What a lot of people don't seem to get about the popularity of Bernie Sanders

[Fast Walker 52]

-- is that there is a huge swath of the Democratic party that has been waiting for a strong, serious liberal candidate for decades now.

They know that despite Obama's credentials, talents and charisma, he still was too corporate-influenced. He was a somewhat more liberal version of Hillary, and then in office, he became even more of a centrist.

The fact is a lot of Democrats-- perhaps most of them-- are tired of centrist, corporate Dems, the types who constantly use Republican talking points and who threaten to cut social Security and Medicare.

My feeling is that Bernie Sanders is the strongest liberal candidate we've had in a long time. He speaks powerfully and honestly about OUR issues. We are lucky to have him in the race.

Is he perfect? No, but no candidate is. And he's as close to what I would want in a viable presidential candidate as anyone I've ever seen. He "gets it" on all the big issues. He absolutely does. His instincts are wonderful.

Does his age make me nervous? Yes, a little. He's in great health and very strong-- but a presidential campaign is truly exhausting. Of course, his running mate will be absolutely crucial.

Does his blunt and "extreme" rhetoric make me nervous? Yes-- mostly because of how the media and elites have discussed him and will play him.

Will he be able to win in November? I don't know. But Hillary is not a sure shot either. The bottom line from my perspective-- and I am thrilled we have this opportunity-- is we have to take this chance to get a strong, honest, liberal Democrat in the White House. It's not clear when we will have another candidate like Bernie.

This is our shot at getting our liberal voices really heard across the country-- and we can see how popular our ideas really are. These are the liberal voices usually excluded from the media. We've long suspected they are popular, but it's been hard to get a fair hearing on them. Now is our time.

[cantbeserious]

1. This Revolt Has Been Building For Years - The DWS, DNC, DLC, Third-Way Has Only Themselves To Blame

eom

[LWolf]

3. Yes.

I don't want another neo-liberal. Ever.

[Nay]

2. I gave you a heart for that. I feel the same way about Bernie, and

the fact that the pundits, Hillary, and others didn't see this coming is an indictment of the whole system.

[Fast Walker 52]

9. Thanks! I so agree about the system.

[DeGreg]

63. The Clinton's are like bad cops...

It think it's obvious that the Clinton's (and a significant portion of people doing well in this country) have been acting like bad cops.
Getting paid for speeches given to corporations, bankers, hedge funders, corrupt countries, etc., it's all just they way the game is played. And it's just one example. If you play it right, you get the power, you get to call the shots, you get the spoils--everybody's doing it, gaming the world they operate in for their own selfish gain. It's why Hillary's answer to Anderson Cooper's question about why she took money from _____--"It's what they offered." The response presumes American's to be conscienceless in the face of such a large, though dubious windfall--who would turn down the money? Isn't that what she believes? Everybody's doing it! Right, help yourself to a heaping dish of moral hazard, and this is just one example (and the Clinton's are not alone).

So the Clinton's are bad cops, and they've pulled us over and seized our cash, because they can, because the have "a gun" on them, because they aint breaking any laws... what are you gonna do about it? They've been waiting for their pay days, and they maxed out all the opportunities. I find it disgusting.

I imagine a new poster for America. It's Uncle Sam and all he represents, but instead of thrusting his pointer finger at you and saying, "I want you..." he's flipping you off, and the caption nows reads, "What are you gonna do about it..."

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

4. All of the folks the party has left behind on its decades-long run to the right.

The proclaim us 'not Democrats' while snuggling up with moderate Republicans. They dragged the party away, and we're trying to drag it back.

[islandmkl]

5. exactly....if I wanted to be a Republican...I would be a Republican...

RepublicanLite™ has just about ruined the Democratic Party and left way too many people behind...

the argument that there really aren't two parties is only valid (and it IS) because of the direction the Democratic Party took post-1988...

[SammyWinstonJack]

37. +1000000

[bvar22]

59. I'm still angry about when President Obama declared that his policies

were "Moderate Republican Policies" of the 80s (That is Reagan Era).
I fought HARD against Moderate Republican Policies in the 80s.
Why should I be supporting them NOW?
And (AFIC) Hillary is to the right of Obama.

[840high]

67. .^that

[disillusioned73]

6. I completely agree..

I was turned off by President Obama's inability to take the huge majorities and the tied of the newly engaged electorate to bring about a real liberal/progressive approach to governing in his first term.. I voted for him for a second term but nowhere near as enthusiastic as I was in 2004..

Another seemingly offensive meme is that Bernie is "the shiny new toy" to us on the left..he is not, I've been following Bernie's career & strong positions for some time.. including his inspiring 8 hour filibuster in 2010 against tax cuts.. I just never thought I'd have a chance to support such a left leaning candidate and I am now a very engaged and excited 40+ y/o..

I had to google cause I couldn't remember the exact year.. I remember watching some of this live and thinking.. wow

[link:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/10/AR2010121005431.html|

[randome]

7. Maybe that's partly the problem. They are 'waiting'.

Instead of getting in the streets and into the faces of politicians, we're sitting back and cheering on The One, whether it's Sanders or Clinton. I don't see a 'revolution' happening from the top down.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You have to play the game to find out why you're playing the game. -Existenz[/center][/font][hr]

[hoosierlib]

11. Damn right...

Change happens from the bottom up and the electorate is hungry (see Bernie and Trump) for someone to lead the movement...

The sleeper has awaken and there much work to do...

[zalinda]

23. You have to have a leader

The world is made up of leaders and followers. In order to have a revolution, you have to have someone who can tell the followers what they need to do. This starting from the bottom up is only in the movies. In real life you have people in the Democratic party who decide who is going to get support and who is not. There are many stories of a liberal dem running only to have the party come along and either not support him, or run someone against him with their support. A revolution is kind of difficult when you have the party against you.

The people have been ready for a revolution for years, but there has been no one to gather around. People thought it was going to be Obama in 2008, turned out it was bait and switch. They even gave him another shot in 2012, again the same result. Only now does he seem to be doing SOMETHING for the little people, but then there is also the TPP. Those who are struggling came out in force to vote for him, and he let them down. Why the hell would people make an extraordinary effort in some cases to come out and vote in 2010 or2014 when nothing is going to change for them?

Bernie is our only hope, it has gotten so desperate out here. And I for one, am very grateful he has stepped forward to be our leader.

Z

[jeff47]

32. We've been working on it.

We have run into things like the county party that took away a leadership position instead of letting the "wrong kind of Democrat" win it. And plenty of other shenanigans.

Basically, we're down to a giant wake-up-call to the party (such as Sanders) or waiting for the old guard to die.

[NikolaC]

57. Folks also need to focus on the down ticket races

Whether it's Bernie, or Hillary, who winds up in the White House, they are going to need as much backup as possible. That is why the down ticket races are so very important. We need good candidates and should work to get more progressives elected. From the local school board races, to the state houses, congress and senate. The grassroots are important.

[bvar22]

62. That is why getting Bernie nominatd is so important.

Hillary would actually suppress Democratic turnout, and we will wind up with Trump and a whole slate of Republicans.

[myrna minx]

60. And yet you ridiculed the Occupy Movement and a "bunch of hippies wandering around a park."

When people take to the streets, that's not good enough either.

[gyroscope]

8. The only thing liberal about the likes of Obama and Clinton

are their social issue positions like abortion and gay marriage.

On most everything else (economic issues, education, defense budget, foreign policy, the prison system, healthcare, etc) they are scarcely different than any Republican.

[Fast Walker 52]

10. exactly-- but you will never hear this in the mainstream media!

[Akamai]

12. Yup! And endlessly we will see on TV and hailed in print right-wingers whose positions have already

been proved to be disastrous, e.g., Bill Kristol (on military actions around the world, being anti-health care), Gingrich, McCain, etc.

None of the views of those opposing military intervention, wanting to tax the wealthy more, wanting to restore Glass-Steagel, etc.

I predict that Hillary is suddenly going to discover the importance of income inequality, and that this discovery will happen within a couple of days.

[gyroscope]

18. And on trade and Wall Street reform

On these two critical issues Obama and Clinton are very right-wing.

Obama embraces the right-wing position on TPP and has done nothing to reign in Wall Street (refuses to bring back Glass Steagull). His cabinet is filled with Goldman Sachs and Citigroup execs.

[SheilaT]

13. And Hillary was rather a long time coming to support gay marriage.

I'm still not convinced she sincerely supports it, but rather finds it convenient at this point to say she does.

[pinebox]

15. I don't think she genuinely does

and this is the #1 issue with millennials

[madokie]

42. The only thing Hillary supports is what her bosses tell her

to know who her bosses are look no further than where her paychecks comes from. Paychecks in the form of campaign contribution and PAC's Not to forget the clinton foundation.


I'm one of Bernie's bosses and I like that set up real well

[Plucketeer]

17. Yup!

And IN SPITE of what comes out of her mouth, Hillary would basically be an extension of Obama's administration. And she's proven already that she'll say WHATEVER she thinks a crowd wants to hear.

[m-lekktor]

22. I completely agree! nt

[JudyM]

28. Great post! I see a difference on health care, though.

[hollowdweller]

35. I think you hit the nail on the head.

Really since Jimmy Carter the dems have sort of moved away from the progressive economic agenda that snagged a lot of blue collar and middle of the road voters.

They have been seen as more liberal on the social issues. It's good to be progressive on social issues, but it will be harder to get a majority.

The GOP basically took these people by saying it was spending on poor people, immigrants, etc that was causing their slide economically.

It would be nice to see some of these people return to the party by pushing an agenda that would make them overlook the social issues because their economic issues are more important rather than vice versa.

[LiberalArkie]

40. And the Democrats can't even claim to have ended Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

It was the Log Cabin Republicans v. United States of America filed in 2004 and won in 2010 that put it to rest.

[ieoeja]

47. Obama talks liberal on economics except for one sentence: "I don't really understand economics."

His expressed opinions on economics are very Keynesian. But he said he would rely on "the experts" on economic matters. So he went after the people with the best resumes. So who would that be?

1. Ivy league graduates who are pretty much exclusively taught Rightist economic thoughts.

2. People who work in the industry, aka Wall Street.


I believe it was either Liberty University or Patrick Henry University that first started giving out National Security degrees. If nobody joined them then some future liberal President could very well decide, "only higher national security people with a degree in that discipline," and end up unknowingly stacking the NSA with Dominionists. I think something similar happened with Obama on economic matters.

[Mbrow]

14. k&R , good points!

[liberal_at_heart]

16. We've been told to shut up and vote for the establishment candidate for decades.

Well it is time to break those shackles. Ah, freedom feels so good.

[Plucketeer]

19. Not that I've dutifully played along

but this new atmosphere DOES feel invigorating, doesn't it?

[hollowdweller]

36. Remember everybody dissing Dean and going for Kerry because he was more electable?

They are trying that again but so far not working. Middle class is more down the tubes now than then.

[pengu]

74. Why do the electable candidates never win?

[George II]

20. "Popular" doesn't translate into being "Presidential".

[JudyM]

30. In what ways are you implying he is not "Presidential," in your opinion?

[Bluenorthwest]

31. Are you unaware of the concept of democracy, which does in fact mean that the most popular candidate

gets to be President? Does democracy offend you at all times or only when democracy hinders your own will?

[Moostache]

54. We do not live in a democracy...we have a representative republic.

I DO have a problem with straight, unfettered democracy in the same way I have a problem with straight unfettered capitalism and for the same reason - THEY DO NOT WORK WITHOUT LIMITS AND ASSISTANCE TO PREVENT MOB RULE.

[frylock]

44. Whatever the fuck that means.

[George II]

49. Right now Peyton Manning is very popular, but he'd never get elected President.

[frylock]

51. Whatever the fuck that means.

[SHRED]

21. Well said!!

[firebrand80]

24. Disaffected liberals are only part of his coalition

Those were the folks that were with him when he was down around 20%, he's expanding significantly from that

[SoLeftIAmRight]

25. I have been waiting my whole life to vote for a Sanders

...

[RoccoR5955]

26. The pebbles are moving

The avalanche shall soon begin.

[liberal N proud]

27. And where has Bernie Sanders been for all those years?

Being an independent, only joining the Democratic party to run for President.

[dana_b]

33. And?

of course! As the OP has said, the Democratic party has been moving to the right and that's NOT where Bernie has been so yeah, he's been an independent. But in order to bring it back a bit towards the left, he joined and is running for President. I think he has done us a favor. Thank you, Bernie!!!

[Half-Century Man]

29. My country has been gradually compromised away since Reagan.

As we Democrats blindly tried to capitalize/horn in on, on the Reagan revolution.

Ask anyone who ever tried to get in with the "cool kids" in high school by dressing and acting like them. It doesn't work. You will become a despised object of ridicule without lunch money.

As for the "safety" of a Sanders nomination for POTUS. Life has no guarantees. However, presented individually, all his policy positions are popular with the majority of Americans. We need to work that every day to everyone. Stay on message and stay active.

If fall we must, I'll fall from a standing position putting one foot in front of the other.

[ieoeja]

50. Thanks largely to Gary Hart and Gennifer Flowers.

Bill Clinton was not even on my radar til the Gennifer Flowers thing came up. While his apology was way over the top (the Bible Belt is one sick place) the fact that he continued on instead of backing down was a big game changer when contrasted with Gary Hart in the previous election.

The one dropdead attribute in presidential politics is "wimp". Hart dropped out over an alleged affair. Then he discovered that he actually went up in the polls after the affair came up. So he jumped back in. And he immediately plumetted in the polls because he initially wimped out.

So when Bill did not wimp out in response to the Flowers affair, people like me thought we finally had a liberal fighter on our hands. As the movie line went, we thought the 90s were going to make the 80s look like the 60s did the 50s. And the non-stop attack machine kept us too busy defending Bill from stupid, fake scandals to pay attention to the sell out.

The 80s should have been an abberation. One does not stop progress. One only slows it down to give people time to catch up (future shock). Reagan was a predictable reaction to the rapid social progress of the 60s and 70s. Clinton should never have happened. The 90s ended up being the abberation.

[Half-Century Man]

56. "Strong people don't need strong leaders" Ella Baker

We need to accept, We are the government.
We hire people to do the day to days tasks of running the government, But the authority of, and responsibility for, rests on our shoulders alone.

The problem with putting people on pedestals is they're not so much "above" us as shining examples of humans, as their all too human natures are fully exposed.

[TIME TO PANIC]

34. I agree for the most part,

but I wouldn't worry about his chances in the general election. No republican can defeat him.

[Stevepol]

41. I totally agree!

I said at the very beginning, when Bernie first announced, that in the general election he would blow anybody away, that the only problem he would have is the primary. If he could beat HRC, he would win it all,

of course, assuming the voting machines are not able to cheat him out of it as they did for Kerry in 04 or some gun nut or anti-abortion or anti-gay nut etc. doesn't God forbid do the unthinkable.

BTW, I'm really happy to see he's got a good crowd of Secret Service people now evidently on the job.

Keep on keepin' on Bernie! We're with ya!

[TIME TO PANIC]

46. Yeah, the establishment did not see this coming.

They've been totally blindsided.

[Zorra]

38. Well said, thanks. nt

[mountain grammy]

39. Every time a Republican says to me, with a shit eating grin,

yeah, go ahead, support Bernie..like they're in on some great secret that spells gloom and doom for the Democratic party, I have to resist the urge to punch them in the face. Meantime our own party establishment keeps harping on the McGovern loss, like we better toe the line or else, another Nixon and gloom and doom for the Democratic party.

Well, I'm too old for the "boys" following Bernie, and, as for that "special place in hell?" I'm an atheist!

Go Bernie! It's not pie in the sky, it's fucking health care and green energy and income equality!

[Fast Walker 52]

52. Indeed!

[wolfie001]

43. I guess I'm not part of "a lot"

Go Bernie!!!

[GoneOffShore]

45. Good post - Here's a piece from Bill McKibben that addresses 'the process' and

why Hilary is doing it 'wrong'.

In the mounting, panicky attempts of elites to derail the Sanders candidacy, one strand dominates. You find it woven through every sage piece from the old-school pundits of the Times and the hip insider websites like Vox. Yes, they say, he's saying some useful things. But he can't really make them happen. He's talking "puppies and rainbows." Real "reform is hard." The Times editors, in their endorsement of Hillary Clinton, managed a matchless condescension: His ideas about breaking up the banks or guaranteeing health care for everyone, they intoned, "have earned him support among alienated middle-class voters and young people. But his plans for achieving them aren't realistic." Wait 'til you're older and richer like us, and then you'll understand how change happens.

In fact, these pundits couldn't be more wrong about where change comes from. And neither could Hillary Clinton. Here's how she put it a few months ago, backstage at a tense and fascinating little confrontation with Black Lives Matter activists:

"I don't believe you change hearts. I believe you change laws, you change allocation of resources, you change the way systems operate."

That sounds sensible, grown-up, wise. It's what Washington pundits always say -- they said it over and over again when we launched, say, the fight to stop the Keystone pipeline. But in fact it's completely backwards.

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/35099-getting-change-wrong

It's well worth a read.

[Fast Walker 52]

55. cool-- thanks!

[Cheap_Trick]

48. We've been waiting for a REAL Democrat since Carter.

How ironic that he's an Independent. NO MORE "THIRD WAY" BULLSHIT.

[NowSam]

53. You nailed it.

Bernie is willing to lay it bare and expose the system and the injustices entirely. He says what we feel and know to be true.

[Babel_17]

58. Like, trust, and respect, for the POTUS can help the public favor our platform

A President Sanders will use the bully pulpit and the pressure will be on congress critters with a constituency that mostly likes parts of what he's selling.

[Utopian Leftist]

61. Yes!

Thank you for this OP, right on!

The reason liberal voices are excluded from the media is so that they can be construed, twisted and spun as "loony left," or too far out of the mainstream to even be considered by serious folk. The powers that be are going to have to realize that a sleeping giant has awakened and will not be tricked or lulled back into sleep any time soon.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

64. The problem is everyone has bought the idea what's good for Wall Street is good for Main Street....

Wall Street doesn't MAKE money. It gets it from Main Street.

[Warren DeMontague]

65. Nah, it's just misogynistic berniebros, who make up lies about Hillary voting for the IWR and stuff

lies! Pernicious lies!

[MisterP]

66. Sanders is a direct consequence of Obama: he started as Rahm's "icebreaker" in Springfield

a blank screen for everyone to project themselves onto after 8 years of atrocity and dictatorial lawbreaking

he soon followed the money and Rahm set up the famous "veal pen" to prevent anyone who needed something from getting it: Dems and workers were just there to pull the lever, make a donation, and go home

the usual wars and impunities dragged on, people's lives stagnated or declined; votaries told us to be grateful for what little we did have

the Dems became moribund, losing 13 Senators, 69 Reps, 12 governorships, and 910 state legislators: the DNC said "what did you voters do wrong?"

they blamed the gays for '10, the youth for '12, and literally everybody for '14

[dpatbrown]

68. Excellent piece. Thanks

[Armstead]

69. My feelings exactly

[PatrynXX]

70. Well considering where Hillary Trump is going with this.

the VP pick would have to be female and black , yeah that doesn't sound right but thats where Hillary's going with this. Don't think picking Bibi as the running mate will fly though

[Dont call me Shirley]

71. Proud FDR, JFK, RFK Progressive Democrat here!

[Vincardog]

72. Will he be able to win in November? AbsoFUCKINGlutely

[Marie Marie]

73. Very simply, I support Bernie because Bernie

has been out there for years supporting and fighting for me and the likes of me. It is who he is.

[bullwinkle428]

75. K&R. Great point about how crucial his running-mate selection would be.