Bernie's Major Fail Last Night: Explains What A Democratic Socialist Is

[stopbush]

I haven't seen anyone yet comment on what I perceive as a MAJOR fail by BS last night, and that was when he decided to explain what it meant to him to be a democratic socialist.

Why a fail? Simple: instead of presenting an over-arching view of what the term meant, what it would mean in practice to Americans, he said that it meant things like Social Security and Medicare, i.e.: social programs we already have.

Which begs the question: if we already have such things as a result of the existing system, why do we need a revolution?

Bernie's explanation broke no new ground, explained nothing about his position other than to say "perhaps you didn't realize" that we already have some socialism in this country.

And of course, who brought us that socialism? Why the establishment Democratic Party, that's who. And they did it without throwing the baby out with the bath water!

So, why the call for a revolution? What if the revolution actually destroys the little bit of socialism we already have?

BS is so wrapped up in himself and the moment that he isn't thinking things through. He isn't thinking strategically, as in "what happens in the next four moves if I do/say this?"

That's a path to failure.

[lunamagica]

1. K&R. You make some great points here.

[yallerdawg]

2. He also major failed on answer about third party candidates.

Don't try to co-opt our party and then tell us you wish we could have more voices and viable candidates outside of the two party system we have.

We do not have a parliamentary system that organizes disparate groups into a fleeting, tentative majority after election.

We organize in the two parties before the election and come to power with the majority rule of democracy!

Could you imagine an America waking up with a 'socialist' president one morning in November with say a 26% victory?

Hell, Republicans reject an actual majority victory now!

[Lucinda]

3. Great point!

[Starry Messenger]

4. I honestly don't consider him a socialist.

I don't know why he crankily insists on some distinction between his views and most progressive liberalism.

[kjones]

5. Indeed. nt

[BlueCaliDem]

6. I heard it, but by that time my eyes were rolling up inside my head as bored as I was with his

talk.

[stopbush]

7. He is getting boring because he never says anything new.

It's a long campaign. Candidates need to be able to talk about a lot of issues, if for no other reason than to keep their audience listening.

I give it a month before people start flipping channels as soon as Bernie utters the words "Wall Street" yet again.

[BlueCaliDem]

9. I learn nothing new from him. With Hillary Clinton, I always come away learning new things she's

already done and plans to do. Last night, for example, she says she wants to work on different scenarios how to tackle the broken immigration system before the G.E. so she'll have it ready to go the moment she's inaugurated and within her first 100 days!

Didn't hear anything from Bernie, though. Nothing new. I listened for the first half hour but then my eyes began to roll up in my head. I truly don't see what about him people get enthusiastic about...or it could be that he's just bad on teevee and better at rallies?

[stopbush]

11. Rallies are the exclusive turf of partisans.

TV debates etc don't come with an audience of your zealots.

Of course he's better at rallies. Last night's audience wasn't feeling the bern.

[Treant]

8. Visine.

It'll help, and the sting may keep you awake a bit longer.

[BlueCaliDem]

10. Hahahaha! I have natural tears for that but they keep on rolling up in my head

the moment Bernie goes into his diatribe of WALL STREET! MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES!

I swear, it's as if I can feel my ears close off like a platypus when he speaks. Then all I hear is an annoying droning...