I would think that if Bernie Sanders spent 40 years identifying what the problems are,

[upaloopa]

in that time he would have given more thought to how to solve them other than "we need a revolution"

So we blow up the current system, what do we replace it with and how do we know if what we get is better than what we had?


I just can't put blind faith in someone like Sanders with no depth like his supporters do. It is amazing that they don't ask for more of an explanation than they do.

"Other countries do it" is not a plan.

"We will tax Wall Street" is not a plan.

"10's of millions of people marching in the street" is not a plan


I just can't vote for pie in the sky and it is a good thing most Dems won't either in the up coming closed primaries.

[notadmblnd]

1. Are these the talking points that came from your morning meeting?

[upaloopa]

2. No they are thoughts that have been going around in my mind for months now.

Unlike some on your side we do think and ask questions before we vote

[Hortensis]

15. Agree completely, Upaloopa.

I never began to suspect before Bernie's disastrous interview, though, that he had no idea HOW to keep his promises. I thought he was just keeping his message simple as a technique for putting it over.

[notadmblnd]

16. Well you might actually want to seek answers by objectively listening

asking the same questions over and over and over in your mind apparently isn't working

[thesquanderer]

3. Did you even look?

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

[upaloopa]

5. Yes I did to be honest. I find Bernie has no ability to get done what he talks about.

I agree with most of what he says are problems. He just doesn't have what it takes to be President. He has no depth to himself.

He builds no relationships with people who he needs to accomplish things. He complains and complains and blames and blames.

I can't vote for that

[thesquanderer]

10. That's a more reasonable post.

Saying he doesn't have plans, as you do in the OP, is just plain wrong. But saying that you don't think he has the ability to implement his plans is at least a defensible opinion. I disagree, as you would expect, but that's why it's good that there are candidates we can each feel good about voting for.

[DanTex]

4. He likes to complain, but doesn't have any solutions.

[bigbrother05]

6. She "listens", then "More of the same, please."

He asks why not and points the way forward.

The USA has often gone for the dreamers, especially when "more of the same" hasn't been working out too well.

[upaloopa]

8. Dreamers dream, doers do. We need a doer in the White House. The stakes are too high right now

If we controlled the Congress and White House and the SCOTUS and the right was at bay we would have time to dream but that isn't the case.

[bigbrother05]

23. Obama was to the left of her and he got things done that Hill/Bill couldn't (Hillary Care)

If you start in the middle, everything will end up center right or farther.

Bernie's been in Congress/politics for a long time, he knows about compromise and getting things done. He'll have a much better chance to keep us on the middle ground, especially with the political capital of a GE win.

[think]

7. Single payer, a living wage, family leave, against death penalty, FAIR trade, free public college

Ending the war on drugs and legalization of marijuana, putting a speculation tax on Wall street where currently high frequency traders are skimming those profits.

These issues are good policy and rational thinking.

[upaloopa]

9. I have no argument with that. Bernie isn't the one to get them done

Any one of us can make a list of what is wrong.


Very few of us could explain how to fix them.

[think]

13. Hillary is against single payer, supports the death penalty, supports the war on drugs...

Who's going to get those things done then...

[global1]

20. Then How Come Hillary Didn't Make That List?...nt

[bigbrother05]

24. That's why a President hires a cabinet

The leader lays out a framework and hires the who they feel can make it happen. Recognizing the challenges, not just being the "3rd term" of a predecessor is critical.

We are electing a leader, technocrats with a stellar resumes get a cabinet post.

[brush]

21. All good things that most of us want, but it's pretty obvious without a dem Congress . . .

those things won't be accomplished. And Sanders isn't even helping to raise money for down-ticket candidates, with all the ballyhooed millions his supporters brag about. What's up with that?

I fear if Sanders wins and is unable to get anything through Congress he will be a one-term embarrassment for the Democratic Party and we won't get the White House back for at lease a generation. Let's face it, a repug Congress is not going to pass any speculation tax on Wall St, or vote for free college, etc.

The repugs, once they get the White House back after a failed dem administration, will run wild and pass bills that will take the country back to the 1940s with segregation, poll taxes to suppress POC votes, back alley abortions, forget about LGBT rights, and on and on and on.

[think]

22. Hillary won't even fight for them. How will we ever get these things if we don't fight for them?

Please don't sell us out before the negotiations even begin....

[brush]

25. Talk to the Bernie camp about funneling some of his fund raising to down-ticket dems . . .

instead of keeping all for his own campaign and maybe there's a better chance of getting a Dem Congress that will vote for his proposals.

Don't you think it's unwise not to do that? What's up, is he just an interloper using the Dem party to get himself elected and won't help other Dems?

Hillary raises and always has raised funds for other Dems.

[Hortensis]

29. Yes, but now we know that when Bernie promises

to make them all happen in his first term he either does not know that is effectively impossible or, more likely, refused to acknowledge the evidence that it is impossible.

Experts say that most would be totally impossible with Congress as it is and only SOME would be doable to some degree any time soon if we had control of Congress.

[Bonobo]

11. No, the problems are so endemic that we DO need a revolution.

When 50% or fewer than the voting populace participates in a Democracy, it is sick beyond help.

When so much money is involved in politics that politicians spend FAR more time collecting it for their next election, it is sick beyond help.

When lobbyists write the legislation because politicians are too busy raising money and and too much in their pockets, it is sick beyond help.

We DO need a revolution.

What we do not need is status quo protection disguised as "incremental change". We are in deep trouble and a sea change is needed.

[whirlygigspin]

12. who said anything about "blow up the current system"?

blind faith? who asked for that?
Is this just spin or is anything based in fact here?
if so, please provide a link to convince us of your points, if true, it should be easily done and done with.
if not, I'll see you all this coming fall, in the big rock candy mountains.

[Gothmog]

14. Sorry, Bernie Sanders. There is zero evidence of your ‘political revolution’ yet

No one has seen any evidence of the so-called Sanders revolution https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/10/sorry-bernie-sanders-there-is-zero-evidence-of-your-political-revolution-yet/

Bernie Sanders recorded a resounding victory in New Hampshire's Democratic primary Tuesday. He crushed his rival, Hillary Clinton, with no less than 60 percent of the vote. If Sanders hopes not only to win the election but to achieve his ambitious progressive agenda, though, that might not be enough.

To succeed, Sanders might have to drive Americans who don't normally participate to the polls. Unfortunately for him, groups who usually do not vote did not turn out in unusually large numbers in New Hampshire, according to exit polling data.

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=&w=1484

...As for Sanders, he credited his victory to turnout. "Because of a huge voter turnout -- and I say huge -- we won," he said in his speech declaring victory, dropping the "h" in "huge." "We harnessed the energy, and the excitement that the Democratic party will need to succeed in November."

In fact, Sanders won by persuading many habitual Democratic primary voters to support him. With 95 percent of precincts reporting their results as of Wednesday morning, just 241,000 ballots had been cast in the Democratic primary, fewer than the 268,000 projected by New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner last week. Nearly 289,000 voters cast ballots in the state's Democratic primary in 2008.

To be sure, the general election is still seven months away. Ordinary Americans might be paying little attention to the campaign at this point, and if Sanders wins the nomination, he'll have the help of the Democratic Party apparatus in registering new voters. The political revolution hasn't started, though, at least not yet.

Without this revolution, I am not sure how Sanders proposes to advance his unrealistic agenda

[LWolf]

17. Nice job obscuring the point.

Obviously, and I think you know this, he's given plenty of time and thought to how to solve them.

There's an obstruction. You know, the one establishment Democrats spend most of their oxygen bemoaning..."Congress will never work with ____________. That's why he didn't/doesn't get more done!!!!"

Which is the exact point of the revolution; for citizens to get active, rise up, and hold their elected politicians accountable to the people.

THAT is how things will get done.

[Live and Learn]

18. Yet, Hillary doesn't even acknowledge any problems until she hears them from Bernie.

And then says "we can't" do anything about them.

[Lucinda]

28. You must be sooooo dizzy! n/t

[Native]

19. I realize that he needs to dumb down his ideas in his speeches so they will play better,

but to just identify the problems with the sole purpose of getting people riled up, and to not offer any real solutions, much less bother to even consider any real solutions, just seems to reinforce his entire career of not accomplishing much of anything. I mean, how can you conscientiously take a salary, paid for by your constituents, for as many years as he has and not bother to try to make much of a positive difference for those constituents and the country you represent as a whole?

So he gives speeches defending his positions and he's attended some protests. Well, I call into my representatives to defend my positions and I attend protests, but I'm not getting a dime from anyone for doing so. I mean, how can you work in Congress for as long as he has and justify only passing two bills in the House & Senate (and two of those were to name post offices)? Simply voting for or against bills that your peers have sponsored (not you) & not playing well with others (yes, we realize you're an Independent, but that's not an excuse), sounds more like you've just bothered to do the minimum that would allow you to sleep at night.

“It is not that I'm so smart. But I stay with the questions much longer.”
― Albert Einstein

Stay with the questions Bernie, don't walk away from them.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

26. lol

it is sad that you do not understand

[Kalidurga]

27. uh huh don't care

I will maybe start caring when ya'll denounce Bill.

[Vinca]

30. I'm curious. Does Hillary have any imagination at all? Any dreams?

Part of the reason I love Bernie is that he thinks big, not small. Everything won't work out, but at least he'll try. Hillary seems to just be content with things pretty much as they are. No rocking of the boat, go along to get along. I see her as a POTUS much like her husband, signing lots of bills from across the aisle and then boasting about how she's bridged the divide. No moon landings in Hillary's future.