working people, would you do it? If I told you that you could be the hero of folks who pour the cement, who teach the classes, who take care of the folks in the hospital, who take care of the children, who cook the food—I mean the hard-working people of America—would you step up and do something for them?

This is what we got to do: Right now we got to reset the future of the Democratic Party. We got to reset the Democratic party on the basis of grassroots activism. We got to reset the Democratic Party on the basis of working people who are striving every single day to make a better life for themselves and their families right here in America. I’m talking about African Americans, white Americans, Latino Americans, Native Americans. I’m talking about Asian Americans, about people who are Jewish and Muslim and Christian and Buddhist and Hindu and those who have no faith at all. I’m talking about folks like you and me, folks like us that need to say that the Democratic Party has got to be democratic, and it starts with getting some leadership in there that's going to fight for that democracy. I'm telling you right now, this is the moment we have been waiting for: The time for us to stand up and fight back and reclaim our nation. Y’all ready?

The Democratic Party should be the party of the people. The Democratic Party should be the party for those who want a better future for their children and grandchildren. It should be a party that invests in workers and protects their ability to organize and fight for a fair wage in good working conditions. The Democratic Party should be a party that believes everyone should have equal access to the American Dream and equal rights before the law. The Democratic Party should say it doesn't matter what your color is, we're going to treat you with fairness and equality and respect. It doesn't matter who you love and go to bed with at night; it doesn't matter who your closest of kin is, they are your choice and we respect and honor that choice. That's what the Democratic Party should be. The Democratic Party should say whether you were born in America or whether you came here, we respect you. We believe that the Democratic Party should be the party of, by and for the people.

... We got to fight for economic justice; we got to make sure that prosperity for working people is available to them and that they have it. We don't need to decide between social justice and economic justice—we got to have all of that justice together. Do we not? You know I've heard people talk about the white working-class versus the rising new American electorate. Well let me tell you something, we got to stand for both. We got to stand for all; we can never sacrifice between the two. If we don't stand up for both, we’re not going to have neither one. Because they would use tribalism and racial manipulation to lower our wages. Once they get us fighting with each other on the basis of these things, they’re always going to come take the money. We've got to stay together.

[Grey Lemercier]

1. Bernie is not even a Democrat, so no thanks

[stopbush]

26. Agreed. If Sanders can't step up and join the D Party, then screw him.

Any success he's had as a Senator or a presidential candidate is due entirely to support from the D Party. It's time he shat or got off the pot.

[eniwetok]

50. Maybe the PARTY is the problem... not Bernie

Bernie is an old fashion FDR liberal Dem. It's the PARTY that largely gave up this tradition. So maybe the Party needs to come home.

[tinrobot]

61. If Bernie joined, we'd be one step closer to the party you want.

By staying aloof, he does not support the party.

[lapucelle]

126. Sanders himself eschews the "democratic" label.

He is not an FDR liberal democrat. Sanders defines himself as a democratic socialist who is independent of party affiliation. He should start his own party and stop messing with mine. He's done enough harm already.

[Beartracks]

54. Yeah, screw the Independents in this country!

Their opinions are worthless to us because they won't join our party!



==================

[eniwetok]

55. I'm an Independent but some here want me to bugger off. n/t

[KittyWampus]

62. Please go start "Independent Underground". Maybe that would help.

[eniwetok]

69. thanks for being obnoxious...

It's people like you that chase people away from the Democratic Party when you need all the goddamn allies you can find.

According to Gallop 2016 Oct 5-9

Republicans 27%
Independents 36%
Democrats 32%

http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

[Beartracks]

73. Eh? I'm a Democrat.

I just don't think we need to live in an echo chamber like our "friends across the aisle."

And I don't think rejecting constructive criticism just because it came the "outside" is necessarily a vigorous way to improve. Nor is thinking we don't need to improve.

We can always reject feedback based on its own merits, determining whether it's constructive, or whether suggestions are applicable, or whether changes might be effective... But not just reject it out-of-hand because it came from a neighbor instead of a family member.

================

[treestar]

123. well they don't get to remake the party

Don't understand why anyone thinks that would be even fair. How do they remake what they aren't part of?

[yurbud]

57. no one gives a rat's as about labels. they want to know if they are going to be helped or hurt

[Grey Lemercier]

65. Bernie trashed Hillary with a RW meme: "That's just the truth. Running against the most unpopular

presidential candidate in history, the Republicans have just won the White House.”

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8387036



The results are now final: Clinton wins popular vote by nearly 3 million

http://www.businessinsider.com/popular-vote-trump-clinton-2016-12?r=US&IR=T&IR=T

Hillary Clinton secured nearly 3 million more votes than President-elect Donald Trump in the final popular vote tally, which by Wednesday morning was certified in all 50 states and Washington, DC.

The Democratic presidential nominee ended up with more than 65.84 million votes, compared with the more than 62.97 million ballots cast for the president-elect.

Of course, Trump won the Electoral College and thus the presidency by pulling off narrow wins in traditionally Democratic states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan, while Clinton ran up higher vote totals than President Barack Obama did in the 2012 election in states like California, Texas, and Arizona.

Clinton's popular vote total fell just short of Obama's 2012 result, by fewer than 75,000 votes. Trump secured the most votes of any Republican presidential candidate in history.

In terms of overall percentage, Trump's 2.1% loss in the popular vote was the third-lowest mark for a victor in the past 49 elections. Trump's share of electoral votes ranked 46th out of 58 elections.

snip


so, NO, his opinions are NOT welcome

[G_j]

120. his opinions are not welcome by you

..that is.. meh

[RiverStone]

129. For fucks sake, let the Bernie bashing go already!

Hillary said during the primaries healthy competition is good for the party. What does more Bernie bashing do at this point?

Bernie fired up a lot of voters and brought a valuable message into the mix

We have a fascist at the gate. We need to UNITE and put all focus against tRump.

[Grey Lemercier]

131. I am simply calling him out on HIS actions and words.

Dismissively calling for an end to identity politics (ie. it's under the bus yet again for us PoC, LGBTQ, women, etc) and his adaptation of inherently RW memes to denigrate Hillary. Not to mention his leaving, yet again, a party he now tries to hector on how to conduct itself.

[ehrnst]

133. When people stop saying things like "Well, Bernie would have won, so we should listen to his plans"

Then I will believe that people want to move on.

Many Bernie fans refused to move on after the primaries, and Bernie did a lot to feed that resentment.

[G_j]

137. Try addressing the substance of the article

I suppose that is too much to ask..

[HopeAgain]

76. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt

This is the attitude that will kill the party. Shall we officially rename as the small tent party?

[Grey Lemercier]

78. What am I in denial about? Bernie cut and ran as soon as the elections were over, but now he

wants to tell a party he refuses to even be a member of how to organise itself? Plus, he trashes Hillary using RW memes, and tells people we need to move beyond identity politics (which is definitely code for screw us PoC, LGBTQ and women, of which I am a member of all 3 groups). I am not the one in denial.

[HopeAgain]

87. Definition of Insanity

You seem to be in denial that we have lost control of the House, the Senate, the White House and the most of the State legislatures and Governors. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

What about the displaced coal minors in Tennessee? What about the laid-off worker force in the rust belt? Do they not count if they are not PoC, LGBTQ and women? Maybe the truth is that the Democratic Party is not ignoring them, but dollars to doughnuts they feel like we are, and that is what counts when they pull the voting lever...

Bernie has ideas that might work... you can choose to keep whistling by the graveyard, or we can all take a critical look at our Party and try to figure out what changes need to be made.

[Grey Lemercier]

93. we need to double, triple, quadruple down on the base,not go chasing some "never coming back" Reagan

Democrat racists, rural or otherwise.

People like me are the future, we have the demographics on our side, now the party needs to full invest in us, once and for all. We need to concentrate at state and local levels too. If we do not make gains in the 2018 and 2020 state legislatures races, we will not have a chance of getting back the US House before 2032 at the earliest (due to the post-2020 Census redistricting). The US Senate is probably lost to us until 2024, as 2018 is going to be brutal, perhaps the Rethugs go to 60 seats (the map is THAT bad, we have only one shot at a flip, Heller in Nevada, maybe maybe Flake in Arizona, whilst we have 11 to 13 hard, hard races), depending on how Trump and the 'Pugs do over the next 2 years. The 2020 and 2022 Senate map is just not enough if the Repugs have 57 to 61 seat post 2018.


Bernie's way is not the future, and yes I am aware (probably more than you) of the deep systemic hole we are in. Women, PoC, LGBTQ don't give a toss about long term economics when you have direct threats from RW racists and xians who want to ERASE us NOW. The Republicans have won with racist white skin colour and fundie xian identity politics. We need to crush their numbers with our own brand on steroids. We have the numbers, but we need to truly instill the urgency of once and for all taking over the country via our majority minority soon-to-come status.

[HopeAgain]

121. So people like me (white males) are just the past?

I feel like you just proved my point. Lyndon Johnson managed to get through the Social Security Act AND the Civil Rights Acts. They used economic change to get into a position to make social change. It's never coming back? No wonder so many rural States have gone red, what do you offer them? Look, I'm not for any "male, white establishment," and I think the alt-right stuff is scary, but if we decide to write off huge portions of the population because you believe they are all irretrievable racists, the backlash is only going to get worse.

[Grey Lemercier]

130. Not that you are the past at all, but our base is simply not

showing up to vote. I am in no way saying you are the slighest bit bad at all. Intelligent and fair white people will naturally support our side. But if the party tries to pander to actual racists and reactionary people we will further alienate an already disenchanted and disenfranchised huge bloc of people. Bernie's dismissive call to end identity politics sounds like a dog whistle to us minority folk.

[elleng]

77. Cut this OUT!

Senator Sanders has more Democratic party principles in his BONES than many 'official' Democrats, and folks should recognize it. IF Democrats (including DUers) don't, they will be confirming, and adding to the difficulties Democrats and other progressives have and WILL have, for the future.

[Grey Lemercier]

79. No, I will not

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8388541

[Tarheel_Dem]

98. You FIRST!

[Act_of_Reparation]

81. One thing the Democrats can afford to do right now is alienate potential supporters, AMIRITE?

[elleng]

82. You are right IF :sarcasm:

[Act_of_Reparation]

84. You can pretty much assume everything I say is sarcastic unless otherwise stated.

That wasn't sarcastic, btw.

[elleng]

86. Gotcha!

[ehrnst]

134. Oh. You mean "listen to Bernie, cos people who weren't Democrats liked him?"

One thing that the Democrats can afford to do now is alienate the groups that made them the party of progress, AMIRITE?

[Tarheel_Dem]

89. +1. What you said. Bernie did immeasurable damage to a party he doesn't even belong to.

So many are trying to rehab his image, but I predict that as time moves on, Sanders will become as despised among Democrats as Ralph Nader.

[lindysalsagal]

112. You know you wouldn't be saying that if he had won.

[Grey Lemercier]

115. He didn't even win the primary of a party he is now not a member of.

Once again.

[alarimer]

118. Ignore the issues and continue to lose, then.

Stick with the same old establishment tactics. How has that worked out? Blame everything else but the Party for losing and you will continue to lose.

[ehrnst]

135. Bernie has a stake in dividing the party, and benefits from portraying it as "a failure"

because they "didn't listen to him."

When Bernie dismissed Planned Parenthood and the Black Congressional Caucus as "establishment groups" all I wanted to say to him was GIVE ME a reality where they are "establishment."

Bernie has a PAC and a book. He's been a bitter old man for awhile because when it was neccessary to work with other progressives, he acted like he was the smartest one in the room, and would not listen to any dissent from his ideas. So he created a situation where he was not liked, and people rolled their eyes when talking about him.

Thousands of people who never worked with him, or under him supported him, and now he's getting that sweet revenge on all those 'establishment types' who got things done without him by torpedoing the party and Hillary's credibility in any way he can.

Letting him take the reigns of a party he won't even stoop to join is a recipie for driving away those 'establishment' types who have been doing the damn work for the party.

Ever wonder why Bernie won't trash Chuck Schumer, that most establishment of establishment Dems (though he won't stop his followers from doing so)? Chuck Schumer handed Bernie his Senate seat. If you don't believe me, look it up. Bernie is just fine with the 'establishment' when it serves his own ambitions. Why do you think that he jumped on an establishment party ticket at the last second.

Bernie, in large part, is in this for what it will do for Bernie, not the Democratic Party.

[Dulcinea]

2. Give them something real!

At some point, most Trumpketeers will realize that the modern-day carny pitchman will never deliver on all his promises, & the Dems should welcome then back. Dems can accomplish that by showing them what's in the platform for them, not just talking about it like the Repubs.

[randome]

3. Obama is the perfect example of what we need more of: dynamism and smarts.

Enough with running septuagenarians and thinking we can 'get by' on that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[ehrnst]

6. Obama is 'old' and 'establishment' by the standards of many in that camp.

And Bernie is a spring chicken!

Don't discount age and experience. That is a mistake that our culture makes to its detriment.

[randome]

16. Obama is my age and I would prefer someone younger.

But he has a dynamism and attention to detail that is rarely equaled. If Sanders or Clinton demonstrated that same level of energy, I would have nothing to say about age.

As much as I disdain the whining 'anti-PC' crew from the right, I see this stubborn refusal to take into account age as wrong-headed PC 'orthodoxy'. The odds are vastly against an older individual having Obama's kind of intellectual heft. That's simple observation.

Obama was a winner because even the lackluster Millennials were drawn to him. We need someone of his caliber again and, as I said, the odds are against another septuagenarian being able to fill that void.

My opinion remains, as always, subject to revision.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[LanternWaste]

21. you can no doubt provide peer-reviewed evidence to support your allegation, yes?

"he odds are vastly against an older individual having Obama's kind of intellectual heft. That's simple observation..."

Then you can no doubt provide peer-reviewed evidence to support your allegation, yes? Unless of course, a simplistic observation merely means "editorial lacking evidence and based on bias..."

[randome]

29. Most of DU is based on observation.

Neither Sanders nor Clinton demonstrated the same mastery of detail or sheer political brilliance that Obama demonstrated. That's only my observational opinion.

As for supporting data: Obama won greater victories while Sanders and Clinton both lost. There may be a dozen reasons for those different outcomes but the one I see is represented by dynamism. IMO, that kind of disparity is best explained by age.

The 90s are so last century. Give us another Obama and we'll be better. He/she could even be a 90 year-old Obama and then I'd truly shut up about age, eat my hat, whatever.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Ace Rothstein]

36. I think Clinton has the mastery of detail.

But she doesn't have the political brilliance of Obama. She also has trouble communicating said detail which obviously wasn't an issue for Obama.

Republicans always ripped on Obama for being a community organizer but I think it is why he ran such successful campaigns. That combined with being really damn smart.

[randome]

85. She did and does have the mastery of detail.

I think you're right, the only thing she lacked was being able to communicate that effectively. That's certainly not the sole reason she lost but it was something that worked against her.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[SidDithers]

4. Better believe it!...nt

Sid

[ehrnst]

5. When Bernie lowers himself to become a Democrat, he can have a say

right behind all the others who have acutually been involved in Democratic campaigns in the various statehouses, congress and the Senate.

When he comes to the conclusion that race, gender, orientation, and disability issues are inextricably intertwined with economic and health care crises in this country, then he will have a place at the table with the Party that works for those groups.

Not before.

[seaglass]

7. You forgot this part:

“The painful truth is that despite President Obama's strong victories in 2008 and 2012, the Democratic Party has lost enormous political ground over the last eight years.”

“That's just the truth. Running against the most unpopular presidential candidate in history, the Republicans have just won the White House.”

https://www.c-span.org/video/?420110-1/representative-keith-ellison-discusses-agenda-dnc

@18:14

Bernie, still dead to me.

[Maven]

15. Yup. Fuck him. nt

[otohara]

51. Ditto n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

90. + a million.

[Skittles]

104. I agree with that assessment

[ehrnst]

106. Seaglass's assessment or Bernies? (nt)

[Skittles]

109. Maven's

[uponit7771]

23. Fuck him... after that deviive comment he's at the bottom of my list

[stopbush]

30. This from the guy who wasn't popular enough with Ds to win the nomination.

Typical.

[think]

31. Is Trump NOT the most unpopular candidate in history?

http://2paragraphs.com/2016/12/bernie-sanders-calls-trump-most-unpopular-in-history/

[uponit7771]

38. That's NOT what Ellison said in context, the republicans weren't running a candidate against trump

.... so the only person left is Clinton.

“That's just the truth. Running against the most unpopular presidential candidate in history, the Republicans have just won the White House.”

it's a bullshit fucked up statement at best

[think]

42. Sanders has repeatedly called Trump the most unpopular candidate and Ellison

No doubt was reiterating the same thing. Take it the other way if you like but Trump is known to be the most unpopular candidate in history

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/21/the-last-presidential-candidate-who-was-as-unpopular-as-donald-trump-david-duke/?utm_term=.f25ae1240f3a

[seaglass]

48. uponit - Bernie is the one quoted, not Ellison. Just want to make sure there is no

confusion about who is responsible.

[bravenak]

32. Dead to me too

[Ace Rothstein]

39. I don't think he was calling Hillary the least popular candidate in history.

[seaglass]

49. I don't see any other way to interpret it. Please explain. n/t

[Ace Rothstein]

88. I think he's saying the Republicans ran the least popular candidate in history and still won.

And that people who don't think the party has to change can hear that and still think it doesn't have to change.

[KittyWampus]

63. Holy Mackerel. First I watched Sanders redefine "political correctness" and now he flat out lies

about Obama's popularity.

Or is he not lying and is just really misinformed?

[Lil Missy]

91. Not hardly the most unpopular according to her vote tally.

More Hillary hatred on a DEMOCRATIC site.

[ehrnst]

105. Yeah, he's going to push that as long as he can.

The little shiv he put into the campaign with his "Tell Hillary to Oppose DAPL NOW" effort to collect emails of potential donors via a pointless yet petty "petition" (when Obama was the only one who could actually do anything) showed that he was really planning on making a loss part of his marketing plan.

I guess that's one way he can extend that career just a litttttttttle longer....

[treestar]

124. when she won the popular vote that was

especially unjustified.

[Paladin]

8. I agree: Until Bernie's an actual Democrat, to hell with his advice. (nt)

[Dustlawyer]

9. Tough crowd here this morning.

Have we become the Party of labels, "Bernie is not a Democrat..." vs. policy. Or maybe its butt hurt over Hillary losing and Bernie has to take the blame, whatever we need to get over it.

We have had our ass handed to us for a reason. We do need to understand why and then do something about it. Its the campaign finance stupid! Americans are tired of corrupt politicians selling us out to Special Interests. While this is about to get real bad, it will be the thing that drives voters to our Party should we get our act together and get candidates that have no allegiance to Big Donors.

Lets look to the future and try to take advantage of the mistakes the Republicans are going to be making right and left. We also need to try to block everything they do in a role reversal of the last 8 years.

[BREMPRO]

18. well said.. n/t

[PatsFan87]

22. Some are willing to cling to a losing strategy because that strategy props up the kind of candidates

they like. Even though these same people scream from the rooftops about party unity, doing what's best for the party, all of this being about policy, etc.- they don't seem to care that our party has been hemorrhaging seats across the country. Clearly their way of doing things isn't working but they're too stubborn to either give up some power or listen to new voices. Kind of ironic how Bernie supporters were told to suck it up, get in line behind Hillary, and do what's best for the party. Now, when we clearly need a change from past leadership, the people who were telling Bernie supporters to grow up are stomping their feet like children because their feelings got hurt. You can't write this stuff.

[mythology]

111. Wouldn't that logic apply to both camps? Sanders didn't win either.

I think it would be smarter to agree on the things we agree on, work on those and on limiting the damage Trump will do and find candidates for 2018 and 2020.

[ehrnst]

117. I think that we don't agree on what a "losing strategy" is. Bernie lost.

And Bernie was the one encouraging foot stamping in his followers, not contradicting the wild rumors that the DNC had "roughed him up" when that cut on his cheek was likely a biopsy for melanoma. Or correct the urban legend that "FDR was forced to endorse his opponent, then went on to win the primary."

He was busy negotiating for a private jet from the DNC before he would 'release' his delegates, and perhaps tell his followers that she was a better option than Trump.

His PAC's 'petition' to "tell Hillary to oppose DAPL NOW!" was a pointless exercise in activism (Obama was the only one who could do anything about it) but a subtle shiv in the campaign to remind his supporters that he, not Hillary, was really the moral choice. It was, , however, a tried and true way to collect emails of people who could be dunned for donations later.

I think it would be foolish to listen to the loser of a primary in a party that he will not stoop to join, but continues to data mine for donors and book purchasers in an effort to prolong his career, about where said party should be going.

His "I am ashamed of Democrats" speech after the election was shameless self-promotion.

[uponit7771]

24. read psot 7...that's why...fuck him

[jack_krass]

44. Its pretty much true, maybe off by 1... (just an observation) funny how you can (and often do)

Say "f-him" in reference to BS.

If someone said "f-her" in reference to a certain losing candidate, they'd be tared and feathered, dipped in boiling oil, drawn and quartered, fillayed and eaten, then called a sexist, then called a racist for good measure.

I find this hypocritical, and sexist in a reverse sort of way.

[ehrnst]

119. She isn't trying to use Bernie's loss of the primary to get emails to raise money or sell a book.

There's little to say "fuck her" about, like there is a shameless self promoter who is trying to prolong his waning career.

Is that clearer? It's not about him having a dick, it's about him behaving like a carpetbagger.

[jack_krass]

122. Its not something I'd ever say about him or her, just pointing out the hypocrisy, and

Speaking "shameless self promotion", You're really going to go there? Really? Who has leveredged her position of power to earn *hundreds* of millions by giving speeches ?

[ehrnst]

132. Bernie knows that discrediting Hillary pushes his agenda.

And his PAC.

Comparing Hillary's speaking fees to Bernie's discrediting her and her campaign is a complete non-sequitur. A desperate one that shows that you have bought into the "you must revile Hillary in equal measure to liking Bernie" manifesto that so many fell for, and he continues to feed.

Bernies "I'm ashamed of the Democrats" (ME ME ME ME ME) statement was completely self serving, and meant to further divide the party that he won't even join, for his own benefit.

[stopbush]

35. Er, at its very base, Party IS policy and policy is party.

I and many others refuse to accept Sanders' "why I am not a registered Democrat" apologies. I know bullshit when I hear it. I know noncommitment when I hear it. I know empty, dead-end pronouncements when I hear them.

There's a reason that Sanders' appeal to voters was in large part the same appeal Trump had to voters: rigged system, corrupt Hillary, pie-in-the-sky policies.

BTW - how did that "most-progressive platform in decades" with which Sanders held the platform committe hostage for weeks work out for us? Another politically expensive effort that now lies on the trash heap of history.

[KittyWampus]

64. And yet Sanders doesn't know the meaning of "political correctness", said Obama was unpopular

and still takes gratuitous swipes at the Democratic party.

So it isn't just "labels" as some here assert.

It's Sanders.

[nini]

108. But we didn't have our asses handed to us

You don't get your ass handed to you when you have about 3 million more votes than your opponent.

There's a lot of things Democrats need to work on but let's be honest about it.

[BREMPRO]

11. First time I've seen anything written by Ellison

Good general message, but not well articulated or particularly inspiring. And wow is that poor grammar and use of English,. ,"We got to" and " we're not going to get neither one" ? Maybe that's nit picking, but can't we do better? I want a spokesman for the Dems that is articulate, inspiring, engaging and can pull Dems together and draw independents to the party. Not sure this is the one.

[Locrian]

12. well, I hear you - but we got beat....

by a man-child with the debate skills of a 12 yo, with barely the ability to string 4 words together...

What we need is honesty and passion - someone with the ability to think tactically and strategically. I'd like the whole package, but right now appealing to the masses may need to take a different strategy.

[NewJeffCT]

14. Both parties do much better when running somebody charismatic

Trump, despite all of his YUGE flaws, is a charismatic TV presence. People want to watch him - even if it's to see if he says something else crazy and outrageous.

Obama was far more charismatic than McCain or Romney.

Bush had that down home country charm, even if it was fake. Both Kerry and Gore were very competent, but also bland.

Bill Clinton was also extremely charismatic, while Bush Sr and Dole were not.

In 1988, Dukakis was a dud and Bush was the less bland of the two.

In 1984, Reagan was the charisma candidate and Mondale was bland and uncharismatic.

Solution - run somebody charismatic for president in 2020. Michelle Obama? Julian Castro? Cory Booker? Not sure who else?

[BREMPRO]

17. very good observation..seems obvious Charisma seem to be more important to most voters than policy.

i like your solution!

[NewJeffCT]

19. Thanks

I'm sure I stole it from somebody else from here or from Daily Kos. But, it did stick with me.

Seems like Republicans do well with pseudo authentic types - George W Bush, Trump, Reagan.

I'd add Elizabeth Warren to the list of charismatic Democrats.

[IronLionZion]

136. Of course it is

Most voters don't get into detailed policy analysis or even think about stuff the same way as the folks on political discussion forums like DU. It is much simpler for them. They like the candidate who makes them feel good.

I felt good about Hillary, but many did not.

[Caliman73]

20. You forgot Elizabeth Warren

She has the ability to explain policy in a very accessible way. She has fire and passion as well.

However, focusing only on 2020 is the way Democrats tend to lose. We need to recruit people like the above to run for local and state races so that in the next 5 to 10 years, the only choices we have are, the smart progressive candidate, or the smart progressive candidate, and not, the guy who has been in office forever, who has voted with Republicans 40% of the time because he's "bipartisan".

[stopbush]

37. Er, the non-charismatic Poppy Bush won the presidency.

[NewJeffCT]

45. Yes, but

he was running against the even less charismatic Mike Dukakis. I did state that above in my post.

[stopbush]

46. Splitting hairs on who was less charismatic, are we not?

[Crunchy Frog]

114. Lost the nomination running against the charismatic Reagan.

Won the election against the even less charismatic Dukakis, and lost against the extremely charismatic Bill Clinton. I'm sensing a pattern here.

[Crunchy Frog]

110. 1984, my first election.

The party saw fit to nominate a sack of potatoes to run against one of the most charismatic presidents we've ever had. I voted for him proudly, but I was in the distinct minority that year.

Yes, I believe that charisma is very important. Large numbers of people vote with their feelings more than their intellect. Running a candidate is like trying to sell a product. If you try to sell a bland product, using a bland message, you will generally lose.

This seems to be a point that Democrats are loathe to grasp. They seem to really want to believe that if the product is of better objective quality, or ticks the right set of boxes, that it will sell itself by default, but that's just not how human nature works.

[NewJeffCT]

113. I missed 1984 by a few weeks

My 18th birthday was in December of 1984 after the election - I think I would have been able to vote if I had turned 18 in December of 2016, but back then it was pretty strict. So, I had to wait till 1988 to vote Dukakis - I learned my lesson there. I liked him a lot and remember predicting in a politics class in college that he would win the nomination well ahead of time. Ever since then, however, I've never gotten really fired up about any Democratic nominee or primary candidate. I knew that whoever won the nomination would be better than Bush in 92, Dole in 96, Bush in 2000 and 2004, McCain, Romney, Trump, etc. I never really even paid that much attention in the primaries. So, I never loved Bill Clinton or Al Gore, nor John Kerry nor Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton. I happily voted for them all, but would have just have happily voted for Bill Bradley, Howard Dean or Joe Biden or whoever was the nominee.

[LeftInTX]

127. This is gonna sound lame, but I found Dukakis fairly charismatic

But it is because I'm Armenian and Dukakis had that same kind of charm.
I was really excited to have a Greek American president.

[jack_krass]

47. I like Keith and his message, but it wont be popular here.

[Emilybemily]

13. Bullshit

The Democratic Party does not need to be remade. We need to fight back against the asshole cheating repukes and expose them when they destroy the country.

BTW, shut up Sanders. You are not a Democrat.

[uponit7771]

25. Amen... Sanders leaving out Comey and voter suppression sounds like sour grapes

[Gothmog]

34. Yep

[JHan]

27. So the party must be remade in one man's image and likeness...

LOL.

It doesn't get more narcissistic than that, this is why I despise populism.

[white_wolf]

28. If Keith and Bernie are the future of the party then count me in!

Their message is exactly what we need right now. Sad to see so many liberals and progressive turning their back on building a movement to help the working class and poor.

[otohara]

52. Count Me Out

not after the hate and division Sanders and his fugly surrogates caused.

I don't even care anymore - the damage they did is beyond repair.

[white_wolf]

67. The only ones spreading hate and divsion here are hardcore Clinton supporters.

Sanders campaigned for Clinton, he asked his supporters to vote for her and most of us did. Plenty of us worked on her campaign or gave money and we still get blamed for her loss. It's especially ironic considering how many times Sanders' supporters were told that we weren't needed. Well, you can't have it both ways. For the record, I'm using the general "you" here. I

[otohara]

70. We Were In Hiding

During the primary/GE - I had a feeling the anger/hate generated by Sanders/surrogates towards Her would sink us in the end and it did.

I don't know what you're talking about I saw crowds of people spewing hate and calling her liar, liar, liar and lock her up - burn the witch throwing dollar bills - ruining our convention - we didn't do that to your candidate.

[white_wolf]

71. The fact is the vast majority of Sanders supporters voted for Clinton.

Sanders backed her and his supporters backed her. Regardless, the election is over. Clinton lost and that is NOT Sanders fault. It lies with Comey, Russia, AND Clinton herself

In regards to your feeling, well I had a feeling that if Clinton was the nominee then we would lose and we did. Many of Sanders supporters warned that it would happen. Many of them tried to warn Clinton's campaign that she needed to focus harder on those states that she lost. Her campaign ignored that advice.

[otohara]

75. Not Enough Of Them Did

Especially the Millennials #NeverHillary worked with white young liberals
Killer Mike & Cornell West helped drive down young black vote...

Peer pressure is a powerful tool and they IGNORED Sanders - because he became a sellout with many of them the moment he endorsed - they're the ones who sunk us.

https://ww2.kqed.org/lowdown/2016/11/14/how-millennials-voted/

This is what stuck with Millennials - this anger and now look who's going to be the SOS!

http://ijr.com/2016/09/695337-7-times-bernie-sanders-burned-hillary-before-warning-folks-against-voting-3rd-party/

My son's hipster friends were hoping like hell Radiohead's single"Burn The Witch" which was released during the primary was about Hillary. They were disappointed to find out the song was written 3 years prior.

[nini]

95. Too bad you didn't work on the Bernie people who threw protest votes away

That's where the problem is.. Damn right Hillary people are pissed.

[Gothmog]

33. I have met and like Keith Ellison but I do not support his bid for DNC chair

I do not want a Sanders supporter to be DNC chair

[Fresh_Start]

40. Bernie...how many seats does your party hold?

at either a state or federal level?

[Thinkingabout]

41. This sounds like Ellison and Sanders is not happy with the Democratic Party and wants their own

party. Nothing wrong with that, they can make their own rules and set up the committees however they want. Don't come to my house and tell me what kind of furniture you want in my house.

[masmdu]

43. Shouldn't "we got to" be "we've got to"?

[HoneyBadger]

53. That distinction is what contributes to the negative description of Democrats by Obama

Latte sipping grammar is not inclusive enough

[masmdu]

58. By "latte sipping grammar" do you mean clear and understandable?

[HoneyBadger]

59. I felt that both were clear and understandable

Perhaps one is more correct, but I feel that such a distinction is divisive to potential voters

[masmdu]

60. Or perhaps it is off putting to potential voters who think clear and understandable communication is

tied to effectiveness.

[HassleCat]

56. We would lose some things.

Money being the big thing. Many corporate donors would give to the other side. We would also lose all those Bright Young Minds who conduct polls and focus groups.

And I'm going to be brutally honest now. We would lose many minority voters, particularly black voters. They are not so different than their "white working class men" counterparts because they see politics as a zero sum game. Any time and attention we spend trying to attract millenials, soccer moms, coal miners, etc will be perceived as a snub at best, racism at worst.

[underthematrix]

68. As an African American, I want the Dem party

to focus on the white working class. I want African Americans to focus on African Americans. We're making gains in BlackExcellence and BlackWealth. What we need to do is rebuild our communities as centers of thriving excellence and wealth. African Americans will vote for the interest of the people because we vote our interests and not our feelings.

[Starry Messenger]

66. Sanders is going to be a boat anchor on Eliison.

If he is smart, he will distance himself from the Senator's constant negativity.

Perez looking better all the time.

[Justice]

74. Well said.

[Tarheel_Dem]

96. YES! Ellison should be smart enough to know that there are hard feelings from traditional Democrats,

and the 3 or 4 million more of us who voted for Hillary in the primaries.

[Starry Messenger]

97. I agree.

I really like Ellison-but...I wandered by the Our Revolution FB page to see what the scuttlebutt was over there about this DNC race, and the comments there are a hot mess.

I don't know why he'd want to hitch his wagon to this, frankly. My union president endorsed him, she was a Hillary primary supporter, and they are still abusing her roundly for it over there. Maybe people are hoping the lefty mcleftersons will come in if Ellison wins, but experience shows that nothing is ever enough, you know?

[Starry Messenger]

138. I must be psychic--

https://twitter.com/keithellison/status/811943610300198913

[Tarheel_Dem]

139. The Hillary haters won't brook dissent, and Hillary supporters won't tolerate the haters, so Ellison

is not going to be the bridge we need to move forward. I don't know why Howard Dean backed out, but I wish he hadn't. Or better yet, I wish Joe Biden had taken the job.

[jalan48]

72. Glad to see some forward thinking Progressives rising in the ranks.

[ismnotwasm]

80. UGH

[JHan]

125. I feel like 2016 has been one massive jedi mind trick

"The Democratic Party should be a party that believes everyone should have equal access to the American Dream and equal rights before the law. The Democratic Party should say it doesn't matter what your color is, we're going to treat you with fairness and equality and respect. It doesn't matter who you love and go to bed with at night; it doesn't matter who your closest of kin is, they are your choice and we respect and honor that choice. That's what the Democratic Party should be. The Democratic Party should say whether you were born in America or whether you came here, we respect you. We believe that the Democratic Party should be the party of, by and for the people. "

I really thought we were the party of this already though, or have I been mistaken all this time?

Maybe the last couple years didn't happen, maybe this is all a dream.

[elleng]

83. Thanks, portlander23.

[SixString]

92. DU Rec.

[nini]

94. This article spells it out..

http://pleasecutthecrap.com/a-message-for-hardcore-bernie-stans/


"Here’s the deal, Bernie Stans. You are almost all white, mostly male and you have means. If you want Democrats to win, you have a funny way of showing it. YOU don’t get to order the 95% of liberals who are already IN the Democratic Party to do your bidding or else. It’s time to grow up and accept that the reason Democrats lose too often is the “independent” far left “progressives” who are blind to the reality. YOU are the reason Democrats lose and YOU are the reason we now face a Trump presidency.

Like I said, Grow the fuck up. "


This article is a thing of beauty.

[Gothmog]

100. Agreed

I like this part of the article

Hillary Cinton won the nomination because of democracy. She received more than 57% of Democratic votes cast. Bernie Sanders virtually only won caucuses, which are the least democratic aspect of the primary process. And most of those he won only because she decided to save her money for the General election. He won very few primaries, except for his “home states” and Michigan and his clock was cleaned in virtually every other state that mattered. Demographically, he only won white liberals. The fact that YOU think he made it close, or only lost because of “Super Delegates” is a hallmark of your delusion. Bernie Stans largely didn’t seem to notice that she reached out to you repeatedly and you bit her hand off, making you more like Republicans than you should be comfortable with.

[JHan]

102. that's my favorite bit too. The whole thing is brilliant. n/t

[WhiteTara]

99. I called all of his offices and left word for him

that if he didn't join our Party to STU. They all said they would use more gentle language and leave him my message.

Really, if someone thinks that they can just steal our Party like the GOP stole our country, then I'm NOT interested in their message.

[Gothmog]

101. New questions complicate Ellison's bid for DNC chair

These allegations may hurt Ellison http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/311270-old-finance-woes-haunt-ellisons-dnc-bid

Opponents of Rep. Keith Ellison’s bid to be the next Democratic National Committee chairman are raising new questions about the Minnesota Democrat’s past to make the case that he’s unfit to be the party’s next leader.

Ellison's critics in the DNC and some supporters of Labor secretary Tom Perez, the other top candidate, are pointing to the Minnesota Democrat’s past tax troubles, campaign finance violations and minor legal issues that once led to his driver’s license being suspended as evidence that he’s ill-equipped to lead the DNC.

Some of those instances date back to the 1990s. All of the issues have been rectified and were previously used in attacks against Ellison during his first run for House in 2006.

Why elect a DNC chair who has baggage?

[JHan]

103. Hillary's "baggage" is all that matters for some folks. n/t

[azmom]

107. Yessssss.

We change or we die.

[SharonClark]

116. Read it. Not impressed.

[okieinpain]

128. reading the comments is exactly why we loose.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein
Read more at: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins133991.html

lmao, maybe bernie is an independent because he can't get elected as a democrat in his state. man we need to learn to play the game and not worry about how we think the game should be.