I do not like the thought that so many good people are considering leaving the Democratic Party.

[PufPuf23]

I have been a registered and voting Democrat since 1972 when I aged into the vote. One exception was I registered GOP to vote John Anderson in the 1980 CA primary as a vote against Reagan. I was firmly politicized Democrat in 1968 age 15. I actually got to eat two family meals with Eugene McCarthy when he campaigned in San Francisco by fortuitous circumstance.

That said I have spent my life voting as a process of elimination. I was a supporter of Bill Clinton as POTUS to the degree I overlooked some items, particularly late in his service. By virtue of my education and professional experience, I should have been paying more attention; however, with hindsight, Bill Clinton was better than the GOP alternative.

I was a supporter of Governor Jerry Brown in 1976 and 1980 for POTUS. I support FDR's second Bill of Rights. I am firmly anti-war but not anti-self defense. I am against a military empire where we garrison troops and divvy out arms around the globe.

Post 9-11, I became disenchanted with Hillary Clinton during her time as Senator and SOS. I became aware of the difference between liberal and neo-liberal. In 2008, I was an any Democrat but Hillary Clinton Democrat and warmed to POTUS Obama to the degree that I cried and was the most glad of any election in my life. I felt that something was wrong and betrayed as soon as POTUS Obama began making appointments and selecting staff. So I have been critical but overall rate POTUS Obama's service as good despite that he is a neo-liberal. POTUS Obama inherited a mess things could have been way worse.

There is a fundamental split in the Democratic Party because of the FDR New Deal liberals and the DLC / Third Way / New Democrats / neo-liberals, a split that cannot be breached as the philosophies and methods are counter; albeit neo-liberals and liberals agree on many social and cultural issues with the stark exception of social justice. The neo-liberals are Machiavellian in their political methods.

In 1968 there were four splits in the Democratic Party, none of which were neo-liberal, the closest being the more conservative Yellow Dawgs. Socially liberal GOP from the 60-70s transferred alliance to the Democratic Party in the 1980s and adopted the neo-liberalism of Ronald Reagan in order to win national elections but moved the Party to the right. The neo-liberals are corporatists and liberals became the scapegoats for any failures; example Gore 2000. From education to war to healthcare to law to environment to just about any metric, recent Democratic Party policy and legislation favors corporations and the wealthy over the vast majority of citizens. Our only alternatives are the nightmare of the GOP or ineffectual third parties.

Hillary Clinton is a neo-liberal and a neo-conservative and has ran a dishonest Machiavellian campaign (as Clinton also did in 2008). The Democratic establishment and DNC fail to represent liberals in general and failed to provide an array of POTUS candidates in 2016 and fail many Democratic traditional interest groups: labor, women, minorities, youth, poor, etc. Sincere efforts and sincere people are mocked and mischaracterized, an artifact of the Democratic establishment in fact. I have long thought DU a useful focus group and site for opposition research but like DU and stay out of habit and much good.

The Clinton Foundation and Hillary Clinton's actions as SOS regards to Syria, Honduras, and Libya are corrupt and repulsive, worthy of the worst of the GOP.

I do not want to leave the Democratic Party and still believe the Party the best route to improve the nation. The Party needs to be rid of the neo-liberals, most of which are either in denial or outright dishonest about who they are and what they support. The neo-liberals are why we are losing Party membership, likely they want for true liberals to leave a substantial American institution. The neo-liberals are why we have an unjust economic system. The neo-liberals are the same as neo-cons regards to war and empire. The neo-liberals will address the environment, health care, and most other issues by monetization and financialization. To disgorge the neo-liberals, requires many of us playing long and for the short term failure of the Democratic Party. The remaining Democratic Party liberals have every reason to withhold monies and support so the neo-liberals fail.

If Bernie Sanders fails in his quest, Hillary Clinton is the best alternative. Clinton may even get my vote in the general election. However, I will not support Clinton as POTUS nor anything Clinton proposes and will bide time waiting for the 2020 primary. Hillary Clinton is a smart and experienced person but is far lacking in political philosophy and even more so in character.

[winter is coming]

1. It's why there are so many independents and unaffiliateds out there.

The Republicans got too crazy and the Democrats got too Republican.

[Unicorn]

127. +1

[Scuba]

136. + another

[LondonReign2]

198. +11

Hard to believe the Democrats have decided to run a candidate with Bob Dole's economic policies and Henry Kissinger's foreign policies. but that's exactly what the Third Wayers have done. Democrats have not decided to leave the party, it was carted off to the right by the Turd Way.

[dgauss]

211. That sums it up nicely.

[Thirties Child]

216. Yes!!

[Thinkingabout]

2. Even if her agenda items are the same as Sanders?

[Armstead]

5. They aren't for the most part

[PufPuf23]

20. They are not the same even when the rhetoric is the same.

Hillary Clinton is a known.

[Silver_Witch]

52. They are not the same...

Except for those she has "adopted" in order to trick you Hillary supporters. You will see her become the DINO she is after the primary.

[Thinkingabout]

61. Or like her position on Social Security, she said to start FICA on again on $250,000, at first

Wanted to do away with the max cap and tax all wages. Later he changed to starting again at $250,000.

[Phlem]

176. Yep. She's exactly like Bernie. Mostly her honesty!

Nope!

[Duckhunter935]

76. Only temporarily

She will "evolve" right back after he is gone.

[SusanCalvin]

109. Yep. nt

[snowy owl]

88. I prefer the original. Thanks, anyway. I trust originals. Reproductions - the veneer fades.

[Odin2005]

117. LOL

[cui bono]

122. They aren't the same. That's the point.

Third Way is the corporatist take over of the party. They do not have the same goals as the traditional Democrats did. They are not the FDR Democrats. They bought into the need for corporate funding and now they are beholden to them. Our country simply cannot survive another corporate friendly admin. Nor can the planet. They are taking this globally on steroids with TPP and all its variations. The ONLY candidate who will not go along with that is Bernie.

Support Hillary at your own peril. At OUR peril. Please don't gamble with our future.

.

[Unicorn]

128. however her history is the opposite.

I'm surprised her voters are falling for her new found liberal values that have come about in the last 5 months. They are campaign lies because if you google her, her history is most often opposite of what she says it has been "all along."

I still remember her as Senator Clinton when she voted to cut every welfare bill and foodstamp that the Republicans brought to the chopping block. This new ideologue with no facts behind it that she is suddenly the most liberal person in the senate is Bull. Both Bernie and Elizabeth Warren are far more liberal than her and when Hillary was in the senate she kept voting with the Republicans. Shocking is the people here who missed that because that shite went on for years.

Also what's shocking is the inability for many people to google her since they apparently lack the ability to remember when she was Senator and what she did.

Her agenda is not and has never been the same as Sanders. And it will not be if she God help us, gets elected to potus.

[Thinkingabout]

138. What specifically are you talking?

You list not be familiar with her record, the facts are there. She made a health care presentation to Congress in the 90's, maybe you are not aware. She was successful in getting CHIP.

[Unicorn]

167. Chip was Edward Kennedy and Orin Hatch's bill. They fought it through and Hillary kept taking credit

for it when she runs for office because she voted for it while in the Senate.

She has gotten a, "she didn't help much at all," response from Hatch and a tepid response from Kennedy:

"Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, who cosponsored the 1997 legislation that eventually led to the creation of SCHIP, was asked whether Clinton was exaggerating her role. The Globe said he wouldn’t criticize Clinton "directly" but said: "Facts are stubborn things … I think we ought to stay with the facts."
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/giving-hillary-credit-for-schip/

The big one on Clinton is the welfare reform bill in 1996, which threw many families off welfare, and into extreme poverty with nowhere to go. She and her husband wrote and sponsored that one.

"The problem with Clinton’s claims, however, is that she betrayed children as First Lady. Under the guise of welfare reform, the Clinton administration worked with Republicans to gut social services, ignoring their own senior officials’ warnings that, by doing so, they would be plunging over a million children into poverty."
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/15/the_worst_thing_hillary_clinton_has_ever_done/


-----
From: the Analysis Bernie Sanders vs. Hillary Clinton on Welfare

"Here’s how Hillary Clinton described welfare recipients in an 1999 op-ed:


Too many of those on welfare had known nothing but dependency all their lives, and many would have found it difficult to make the transition to work on their own.

Hillary Clinton also defended welfare reform in 2000 column:


Since we first asked mothers to move from welfare to work, millions of families have made the transition from dependency to dignity.

In 2002, when Congress was debating whether to reauthorize the Clinton-era reforms, then-Senator Hillary Clinton said:


Now that we’ve said these people are no longer deadbeats—they’re actually out there being productive—how do we keep them there?

Bernie Sander, on the other hand, voted against the 1996 welfare reform legislation as a member of the House of Representatives, and strongly denounced it as cruel. Here’s how he described the legislation in his 1997 book, Outsider in the House:

The bill, which combines an assault on the poor, women and children, minorities, and immigrants is the grand slam of scapegoating legislation, and appeals to the frustrations and ignorance of the American people along a wide spectrum of prejudices.

Here’s how he described the welfare reform debate during a C-SPAN interview in 1994:

My concern is in the process of welfare reform, we begin to look at the causes of poverty in America, that we make sure that we improve the situation and not punish poor people and children, especially the children.

Sanders also wrote in his 1997 that while he supported Bill Clinton for reelection over his GOP rival Bob Dole, he had plenty of reservations:

Do I have confidence that Clinton will stand up for the working people of this country—for children, for the elderly, for the folks who are hurting? No, I do not.

According to our analysis, one of these candidate had a principled, progressive stance toward welfare reform, while the other had a politically convenient stance that, at the time, seemed most likely to advance her political career. And yet, bizarrely, Bernie Sanders is the one under attack for his attitude toward civil rights in this country.

Years later, Bernie Sanders continues to fight for the issues liberals care about without seeking to personally enrich himself in the process. He reported a net worth of just $330,000 in 2013. Hillary Clinton, by contrast, earned more than $25 million over the past year, and earned more than Sanders’ entire net worth in one hour for an October 2014 speech sponsored by telecom giant Qualcomm."

http://freebeacon.com/blog/analysis-bernie-sander-vs-hillary-clinton-on-welfare-reform/ (I did a quick vet on this and it comes up as a liberal site - Unicorn)

[Thinkingabout]

169. This was after she made the health care to c ongress, yes Ted Kennedy pushed it

Through Congress, why, just because Hillary was not a member of Congress but I see you did not furnish any information of efforts in the background. She planted the seed, Kennedy nourished the plant to maturity.

[Unicorn]

187. The article says the opposite.

[Thinkingabout]

204. Hillary made her health care presentation in 1993, the article listed

Kennedy and Hatch in 1997, yes it was after she made the presentation.

BTW, Sanders is pushing for education, the welfare reform provided for training, assistance during the training and child care. Either Sanders is for finding ways to end poverty or he isn't. Either he is for education or he isn't,

Our young people are dying through gun violence, Sanders does not seem to be interested in curtailing gun violence. Conclusion, he does not care about our children or poverty, yes Hillary has been an advocate for children, their education, healthcare and well being. She has also been an advocate issues, their wages since there are many single women homes living in poverty.

[Unicorn]

168. Wow, I just learned something amazing while googling Clinton.

I remember well, how when she was a senator she and Pelosi would repeatedly give lip service to the Dems then cave to the republicans and vote their way. What I didn't know was Debbie Wasserman Shultz was in that shite too. This one came after Hillary left the Senate:

"Today, the House passed the 2014 Farm Bill 251 to 166.

162 Republicans voted for it. 63 voted against it.

103 Democrats voted against it. 89 voted for it.

The Farm Bill contains $8.7 billion in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps. This translates to a $90 per month cut to beneficiaries. This cut follows November's $5 billion cut from the program, the "hunger cliff" that the Democrats themselves created.

The deal also restricts the USDA from "advertising the SNAP program through [TV], radio and billboard advertisements."

Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz all voted for the bill.
"
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2014/1/29/1273428/-These-89-Democrats-Voted-to-Cut-8-7-Billion-from-Food-Stamps

[Thinkingabout]

170. Your results came back about Hillary like my Google results did for Sanders except less.

[Unicorn]

171. Please post what you have for sanders against welfare

[Phlem]

178. Crickets!

They all lie just as well if not better than their Goddess.

Each and Every Time.

Hill-larious!

[Unicorn]

193. I'm not over looking that this person may be being paid to post by the Clinton campaign. The wild

accusation with nothing to back it up seem to be the troll way.

Most real posters will put in a link to point to why they believe something.

I haven't been on this site a week yet. I suspect you guys have a lot of Clinton trolls here because I've seen wild accusations and then they don't come back when you call them on it several times now. On Huffington post, which I fled because it's over run by Clinton trolls as well as articles that are pro to the point of shilling for Clinton and there is a serious lack of articles for Sanders.(Sanders only shows up in linked blog posts not as news.) The real posters would provide links and be able to discuss it. Then there were the hit and runs like this lady just did. It spells Clinton paid poster.

[LondonReign2]

201. If you've ever read thinkingabout's posts, it is hard to imagine anyone

would pay for such nonsense.

[Unicorn]

203. I see. I put that person on ignore since she has 100% chance of being on juries

and already showed she makes wild accusations while lacking the will to qualify them.

[Cal33]

222. Let me play the devil's advocate for just a few seconds. Just look at the immenslty of the job:

Trying to make lies sound like the truth is anything but easy. One fails at it most of the
time. I think you have to be pretty desperate, indeed, to take on a job like this!!

[Phlem]

215. Welcome aboard and safe journey's!

Try the Bernie group for some peace of mind and support.

[Unicorn]

230. Thank you.

I'll head there now. I hadn't looked into groups yet.

[Unicorn]

245. Thank you! I will.

[Thinkingabout]

229. Paid troll, huh, send me my check.

I never have believed in unicorns.

[Phlem]

247. You don't make enough sense to get paid Chief.

[harun]

147. ROFL

We will not be hearing the terms Social Justice, Inequality or Wall St. Speculation out of a Clinton presidency.

Neo-liberals/neo-conservatives love inequality. It provides more workers at lower wages for their true god, Corporate Profit.

[Thinkingabout]

148. Denial of facts, huh. Now Sanders is moved to Hillary's position are you going to say Sanders does

not have a position on SS?

[Phlem]

183. I believe post 171 asked you a question you haven't responded to.

Denial of facts? Denial of information? Denial of truth?

Here it is:

171. Please post what you have for sanders against welfare

Got nothing huh.

Just like every fucking Hillary supporter when faced with the facts.

[2banon]

238. You seem to have a general problem with facts.

might want to look into the reasons why and how it could be corrected.

[lumberjack_jeff]

179. To a large degree, her agenda items are better described as rhetorical devices. n/t

[2banon]

239. And that's putting it politely.

I'll try and remember your words instead of the more crass but to the point terminology I tend to use...

[truedelphi]

228. Her agenda's stated positions are cancelled out by decades of the Clintons selling us

In the middle class out, over and over again.

"Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice shame on me," is the mantra of today's voters. They're fed up to the hilt with the deceptions both Big Parties have perpetuated on us voters.

I could care less what she or people like Diane Feinstein say - what matters to me is what they have done.

[Thinkingabout]

237. Like twenty five years of getting zilch done, tack the name Sanders and the king of no

Accomplishments but holding a seat in Congress. Just like his speech transcripts, see there isn't anything.

[truedelphi]

240. He held a seat wherein he didn't swindle the taxpayers with

A vote for a six trillion dollar, unwinnable war, unlike HRC's vote for the IWR.

And he stands firm on issues that need to be acted on:

** Support of $15 minimum wage
** Support of free college for all
** Single payer health care
** Support of a fracking ban
** Support of outlawing the death penalty
** Campaign finance - relies on smaller donations from individuals
** Wall Street relationship - hasn't accepted millions for speeches he refuses to release
** More even handed on Israel/Palestinian conflict
** Less hawkish
** Better judgment on Iraq war and Patriot Act
** Quicker to support gay marriage
** More decisive on trade deals such as TPP
** Stronger supporter of marijuana legalization
** Stronger support of Social Security preservation/expansion
** Supports reinstating Glass-Steagall
** Wants countries in region to lead fight against ISIS, not US
** Calls for withdrawl of troops from Afghanistan

[Thinkingabout]

241. He made sure Lockheed Martin got over a Trillion dollars on F-35 program

Which has large cost over runs and still not a functioning product. Oh, I think if you check he voted for funding of the war. On keeping SS stronger, he is now saying the same as Hillary, to start FICA on Wages $250,000, glad he arrived at her position. Campaign finance reform, his campaign has twice been told to refund donations from individuals of over $2700. He isn't following the current laws of campaign finance, it is a problem.

[rhett o rick]

234. At the beginning of the campaign they were miles apart on every issue. Since then

Sen Sanders has been steadfast while Clinton's rhetoric has changed. Now she isn't so hot on fracking and the TPP (wink, wink). Now she is all over $15 min wage. I wonder who she is fooling. You?

[randr]

3. My party left me

[Ed Suspicious]

27. This.

[PufPuf23]

33. Feels that way. Seems taking the Democratic Party back would

be dual purpose.

[840high]

69. Yes it did.

[Duckhunter935]

80. Indeed so

[Adrahil]

139. By almost any measure, that's untue.

The party as a whole has moved to the left, and our elected representives have as well. . All these "party left me" types seem to be forgetting Dixecrats (oretty much gone), Reagan Democrats (almost gone), and other conservative democrats. Where I gre up was very much dominated be "Democrats,". Most of whom (but nit all) were pretty damned conservative. They are gone now. They either died or became Republicans. The Democratic party where I grew up is now pretty much aligned with the national party.

[Phlem]

186. you are lost.

Some more jokes please!!!!



"The Democratic party where I grew up is now pretty much aligned with the national party."

And the fucking party has moved right. Get it yet? The DNC's antics this election plays out Republican strategies. WWhat's it gonna take for you to open your eye's.



Hint New Democrat = Thirdway = Conservative Neo Liberals.

Try reading.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

177. Yup.

[RKP5637]

185. Same here, so I officially left them and registered Unaffiliated. I feel much better. n/t

[brooklynite]

4. And by "so many good people" you mean a handful of anonymous bloggers...

...there's no hard data that any significant number of voters are planning to do so in the real world.

[Armstead]

6. No but a significant number may well just tune out and stay home....

because of a perceived lack of real choice.

or maybe vote GOP just for a change.

[Demsrule86]

8. Saying that people should or will vote for the GOP

is supposed to be against the rules.

[JonLeibowitz]

9. No, saying people will vote for the GOP is not against the rules.

The poster did not say they should.

[PufPuf23]

34. No way would I vote GOP nor would I recommend so.

One must learn to be selective within the Democratic Party.

One has the most power to clean one's own home.

[Armstead]

10. I didn't say they should...but they very well might

[TransitJohn]

14. LULZ

[OwlinAZ]

118. postulating and exhorting are quite different

[Andy823]

16. Only an idiot

Would vote for the GOP candidate. I am sure that some of those who keep pushing that meme are just that, and of course there are a whole lot of right wing trolls pushing that meme here on DU also. I do see this kind of shit posted on that other board a lot of you belong to, but this is DU, and it's a site where Democrats are supposed to be supported, not republicans.

[passiveporcupine]

41. it's a site where Democrats are supposed to be supported, not republicans

You would think, wouldn't you?

Yet most of us are supporting the best dem we've seen run in a long time while some of you are supporting the closest thing to a republican we've seen in a long time.

[LondonReign2]

205. I would add that only an idiot would vote for Republican economic and foreign policies

?itok=o-pSGbXf

[riderinthestorm]

21. Democratic party membership has fallen 7-8% since 2008 depending on which survey is used

Independents are now at 43% of the electorate - a stunning figure.

The Democratic party is dying a slow death.

[pokerfan]

121. a picture is worth a thousand words

http://www.gallup.com/poll/166763/record-high-americans-identify-independents.aspx

[Aerows]

22. Let me state it plainly for you.

There isn't enough money in the world, propaganda, and voting suppression that will see Hillary Clinton in the White House.

If you think Bernie has been harsh on her, the politically damaging explosions coming are going to be mere lit matches in comparison.

[RKP5637]

190. She's going to lose, but so many people have blinders on. n/t

[PufPuf23]

32. I mean good Americans and good Democrats not bloggers.

There is hard data that the number of registered Democrats (and GOP) in % basis of total voters is in decline.

New voters tend to register independent and POTUS primary campaign has turned off many youth to the Democratic Party.

You know what I typed but you cannot help yourself but to post disingenuous.

[riderinthestorm]

46. Yes the Democratic party is at 28-29% of the electorate - historic lows nt

[PufPuf23]

56. The poster also knows better but posts inaccurate anyways.

Thank you as you report what I was too lazy to look up.

[riderinthestorm]

59. I know. The disinformation campaign by Hillary supporters never disappoints

[snowy owl]

95. So the independents (me for instance) who've already left, mean nothing?

People like you will spell the end of the party as you now know it. You think the current high number of independents isn't a reflection on the dems? Or are you one who just doesn't really believe that everyone should be able to vote in primaries? God Bless exclusive clubs? Stupid thinking.

[TM99]

17. I blame Clinton and every other spineless

Last edited Sun Apr 24, 2016, 09:01 PM - Edit history (1)

motherfucking Democrat that cheerleadered for Bush's illegal invasion.

I have particular loathing for Clinton because she stood up on the Senate floor and parroted the lies and talking points verbatim.

By your own logic, Clinton is not a good person. She allowed the GOP to win their way, sent men and women from the US to their deaths, and killed hundreds and thousands of Iraqi civilians.

[Silver_Witch]

57. War is the lifeblood they drink in the night...

hatred and murder of other people and our planet are their ultimate goal...I am always amazed that they don't know that they will die too. When the planet shakes us all off like the fleas we have become that will be the end of the 1%.

[Old Codger]

23. hillary

is not to blame for that particular act, but she is guilty of the same mindset that led to that happening and will perpetuate that mindset into her "rule" fortunately we won't have to endure that...she is a war monger of the same mold as gw and all of that bunch...

[closeupready]

11. In a democracy, we are all free to vote however we want.

And I do not enjoy seeing the political home of American liberals fumble so badly in the face of a VERY weak Republican opposition party.

But perhaps things are unfolding just as they must for a better government to emerge...?

Peace.

[PufPuf23]

38. Thank you. Peace be with you too. eom

[oldandhappy]

12. Thank you. Well done.

I'm with you. I had not sorted it all out so clearly. Thank you for your post. Excellent. I will change my registration after I vote in the primary. But I will still vote for Dems, at least down ticket. The DNC has decided it does not need me at this point. Oh yes, they will whine. But they will not change. I am going to re=register because I want the DNC to see a change in numbers. Right now they just assume we will all fall in line. Bernie has impacted the party from the inside. We can continue the pressure. I figure real change will not happen as long as the manipulations and money grubbing and control policies continue to get the DNC what it wants. When it no longer gets what it wants (or what clinton wants) then maybe there can be conversation. I am patient, I no longer want to call myself democrat. I will be very happy to be independent or green. I feel I am telling the world I am capable of making my own decision. I am not obedient! I understand your concern about people making changes. We are not going far.

[PufPuf23]

40. Thank you. Think of staying as a burr under the saddle. eom

Last edited Tue Apr 26, 2016, 10:34 AM - Edit history (1)

[oldandhappy]

114. excellent reason!

[danimich1]

68. Mine will change too

I'm done. If they ever have a decent candidate I'll re-register. I've never voted for a republican - but that's what Hillary is. Once Bernie is gone I'll switch to independent. Chances are the only good it will do is make me feel better. But I'm ok with that.

[oldandhappy]

115. with you 100%, smile

[TheCowsCameHome]

13. It's sad, but as he saying goes, "*hit happens"

One cowboy can only so much when the herd is running out of control.........

[vintx]

15. I'm not changing my registration unless Bernie drops out.

Once that happens I'm done with being a yellow dog.

Done telling people "But SCOTUS!"

Done donating money, time, anything.

[djean111]

19. Me too. Exactly.

If the Democratic Party is pushing down our throats a candidate who stands for war and fracking and the TPP and cluster bombs and means-testing Social Security and Wall Street, and against Single Payer - then I must not be a Democrat. So I will leave.

[PufPuf23]

42. What has occurred in POTUS 2016 makes me frustrated and angry.

The Democratic party looks today like the GOP of my youth.

Hillary Clinton reminds me of no politician more than Richard Nixon.

Recall Nixon made his name when in Congress pushing back against the New Deal and demonizing liberals.

Nixon lives in infamy but did much damage on the way.

[DonCoquixote]

123. sad fact is

Nixon founded the EPA. Could you imagine the modern Democrats putting that up?

[PufPuf23]

125. Nixon supported the centerpieces of progressive environmental legislation (NEPA, EPA, CWA, OSHA)

Look at an earlier post.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1810097

Nixon also was responsible for price controls and gasoline rationing in response to Arab oil embargo. Roe vs Wade occurred while Nixon was POTUS and, while he did not use his position to force the issue, Nixon was pro-legal abortion. Federal affirmative action programs were initiated under Nixon. Desegregation in general was supported by Nixon. The widespread desegregation of Southern schools occurred under Nixon. Nixon supported the Equal Rights Amendment. Nixon proposed health care legislation similar to ACA. Nixon appointed more women to federal positions than any prior POTUS. Nixon opened China. Economic policy under Nixon was Keynesian (the New Deal and Great Society are examples of Keynesian economics). Nixon obtained the first nuclear arms control deals with USSR, opened trade, and visited USSR as POTUS. After the Yom Kippur War, Nixon made peace with Egypt and started Middle East peace talks. Nixon supported a two-state solution for Israel.

That said, IMHO it takes a Reagan or a Bush to find worse POTUSs that were more despicable in character.

Nixon's history as POTUS also illustrates how far the 21st Democratic establishment policy has drifted to the right and actually resembles GOP policy of the Nixon era.

Nixon will go down in history because of the dirty tricks known as Watergate. Worse Nixon lied to the nation to get elected and deliberately extended the Vietnam War while meddling to undermine the Paris Peace talks to achieve POTUS.

I may have been the first at DU to note that Hillary Clinton resembles Richard Nixon.

Alas the comparison has more than a little validity.

BTW I was a career federal employee and Cal student when Nixon was POTUS as well as a registered and voting Democrat.

[Art_from_Ark]

233. Nixon was under a lot of pressure to take action

in the wake of two major environmental disasters that occurred in 1969-- the Santa Barbara Oil Spill (the worst US oil spill up to that point), and the Cuyahoga River becoming so polluted that it actually caught fire.

[DonCoquixote]

249. whereas modern politics

insulates pols from even the worst disasters, yay 24 hour news.

[Jackilope]

44. FISA was my first heartbreak.

I had pleaded with Sen. Tim Johnson at a 4th of July parade appearance to vote against it. I could tell by his facial expression it was already a done deal. I sobbed watching Democrats like he and Sen. Obama vote for it and contemplated turning Independent then.

TPP, fracking, no single payer / Medicare expansion, and the shoving of a neoliberal war hawk is pushing me to the edge. The system is too rigged to try and get enough decent, progressive Democrats in.

Nominating HRC is going to be the final straw in the death of the Democratic Party. Economic collapse and war is what I foresee. It will be the Grand Theft and the paid online Brock-style trolls will have been paid for their part in the collapse, but will suffer just like the rest of us who tried to warn.

[ReasonableToo]

90. The day they voted to extend Patriot act I tossed the letter calling for a donation in recycling

I only give to candidates directly. I imagine Bernie wants to support select canidates as well and not the neoliberal ones.

[riderinthestorm]

94. Yes, Bernie has a list of 190 down ticket candidates we contribute to directly

http://jackpineradicals.org/showthread.php?4694-Bernie-s-Coat-Tails-Important-List-of-Bernie-Democrats-Running-for-Office



Eliminate the DNC completely. We don't need their filter anymore.

[ReasonableToo]

106. Thanks. Had not seen that. My district not listed but I voted as progressive as I could

My litmus test is anti-TPP, anti fracking, and pro single payer. These are all deal breakers.

[riderinthestorm]

107. Mine are environmental issues and whose pledged to prioritize them

[PufPuf23]

129. Thank you. I had missed that list of down ticket candidates. eom

[840high]

71. Many of us are with you.

[Andy823]

18. If people don't like it

Then they really don't have to be here, do they? I still can't figure out why so many so called Bernie supporters come here and do nothing but bash Clinton, day, after day, after day. It's almost like they want republicans to win the WH instead of a Democrat. Hmmmmm, maybe that's the reason.

[TheProgressive]

26. No, it's to indicate how bad a candidate Clinton is...

And to tell the DNC and super delegates that a Clinton presidency will
cause a mass exodus of *real* democrats from the Dem party.

To say nothing of the huge and destructive mistake a Clinton presidency would be...

[Aerows]

36. I have no idea who they think

Hillary Clinton appeals to if they aren't financially tied.

The GE is going to be a red wedding GOT-style politically and Democrats are going to be asked to sit back and complain that it was Ralph Nader.

I'm in no way going to be scolded. I have been saying this for months.

[Andy823]

77. I don't buy that

The majority of those who keep saying they are going to "leave" the party, are not even Democrats. This board has been taken over by right wing trolls who have been able to dupe a lot of people here into thinking their way. Not voting for the nominee come November only helps republicans. If you want to let Trump, or Cruz, be your next president, then you may not be a "real" Democrat in the first place.

[TheProgressive]

85. Yes, almost everyone here could be a troll...

But I will never again comprise my morals and ethics. I will *never* vote
for a republican and that includes Clinton. Just look at here past and her present.
It is republican and oligarchic.

[dreamnightwind]

150. Wow we think we are more Democrats than our party is these days

Apparently you think we're mostly phony right-wingers, how insulting, way to reach out to disaffected Democrats.

[LondonReign2]

208. Instructing us to pick the shit sandwich because the double shit sandwich is worse

is no longer a compelling argument

[Aerows]

29. "We'll go it alone"

Without a significant mass of Democratic voters that are upset by voter suppression.

*That* is surely a winning strategy.

[whatchamacallit]

31. The primary is still underway

If she clinches the nom you won't have to put up with many Sanders supporters because there will no longer be a reason for us to come here. I think you can deal until then.

[jonestonesusa]

251. ^^This^^

If Clinton wins the nomination and this site becomes Hillaryland, further marginalizing the left base of the party, it will definitely be quieter in here. I certainly won't be here, and that's probably true of a lot of Sanders supporters.

[PufPuf23]

43. The Democratic establishment and DNC failed far too many Party members.

Hillary Clinton does not have the character to be POTUS nor CIC.

I have no intent to leave the Democratic Party over failed leadership.

Time to replace the leadership.

If it means temporarily stopping support and being a pain in the neck, so be it.

[Punkingal]

55. People explain it over and over again...you don't get it because you are listening.

Do you honestly think Bernie supporters want a Republican? Of course you don't...you are just throwing it out there because you have no defense of your candidate.

[Jrapin]

65. Really? Still can't figure it out?

Ok,

[alan2102]

83. It is almost like YOU want Republicans in the WH

HRC is, after all, a Republican. A decent, center-right Republican. Not like the crazies in the party.

[TDale313]

197. Nearly half the party supports Bernie.

So telling 'em to fuck off is a really bad idea. Many long time Dems are not happy with where the party's at right now, and are very disappointed in the leadership. We can stay and try to move the party forward or we can look for another "home"- but we're not gonna sit down and shut up about the problems we see- particularly the influence of money in the process.

[-none]

236. That is Over Half, not nearly half, that supports Bernie.

Election fraud and voter suppression are taking their toll. Plus misreporting of the results isn't helping any either.

[TDale313]

250. I know. But the "nearly half" is absolutely indisputable.

And makes the point without getting into that particular debate, which tends to lead to them writing us off as ct. We're a huge part of the party, whether it's slightly less than half or more than half.

[-none]

258. OK, that makes sense

[insta8er]

24. I was staunchly with Obama, but what we got now...IMO Stinks to high heaven. I will not be part of

the problem. And if Sanders doesn't make it I am out!

[The Second Stone]

25. I agree with some you put forth and disagree with other things

I respect that you think that Hillary Clinton is Machiavellian. A bit of a strong term the way you use it, but you get your point across. Hillary Clinton is a ruthless operator. And I approve. American politics is a knife fight in dark alley, as are the more dangerous aspects of international politics. Whoever our president is, we will be lead by that president down the dark alley of politics that is life. The world is a dangerous place, and American politics is dangerous with high stakes.

Hillary Clinton has the experience and the political skills to lead us in such an environment. The Republicans are not going to be any nicer to the next President if she is a Democrat than they were to Obama, Clinton or Carter. A naive, doddering old narcissist (Sanders) simply doesn't have the skills to accomplish anything, including getting the nomination or elected.

What Hillary Clinton will do that will benefit us hundreds of thousands of times a year is the same thing that Bill Clinton and Barak Obama and Jimmy Carter accomplished: appoint judges who will give the people an even playing field. How the law is interpreted is what matters every day, and into the future. Bush v. Gore and Citizens United are the direct result of conservative appointees to the courts. They are Nader's narcissistic gift to us all.

The same crap spouted about Hillary Clinton was spouted about Al Gore by the credulous water carriers for the far right on behalf of Nader. The difference between Nader and Sanders is that Nader was quite happy that he spoiled the election as punishment for a lifetime of perceived slights. Sanders at least started off hoping to make a contribution.

[PufPuf23]

47. Bernie Sanders has made a contribution, win or lose.

Sanders engages the youth, brings some hope to us old liberals, and adds much required breadth to the discourse.

I backed into Sanders just like I backed into POTUS Obama.

POTUS Obama did not bring the hoped transformation but did stabilize the freefall.

If Sanders is elected POTUS (highly unlikely, which is about where we all were a year ago), he will be unsuccessful in most campaign items but maybe the reverse in direction away from neo-liberalism and corporatism and neo-conservatism - "transformation" - may start. What I envision will take many other politicians and a generation to accomplish. First we need to clean the stable.

Hillary Clinton is no Al Gore.

[The Second Stone]

63. Sanders doesn't engage the youth, he panders

Sanders Panders. And it is true that Hillary Clinton is no Al Gore. And Al Gore is no Hillary Clinton. She will be victorious where Gore failed. Gore did not fight the "liar" label thrust on him by the Bush friendly media and he chose Lie berman as his running mate. Hillary Clinton will not make those mistakes. She will hit Trump hard every time he hits her. She will fight back against the right wing media lie campaigns. Nobody messes with Hillary Clinton without paying a price for it.

Clinton is going to crush Trump like a damn bug. This is why the republicans are trying to switch out to Ryan. They all can stomach Ryan, but not Trump or Cruz.

[PufPuf23]

64. Back 4 or 5 months ago, I stated at DU that I thought Ryan would be GOP POTUS nominee.

Gore was a disappointment.

Your description of Hillary Clinton is one aspect why I do not believe Clinton has the manner or character to be CIC or POTUS.

Comprehend?

[The Second Stone]

98. Yeah, I actually comprehend that you think someone who will quietly take abuse

and not fight should be POTUS. It's why I wasn't for Obama in 2008 until he had the nomination wrapped up. And I think his coddling of Congress proved the point. You cannot deal with Republicans by being Ms. Nice Guy. You've got to be prepared to dish it back out.

Comprehend?

Sanders and his 100,000 raving maniac bros think that the Republicans will just lay down for them? Nonsense. They will eat him alive. He is not even a back bencher, he is a party crashing wallflower. Now he happens to be very popular, but that isn't with the elected representatives in DC. They tolerate him (Democrats) and deride him (Republicans). He has zero infrastructure. He thinks that saying the word "establishment" constitutes a set of policies and allies? I think not. But that is just my opinion.

[Old Codger]

28. Not really

going to leave the democratic party, the democratic party that I belonged to for all the years no longer exists. This travesty that calls itself "democratic" is merely an offshoot of the republican party not really that much room between hill and most of the last bunch of repugs we have had...Obama is not that far away from that same place, he is better than she will ever be but still way way too far right to be a true dem

[cantbeserious]

30. This Citizen Voted For A Clinton Twice - Never Again

eom

[TheCowsCameHome]

37. Yup - Two and through.

All done.

[PufPuf23]

48. Me two too. eom

[merrily]

35. I understand your position, but do not think an OP will change anyone's mind.

I think people need to understand that about 15% of Democrats who are very engaged this time around will not be voting for Hillary if she is the nominee and plan from there.

[PufPuf23]

50. I come to DU near every day and thought might as well say me piece.

There is an alternative to leaving the Democratic Party and that is to reorganize the Party from within.

No promises nor guaranteed outcomes.

Better to stay and be an irritant maybe?

[merrily]

53. ABSOLUTELY say your piece. You said it very well, too.

I do not, however, any longer believe that the Democratic Party will ever be made more liberal from within.

[PufPuf23]

58. I understand you pain. I may be wrong.

If right, there may be a day so sublime.

[Maedhros]

194. I agree. There are too few levers of power in the Party that are accessible to change agents.

The Party's response to calls for a more liberal platform is, essentially, to pretend they agree and do the opposite.

When a true agent of change appears to gain momentum, establishment forces coalesce to attack, sabotage, and punish the change agent.

[merrily]

196. Appointing Warren liasion to the left spoke volumes in a number of ways.

[840high]

75. I am sending your

OP to all my friends and family. Thank you.

[TheCowsCameHome]

45. Your dilemma

is being experienced by many thousands of others.

I will never again vote unless it's a person I can vote FOR.

I've wasted too many ballots over the last 50+ years. It's over.

[Live and Learn]

146. No idea why that post was hidden but I feel the same way. nt

[haikugal]

210. So do I.

[rufus dog]

49. Great post

I will be switching my affiliation the day HRC is nominated. Will I vote for her, maybe. But I am done with the party, and I am not a huge Bernie fan. Support him over Clinton, but feel the party must do a lot better.

Unfortunately the party has been sold off, so IMO the only option is to join the largest current group, the independents.

[PufPuf23]

54. Thank you but reconsider.

I spent most of my life a 49ers fan.

Most of the games I attended were at Kezar as a child. I was a Christopher Milk Club kid.

I am still a SF Giants fan and Warriors fan but not so much the 49er fan anymore, probably because of the ownership.

In one sense one loses power by leaving the Democratic Party and going independent.

That may be one way politics is different from sports plus politics is way different from sports even though most folks appear to think they are the same.

[rufus dog]

67. I almost left in 2007

Was pissed that the Dems didn't go after Bush/Cheney after winning the midterms. In retrospect I should have left, too many were bought off. Fool me once!

As for the Niners, was in tears after the 71 Championship game, a lifelong hate of the Cowboys was the result of that experience.

Anyway, the point is, I have lost all trust in the party. No way do they get another chance.

[PufPuf23]

72. I about lost political hope during Reagan and have been adrift since the stolen

Last edited Tue Apr 26, 2016, 10:34 AM - Edit history (1)

election of 2000.

Once I decided to support POTUS Obama the world brightened but that was short lived and took my cynicism deep.

That said, POTUS Obama calmed a very bad situation.

I have zero trust in Democratic Party leadership.

I can smirk over being a pain in the ass and they might as well learn to distrust me until I give up or the neo-liberals leave for a new home or demise.

[yuiyoshida]

143. Hey! I hear that

My parents were 49er season ticket holders for years! When the owner said screw the city and moved to so called greener pastures, they refused to have anything to do with the 49ers.. despite they would call and ask about season tickets. They told them, call people in Palo Alto, you don't need our damn money.

As for me.. Raiders fan. always been, always will.

[Ferd Berfel]

51. The Democratic party took a RIGHT turn in the 80's

and has been heading in that direction ever since. The neo-Dems, as they are now, is no longer the Party I signed up with back when Nixon was king. The neo-Dems have Wall Street, They don't need me.

The Party has left me.

[PufPuf23]

62. The Democratic Party did not leave you, it was stolen. eom

[Ferd Berfel]

200. True

I usually make the DLC CLinton Koch Bros reference but thought I'd state it differently time

Yes, It was stolen.

[grasswire]

60. thoughtful and interesting, thanks. nt

[LWolf]

66. Thank you for this.

It's thoughtful.

I agree with most. My bottom line: the party needs to be rid of the neo-liberals, and this has been the best opportunity to do so since they took power. If we fail, then many are going to quit the party and take their votes and activism elsewhere. Enough to matter? That remains to be seen.

[PufPuf23]

70. I think we agree about the neo-liberals and also see the opportunity

as more and more folks wake up.

Why not be independent in mind and an irritant within the Democratic Party with a goal to remove the neo-liberals.

Liberals quitting is what they want.

[jeff47]

73. Your experience is radically different from those of us who are younger.

1992 was my first election, since I turned 18 that year. I've never had a Democratic party that was not under the control of the DLC or their successors.

As a result, I'm not particularly enamored with the party as an institution. To me, the good works of the Democratic party only exist in history books.

The generations before us created a world where institutions no longer show any loyalty to their people, resulting in the people no longer showing loyalty to their institutions. For example, layoffs used to be a last-ditch effort to save a company. Now they're used to goose the balance sheet whenever executives want a larger bonus.

That lack of loyalty extends throughout our society, including our political parties. The party, frankly, does not give a shit that they are hemorrhaging members, and that turnout among GenX and younger is abysmal. Because of this right here:

If Bernie Sanders fails in his quest, Hillary Clinton is the best alternative.

The party will never give a shit as long as voters are willing to be motivated by lesser-of-evils arguments like this. I am no longer willing to accept that abysmal situation.

I'm quite confident that the neoliberals will negotiate away my Social Security, Medicare, abortion rights, and similar issues if given enough time. So I don't see a benefit of pushing off those losses by a decade. I'll still be here to suffer them either way. Might as well get started on the rebuilding sooner.

[PufPuf23]

78. If Hillary Clinton is nominated for POTUS 2016,

I hope an organized movement within the Party begins to look to primary Clinton in 2020 and lets Clinton and party leadership know every day of her 4 years.

Who ends up VP will be interesting. Also the GOP may win because of the incompetence and poor faith effort of the Democratic leadership.

I agree with everything you say and I apologize. My generation had far more opportunity but it is unfair to blame many of us for Reagan and Reaganism, now taken as virtue by establishment Democrats.

I think the Democratic Party wants liberals to give up and leave.

Sanders quest doesn't end with Bernie but begins with Bernie.

[jeff47]

81. I don't.

I hope that movement forms outside the party.

I see no point in reforming the Democratic party. Let it become the new Republican party that the leadership desperately wants it to be.

My generation had far more opportunity but it is unfair to blame many of us for Reagan and Reaganism

Which is why I said "generations" instead of only yours. It was a combined effort by parts of several generations, not the accomplishment of a single generation. Heck, the younger half of the teabaggers are GenX.

[haikugal]

232. I'm with you jeff47...you're the same age as my son and I think all of us working together

Outside what is known as the Democratic Party is the way to go.

Good comments, thanks!

[metamorphosis]

74. This seems to have some markings of major political realignment

Eugene Mccarthy's run in '68 signaled a shift among Democrats, amid anger about Vietnam, the arms race, womens' rights, civil rights, etc., which kept the Dems in strong control of the House and Senate well into the mid-1980s. Gradually, the DLC came to power, with Bill Clinton as one of the group's leaders. The formerly liberal DNC battled it out with DLC for 10-12 years, but eventually succumbed when the Senate leadership passed from the brilliant George Mitchell to the terribly unpopular and ineffective) Tom Daschle (mentored Barack Obama after the disastrous end to his Senate career). Harry Reid was only slightly more capable than Daschle. Only in the House did liberal leadership return, following a steady decline during the Dick Gephardt years.

During the same period, Nixon developed a "southern strategy," based on the notion of a predominantly white "moral majority" (ironic, insofar as his was a least moral presidency. Reagan further developed the idea of appealing to blue collar (mostly white) voters in the south, but also around the nation. This, in itself, was a political realignment, with the GOP gradually the formerly Confederate States into a GOP fiefdom. Eventually, there was a further GOP realignment with the development of the "tea party" movement, with racist and xenophobic and anti-intellectual leanings (similar to the 19th c "know-nothing" party). Absurdly, the tea party with its "clown car" candidacies has gradually grown to dominate the Republican Party, with such discontent that the GOP itself now is in a state of chaos & crisis - or internal fracture/identity crisis.

So, we have seen political realignments in the population, with many former Democrats (especially white southerners and blue collar workers) leaving the party, and with the Democratic Party running a centrist program, bolstered by a gradual increase in minority populations.

2016 is a very interesting year because we're seeing a massive growth of unaffiliated voters and a nearly visceral anger at both political parties among nearly half the population. Both conventions may be the most contentious since the late '60s, and further alienation and realignment seems likely.

On the Democratic side, we may go into the election behind the leadership of a kind of dinosaur, a Daschle Democrat (DLC). One of the odd paradoxes is that the nomination battle was won in an alliance of the DLC with many af-am voters, who had been stalwart bastions of liberalism since they swung to the Democratic Party as white southerners swung to the GOP. But the af-am alliance with HRC seems likely to be only a passing trend, since af-am voters have consistently benefitted much more from the liberal-progressive of the Democratic Party.

One cause for concern is that Obama has governed far to the right politically, despite flashes of liberal rhetoric, and many af-am voters have stuck with Hillary Clinton because she has declared herself an heir to the Obama (Daschle) legacy.

---

A broader view, which covers the entire history of the US, is that there have been realignments or shifts to right or left in the population, on average every 15-20 years (Arthur Slezinger's theory). In this view, voters change their party affiliation when the party no longer represents their views; the realignments themselves are mostly driven by larger shifts of the population, various political trends, wars, economic collapses, and other catastrophes.

Thus, should we be surprised to see a fundamental realignment taking place? Perhaps not, according to Schlezinger. The last major realignment took place in both parties a few decades ago, with Nixon's southern strategy, moral majority, Reagan Democrats, etc. And both Parties have had more than one realignment (strong liberal/ New Deal tradition usurped by Clinton and others DNC to DLC; GOP conservativism which became more and more radical until the "tea party" wing dominated).

---

On the other hand, none of this really seems to make any sense, and the crisis within each Party seems so extreme as to actually terrify many Americans, who wonder if anyone in Government truly represents their interests.

---

It seems unlikely that either Democrats or Republicans will be able to govern in such a fragmented state for very long, with tens of millions abandoning both parties. Perhaps the internal organizing principles of both parties have become so weak that neither party will long survive in anything like their present form. The Democratic crisis is even more profound than that of the GOP, with most legislatures and Governers being in GOP control of most States. Prospects for the future may include gradual disintegration of the DLC coalition and an end to the disastrous Daschle paradigm for Dem leadership.

Eventually, the Dem voters do have demographic trends on their side, as the % of minority voters is growing sufficiently to prevent Republicans from regaining the Presidency by catering to the interests of the diminishing white population. Further, young voters are highly liberal and progressive, and conservative religion's influence has shown steady signs of losing steam in an increasingly less religious nation.

So there is a generally Democratic or liberal coalition, dominated by minority groups, women (especially single women), younger voters, and to some extent low income voters (also environmentalists, humanists, etc.). But the Democratic Party leadership has been swinging to the right, and no one is sure whether the Democratic Party can continue to represent the voters in the liberal coalition.

At the very same time, the coalition of religious conservatives, wealthy/powerful, and tea-party "no-nothings" has revealed itself to be so shaky that the GOP seems almost unable to expand its appeal enough to win the Presidency. On the other hand, the GOP political leadership can content itself with controlling most of the State governments and both Houses of Congress. Despite massive chaos in the GOP, they have the wealth and power to win most elections, and to win massive landslides in the off-years when fewer Democrats tend to vote.


---


The point of all this is that there is widespread discontentment among the populace generally. On the liberal/humanist side, the Sanders phenomenon may be a reminder that the DLC control has ruined the Democratic party by not representing its constituencies well enough. Perhaps it is time for the DLC to go away permanently, or perhaps the Democratic Party will have to crumble away, being replaced perhaps by a reborn Progressive Party, or something of the sort.

Maybe this is the kind political revolution that Bernie has been talking about. Surely, there will be another Presidential challenge like this one in 2020, but it is possible that the progressives will abandon the Democrats and run third-party campaigns from then on. 2016 may simply have taught us that the Democratic Party no longer represents half of us, and that there are plenty of liberal and progressive Independents that could join with us to build a new liberal/progressive party.

[PufPuf23]

84. Thank you for filling in so much detail.

Sanders is a highly welcomed candidate but only a start.

Rereading my OP, one could conclude I want to go back but what I want is to change direct for the future where Sanders is just a start of a transformation of a generation or more.

The discontent is an opportunity for something good and new and also a risk factor for the bad actors.

It is very difficult to maintain momentum.

[Trajan]

93. Well spoken

Totally agree ...

[baldguy]

79. Who said they were good? Who said they were part of the Democratic Party?

What I see are people who have criticized every success the Democratic Party have ever made, with the false narrative - created by the VRWC - that "both parties are the same", and see every defeat of the Democratic Party as a major victory.

These people are not "good" by any stretch of the imagination.

[PufPuf23]

86. There are good and well-meaning people left in the world.

I include myself and I have been a loyal registered and voting Democratic Party member for at least 44 years.

What is VRWC?

Who said "both parties are the same"? I didn't.

Problem I have is that the neo-liberals and neo-conservatives and money have taken over Democratic Party leadership and serve the wealthy with the GOP policies of my youth.

[baldguy]

89. The "VRWC" is the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

From which those "good people" you describe have taken lies, talking points, propaganda, and phony "issues" & used them to attack and work to defeat Democrats and the Democratic Party.

Those "good people" and not good people.

[PufPuf23]

119. Thanks. Much of the contemporary criticism of Hillary Clinton comes from

her left and from her actions post-9/11, as Senate, SOS, and candidate for POTUS.

The world is so topsy-turvy now that the VRWC of the 1990s is used as cover for valid concerns now.

[baldguy]

137. If you say Clinton is a war-mongering corporate whore who can't be trusted

You're parroting the RW lies which have been spread about her for 35 yrs. There's nothing from "the left" there. There's no original thought there.

The people that believe & spread RW lies about Democrats are not "good people".

And if you want topsy-turvy: how's about Trump and Sanders agreeing that Clinton isn't qualified to be President - when any fair reading of the facts would show that she's the most qualified person to for the job come along in ages.

[PufPuf23]

149. My thoughts are my own. I supported the Clintons and mocked the VRWC in the 1990s.

My judgement about Hillary Clinton is harsh and comes from her time as Senator, SOS, and candidate for POTUS in 2008 and 2012.

I was already in any-Democrat-but-Hillary Clinton in 2008.

How many videos of Hillary Clinton outright lying or being disingenuous have to be posted at DU to see that Clinton has a problem with telling the truth?

I don't parrot anyone and haven't watched TV in years and only listen to SF Giants and Warriors games on the radio.

Neither am I naïve.

If you pay attention, there are many long term posters and Democrats, "Good People" at DU that are liberals and strongly against Hillary Clinton. Explain that with substance and without name calling.

The neo-liberals have taken the Democratic Party to the right of the Nixon era GOP except on some social and cultural issues.

Hillary Clinton is a neo-liberal and a neo-conservative. These terms have specific meaning and are counter to the Democratic Party of the New Deal.

Nixon should never have been POTUS because of character issues.

I won't even go there in the horrendous thought that Trump be POTUS.

Hillary Clinton is intelligent and experienced, like Nixon, but also, like Nixon, Clinton fails the test of character.

[baldguy]

155. Apparently, your thoughts are not your own, considering the words that you use.

[PufPuf23]

156. Do you have anything better than a meaningless insult?

I can say the same about as you appear way deep into the mindless kool aid and neoliberal dribble.

I know what is in my mind and what are my sources.

Go away.

[nadinbrzezinski]

175. You are taking to s true believer

And like Nixon true believers, by 1974 they never liked the guy. Echoes of history.

[PufPuf23]

191. I get that.

Hillary Clinton reminds so much of Nixon.

I lived through Nixon as a high school student, 18 year old subject to the draft, Cal student and career federal employee.

I don't know your interest in music or the acquired taste for Frank Zappa but this is a timely clip of music about Dick Nixon and the general state of the world.

A brief series of images brought to you by The Viet Nam War, Richard Nixon, Kent State students and the Ohio National Guard, sprinkled with some excessive police force and rioters, courtesy of the Ministry of Madness. Special guest appearances by the Son of Orange County and his son, Agent Orange.

[TCJ70]

161. There is a subset of Hillary supporters, probably the majority of them...

...that are hardcore party loyalists. Any and all criticism of Hillary is invalid because of the 90's in their eyes. Anyone who says people here are part of the VRWC isn't worth engaging.

[PufPuf23]

166. Thanks for the insight. One is whacky to claim the OP was written by the "VRWC"

or a member of the GOP.

Whacky or deliberately dishonest.

[silvershadow]

82. The alarm was sounded eons ago, and the reasons why have been posted. All we have to do is

read, digest, and change. We apparently won't. I can only believe that in the end, the delegates will seat the proper candidate, even if it means having to (gasp) re-write the rules. I cannot believe they would taint roughly 50% of the voting public with such a horrid candidate. I believe this. I have to. It's all I have left. She apparently doesn't have the class, let alone, humility to.

[PufPuf23]

87. I share you thoughts but looking at what may be inevitable too alas.

The neo-liberals want the liberals to leave the Democratic Party.

Note my opinion of Hillary Clinton, not what one could conclude as glowing.

[Marrah_G]

91. I feel much the same way

[PufPuf23]

92. Let us share a hug then. eom

[Marrah_G]

96. I always have hugs for DUers

[PufPuf23]

102. Nice eom

[w4rma]

97. Independents need to register Democrat to vote in many primaries.

Independents need to understand that neoliberals don't want you registered as Democrats to interfere. Don't walk into thier trap. Instead vote against every Third Wayer.

[PufPuf23]

104. Exactly. We need more Democrats that do not support the neo-liberals within the Party.

Then in the Party refuse to vote for any neo-liberal and throw sunlight on them so they fail and support Democrats that we can trust.

[nichomachus]

99. If only we knew what Hillary really thought

I think those hidden transcripts would give us a pretty good idea what's really in her heart.

[PufPuf23]

105. Those of us that can see are past the transcripts anyway.

No doubt they are full of plausible deniability and dog whistles for the initiated.

Hillary Clinton is a known commodity among those that are political junkies.

[Beacool]

100. Yeah, sure.

Poor Sanders, he's losing because Hillary is running a "dishonest Machiavellian campaign". Nope, he's losing for a much simpler reason: more Democrats have voted for Hilary than have voted for Sanders.

He wasn't even a Democrat until he decided to run for president and needed the party's resources. That doesn't exactly inspire confidence in many Democrats.

[PufPuf23]

108. I never said Hillary Clinton was ahead because she was running a dishonest Machiavellian campaign

but hat is part of why Clinton is ahead and I expect Clinton to prevail.

Hillary Clinton had an 8 year head start and support of the DNC and Democratic Party establishmen before Sanders was ever a serious candidate.

Some of you forget that Sanders joined the Democratic Party to run for POTUS because he did not want to split the votes to favor the GOP. Sanders also said he would not run 3rd party should he lose.

So you are laying down some spin. Feel good?

Sanders campaign has been a welcome one to me but it is a symptom rather than the cause of the malaise in the Democratic Party.

[randome]

157. And Sanders has virtually no support from the party. He's never been a team player and it shows.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[PufPuf23]

160. Sanders has causcused and voted with Democrats during his time in Congress.

Sanders has been appointed by Democrats to various Congressional committees.

Sanders has had little or no support from the Democratic establishment and DNC.

Sanders is an iconoclast and freethinker, especially when compared to most pols.

At least a 1/3 of Democratic party members have little or no support from the Party establishment.

The Party establishment failed to provide a slate of 2016 POTUS for our perusal and made the assumption for us despite the knowledge of the negative sentiment within the Democratic Party and in the populous at large regards Hillary Clinton.

Sanders offers a true alternative and was good sure loser for the Democratic primary season but has done far better than expected.

I backed into Sanders because in 2008 and 2016 I was an any-Democrat-but-Hillary Clinton supporter and voter.

The support and conversation breadth offered by the Sanders candidacy is a breath of fresh air.

I read your posts and you cannot be trusted to be objective.

[onecaliberal]

101. I would submit to you, that the party left us long ago.

[ReasonableToo]

103. I don't go back as far as you but feel exactly the same

About Obama and the Clintons.

I'm not sure how much we can do without an objective media. But we'll keep trying to fight for the party against all enemies foreign, domestic and republican.

[PufPuf23]

110. Very good point about the loss of objective media.

The one alternative is the internet but the internet needs discretion or else is an echo chamber or a tower of babble.

[MelungeonWoman]

111. I really appreciate the earnest feelings of those who wish to leave the party

but I beg you to reconsider. it was easy enough for the DNC to scrub noncompliant voters from the rolls during the primaries, if you decide to change to independent before November it's just asking to be purged. Grit your teeth and stay, find Berniecrats in your area, support them and vote for them in the next primary! It will be a lot easier to take back our own party than to invent another one.

[PufPuf23]

112. We agree. Beg "them" to reconsider.

I offered the opinion that it is better to stay within the Democratic party and work to change the leadership and direction, mainly by being against neo-liberalism.

Thank you.

[BernieforPres2016]

141. I live in an open primary state

I voted in the Democratic primary as an Independent. There is no reason whatsoever for me to change my registration to Democrat at this point, though I suspect the DNC will try to turn my state (NC) into a closed primary by 2020.

I hope whoever picks up Bernie's issues nationally after this election will do so as an Independent so I won't have to bother changing my registration temporarily if NC becomes a closed primary state.

[Kittycat]

113. Outstanding post. Thank you!

[Odin2005]

116. I'm not leaving, the party left me.

Turd Wayers like Rahm and Debbie have made perfectly clear that we Progressives are no longer welcome, that we are, in Rahm's words, "fucking r*tarded".

[ReRe]

142. I will go to my grave...

... remembering those words from Rahm Emanuel during those ftwo yrs of POs 1st term. I'm with you. If anyone leaves the Democratic Party, it needs to be the Third Way/Grand Bargain/New Democrat/Progressive Policy Institute/DLC NeoLiberals. They are the ones who waltzed in in 1992 and took the Democratic party over. They are the ones who need to break-off and begin a new party. THEY are the imposters.

[slipslidingaway]

120. Thank you, that was a quick, frank and well stated trip through history ...

although I am not sure how people are supposed to fit into the Dem party when they try so hard to push people away and do nothing to bring independent voters into the party. We have an outlier on the Repub side who is gaining support, people are tired of the two parties controlling our nation.

The Dem party has only given one choice, with the scheduling of debates, not to mention the corporate media, they fail to recognize the level of discontent at their own peril.

The younger generation is not as constrained along party lines, we read about how the PUMA's folded and voted for Obama, but they were associated more with mainstream voters, millennials are not die hard party loyalists. This is different year with millions of a new generation entering the voting system, we can either dismiss them or welcome them, but I fear the Dems are being more dismissive.

The Dems are playing chicken on the tracks and assuming people will all leave the tracks for the Hillary side, but there are so many independent voters and newer voters. Millennials are 70 million strong, far larger than my generation of boomers.

This will be an interesting year!

Thanks again!

[Betty Karlson]

124. You are way more moderate than I am.

Given the attitude of Clinton's supporters on DU, I'm starting to feel that a vote for Clinton is a vote for a moderate Republican who won't care about me. Might as well write in. Or better yet: start a party for the 70% of the voters to Clinton's left.

Alternatively, maybe I sould work to make sure Bernie secures the nomination, so he can win a landslide victory in the GE. Clinton is a risk the party shouldn't be willing to take. Let's BERN some sense into the party elite.

[PufPuf23]

126. Sometimes it is hard to separate DU from the real world.

IMO the attitude of many Hillary Clinton supporters at DU sucks.

Most people in the meat world do not pay as much attention to politics as those of us at DU and are more influenced by TV or radio and friends and family and have less data.

Sanders would most likely easily win the general election and this is my desire.

I perceive Hillary Clinton (and her more vocal supporters) as essentially GOP that do not want my input as I am a liberal.

Look at my post #125 in this thread were I typed of Nixon.

It seems to me that one is in a better position to be an opposition member within the Democratic Party than leave the Party and that this is a better choice looking at the long term.

[w0nderer]

130. K & R n/t

[firebrand80]

132. We went through this crap in '08

Outside of a handful of diehards, this will blow over

[grossproffit]

133. I've grown bored with the "my way or the highway" crowd.

[firebrand80]

135. They think all these Bernie votes are diehards

This primary will be a distant memory to most folks by November

[jonestonesusa]

255. The enthusiasm of Sanders supporters will be a memory too, but differences on issues will remain.

Why do Clinton supporters constantly underestimate the opposition to Clinton, even among likely Democratic voters? Whether she wins the nomination or not, the primary hasn't exactly been a ringing endorsement of her campaign. She's getting outraised and outstpent by a "self-described Democratic socialist" from Vermont, a "senator of little note" as one of the DU Clinton minions put it. 25 years running for president, and this is the best Clinton can do??

Does it raise any curiosity at all that Clinton has lost 10+ primaries and caucuses against an unexpected challenger? Let me guess the answer coming from Clinton and her supporters: no! Wait out the primary, excuse the losses, learn nothing - what kind of campaign strategy is that? The level of denial in the Clinton camp is emblematic of why Dems have lost so many seats nationally and in individual states during recent years - the DNC in the tank for Clinton, and Obama's short coattails in the midterms. What in the world is wrong with actually trying to engage left-leaning and younger Democrats?

Sanders taps into record levels of enthusiasm through an independently funded campaign, the like of which has, literally, never been seen in the US. The response of the Clinton minions? Meh, nothing to see here.

We all hope that if Clinton gets the nomination, she can manage to win the general against the clown car full of wannabes going by the name of Republican candidates. But it's not impossible for her to lose the general, so let's also hope that the DNC and the Clinton camp shocks the world with a presidential campaign that motivates voters far beyond her adoring base. We'll see.

[jmousso75]

134. I do not like the thought that so many good people are considering leaving the Democratic Party

The democratic party left me years ago. They became a corporate party just like the Republican, beginning with Bill Clinton in the 1990's with his "third way" politics, NFTA, , overturning Glass Steagall.

[PufPuf23]

151. I am suggesting that folks like us stay the course and try to take back leadership of the Democratic

The Democratic Party was stolen as a vehicle in order to obtain corporate monies and support to win elections.

When Bill Clinton won the victory felt good but the change was slow and not so apparent at first.

As long as the USA has a two party system, one disenfranchises oneself by not being a member of the GOP or Democratic Party.

One does not have to follow leadership in spirit nor heart but one's vote is most valuable as a member of the Democratic Party.

Disgorging the neo-liberals and corporatists from control of the Party is a long term project.

POTUS Obama did not truly support not enact the transformation that many of us wanted, Bernie Sanders would only be a start and change in direction. The transformation would take a generation and a change in pols and populace from bottom to top.

Reconsider. Be a Democratic Party insurgent.

[B Calm]

140. Yesterday I had two Hillary supporters suggest I leave the party,

and thus shrink the Democratic base.

[PufPuf23]

153. The neo-liberals want the liberals to give up and leave the Democratic Party.

Rather than grow the Democratic party, the neo-liberals and Clinton supporters want to purge the party of liberals to secure their own position and power.

Hillary Clinton and the like are cold and disrespectful towards many liberal Democrats of long duration and commitment.

[disillusioned73]

144. Truer words..

never spoken...

"The neo-liberals are corporatists and liberals became the scapegoats for any failures"


reminds me of.. "privatize the profits & socialize the losses" - the system has been rigged for a looooooong time..

[PufPuf23]

152. True words as well "privatize the profits & socialize the losses"

Time for neo-liberals to do some losing.

Neo-liberal failure is not a sure thing immediate and will hurt and cause gnashing of teeth but is a good and necessary step.

A miracle now would be for Bernie Sanders to be Democratic Party nominee for 2016 POTUS but now looks that a game-changing event will be necessary.

[Jitter65]

145. I do not believe so many good people will leave the Democratic party.

Not supporting Clinton as POTUS is exactly what the GOP did to Obama. How well did that work out for us?

[PufPuf23]

162. IMO POTUS Obama once elected did not use the ground swell of popular support

and that was disappointing for many.

POTUS Obama is a neo-liberal but still a good POTUS that calmed a nation in crisis.

But POTUS failed and did not hardly try to bring transformation.

The DNV then proceeded to contribute to the loss of 100s of federal and state elections.

Even if I vote for Hillary Clinton as POTUS to keep the GOP out of office, I will be against Clinton and her kind and look forward to primary season 2020.

I am most interested in the Democratic VP because frankly I would not care if Clinton is impeached.

I expect to vote for Hillary Clinton but will do so with anger, sadness, and a grudge over the failure of the Democratic establishment and DNC to provide a slate of candidates for POTUS 2016.

[EndElectoral]

154. Thanks for a well written op. I've posted FDR's Second Bill of Rights below.

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the Nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

...

Like you I cannot support HRC in the Primary. Unlike you I cannot support her in the GE. I also registered as a Dem in 1972. Remember it and Vietnam well.

[PufPuf23]

163. Thank you for the FDRs 2nd Bill of Rights.

I never expected to hit so many nerves nor get so much positive support with my OP.

[yourpaljoey]

158. Third Way will slink back into the GOP; the Dem Party shall be reborn

[PufPuf23]

164. Your finger to God's ears. Thank you. eom

[lumberjack_jeff]

159. Unfortunately, the arrogance and ego are rubbing off on Clintons supporters.

They can win even without any Sanders support. They're sure of it.

[PufPuf23]

165. Agree. I think that there is a desire for the liberal Democrats to leave the Party

to their benefit.

That is why I wrote this OP.

[nadinbrzezinski]

172. I already did

And I know more will.

It's ok. The endorsement from Charles Koch cinches this for me. They are now part of a RW conservative, business friendly party. The realignment is complete. There is a little problem that they still need the despised left to win, and mark my words, they will blame it if they do not keep the WH.

Bed made...their business at this point

[PufPuf23]

173. We disagree. I think the neo-liberals want liberals to leave the Democratic Party

and to not stay the course as an internal insurgent may be a mistake.

Then I have been a registered and voting Democrat since 1972.

Perhaps the millennials can join in force and disgorge the neo-liberals with time?

Some of us need to remain (and be irritants) to maintain a beachhead.

The problem is that the USA is locked into a two party system and one has less political power outside a major Party.

At some point the neo-liberals will fail because their philosophies cannot be sustained.

That said, I greatly admire you, Nadin, and your growth as a voice.

[nadinbrzezinski]

174. Well I talk to the kids in the field

And...they don't see voting as a way to get change nor are they partisans at all. These realignments happen every so often. This will be the 7th political system in the US.

As I said, they made their bed. I hope they enjoy it. The world might not have time for the pull back. But that is another story. In November, from the way the kids are speaking...I expect a low turnout truly.

[PufPuf23]

180. That sort of fills me with dread (as does too much and in unexpected ways than my youth)

At heart I may be a work within the system person, even more so than my life long self-image.

The USA and world may well be headed towards war or economic collapse or other.

A reset doesn't necessarily indicate something better, and over the short term too often something worse.

I feel so sorry for the folks in the continuous war zones especially because most people just want a secure life with room for happiness and then there are the young that have never known anything but violence, lies, and disruption.

The neo-liberals that have captured the Democratic Party are going to fail at some point because what they do is not sustainable.

There is also the sword of Damocles that is global climate change and the related anthropomorphic global extinction event.

The neo-liberals approach is to treat the certainty wrongly as business opportunity and chance to expend empire and political power.

Population is going to decrease and the choice now is how ugly the decrease.

Maybe this is how the millennials and younger will disgorge the neo-liberals?

Hopefully they get it right in an early iteration.

Most young I meet have little or no apparent interest in politics. Too many adults are pro-Trump. Many of my once peers are pro-Hillary Clinton and self-righteous about preserving their own interests.

Sad.

[nadinbrzezinski]

189. That reflects what we are seeing

Though there is one qualifier. The kids are interested in politics. They just don't see the party games as the way to bring change. They tend to think all pols are corrupt and have no interest in them.

I used to believe in working within the system. But even locally seeing the failure of local elites to respond to their demands over and over and over again, this is setting the stage for something very ugly.

Which is one reason I am no longer registered with either national party and my "vote" will be cast with the full knowledge that it really will not count or matter. Also, after so many shenanigans by both parties regarding voting disenfranchisement I consider the elections not legitimate

[PufPuf23]

199. What I see in the young is very much because of where I live.

Very rural and in hard core Indian country.

I agree with Jimmy carter and the recent university study that we no longer live in a democracy (or representative democratic republic) and question the legitimacy of elections.

The 2000 POTUS election was way over the top and may well have rung the bell on the never-perfected experiment that was the USA.

I also worry about and expect something very ugly on the horizon (but I may be gone by then)

I am not sure my vote has ever mattered. I liked the young Jerry Brown and also Ron Dellums much as pols so long ago. Also Eugene McCarthy who brought me to the Democratic Party age 15 in 1968. I had the fortune to stay by circumstance with his entourage in the Clift Hotel when he campaigned in San Francisco and ate several family meals. Was I ever idealistic.

[nadinbrzezinski]

202. We all are.

The kids here, in my urban core, don't care.

And I suspect they would agree with those in Indian country. And yes, that Princeton study made it very official. The elites though never, ever listen. It will end up the same way it always does and they will be surprised by it.

The only thing delaying it is the bread and circus. I got the feeling that is also coming to a dramatic end. People know. The way we all joke of the media is how people joked about Pravda as well.

[tularetom]

181. Even some of us not-so-good people are considering it

My granddad has to be spinning around in his grave. He loved Roosevelt, told us all the time how FDR saved his business and his farm. He died in the late 60's, and now, of his seven living grandchildren, five of them have gone completely to the dark side, leaving me and one of my female cousins as Democrats. She's a college professor and dyed in the wool anti-war hippie type Dem so she will never switch sides.

Neither will I. But I no longer see the Dems as a clear cut alternative to the pro-corporate, anti-labor agenda of the republican party. I don't think they want thinkers in the party anymore.

I won't become a republican, but I don't see a future for me in the Democrat party.

[PufPuf23]

206. Its hard to see the benefit over the short term.

My Dad (RIP 1996) was an over age WWII volunteer and a FDR Democrat.

WWII and the fact that there was a CCC camp that brought much to the tiny rural town where he spent his entire life.

He had an 8th grade education and when a youth the only access was by foot, horse, or (mostly) mule.

After Pearl Harbor he got baptized, making him under 30, as he had until then lived life without a birth certificate or any proof he existed.

We butted heads over Vietnam, Then he became a Reagan lover. Then he was infected with Fox and Limbaugh.

I often told him I could not understand how one could hold Reagan and FDR in one's head at the same time.

I rebelled by walking off his gravel crusher age 18 to work for the US Forest Service and went to that hippy school Cal on my own dime and scholarships and left "home" against his will. I had no interest in running heavy equipment or hunting.

Other than that we were close.

I am an anti-war hippy type Dem.

The neo-liberals want to expel our kind from the Party. We are already marginalized handy scapegoats. Fuck them.

[tularetom]

217. Go Bears! When were you there?

[PufPuf23]

225. At Cal 73-75 then 77-79 undergrad, BS Forest Science, minor soil science

One term 82 as a fed employee (I was age 21 and already a career fed age 21 prior to starting at Cal)

85-87 Haas MBA

[tularetom]

231. Yeah, I did two tours also

63-66 in Civil Engineering after 3 semesters at community college and 2 years in the US Army.

Came back in 68-69 to work on the Shattuck Avenue BART station and did some grad level work.

I was there during most of the fun days of the mid and late 60's - Free Speech Movement, Peoples Park.

[RKP5637]

182. I left, I switched to Unaffiliated and feel much better for it. I just can't appear to support

DNC/DLC/DWS/HRC. The first president I voted for was JFK, how the democratic party has changed since then.

[PufPuf23]

207. The Democratic Party ressembles the GOP of my youth.

The problem is we are stuck with a two party system.

At some point the neo-liberals will fail.

[RKP5637]

218. Exactly!!! Same here!!! The D party has been on an ever rightward march and now they have

lost me, but apparently TPTB in the "new" democratic party don't give a damn about me and millions like me. They are going to totally screw up the 2016 election. I seriously doubt HRC will win in 2016.

[tonyt53]

184. "If"

"If Bernie fails in his quest"? He already has. Do the math. I too was in the first 18 y/o that got to vote in '72. I, as did man y college students, worked hard for an idealistic Democratic Party candidate that was hammered in the general election by a guy that everybody knew was rotten to the core. I decided at that time to never, ever allow myself to be so tainted that i would ever vote for a Republican again. I have been true to myself on that matter. "Clinton may get your vote in the general election", is like saying that maybe Trump isn't so bad after all.

Oh, about her actions as SoS - she did the biddings of the guy that hired her. Decisions in those matters were his, not hers. Exactly what has the Clinton Foundation done that has upset you? Provide facts, not GOP/Rove canned replies.

By not voting for the Democratic Party nominee, you and the other Bernie-ites will have just sealed the fate of those very groups you listed.

[PufPuf23]

213. You must not have read my OP to end or very well.

I expect to vote for Hillary Clinton and have more than a smidgen of self-hate over such a vote. I also will not support Clinton while POTUS and look forward to primary 2020.

Post Bill Clinton's terms as POTUS, the Clintons have enriched themselves as no other pols in the history of the USA and no former POTUS has ever had a non-profit with the endowment and scope of The Clinton Foundation.

Sanders by being a surprise, exceeding expectations, broadening discourse, and exciting some of the youth did something other than outright fail. Hopefully he started something that may take years for full fruit.

I can do math. Shit happens. Unlikely but Sanders could still be Democratic nominee. Should something happen to remove Hillary Clinton from consideration, I would expect the Democratic establishment to attempt to sidestep Sanders.

The threat to the neo-liberals this time is from the informed left so stop the right wing source meme as you know that it is not true.

I don't carry water for anyone much less the GOP.

[mike_c]

188. you and I are the same age....

I left the democratic party in 2002 and have voted green party whenever possible since then, so I'm perhaps not who you mean in your OPs title-- I've already left. However, I've come back in 2016 solely to vote for Senator Sanders in the California primary and in the general election next November. I'm a New Deal democrat through and through. A Sanders presidency will get this country back on track to restore social and economic justice, something I've sought throughout my voting life, but which democratic party candidates have not offered in two generations. The party establishment will never represent my political interests.

[PufPuf23]

220. The OP was directed at those that are saying they are leaving the Democratic Party

rather than remaining or joining.

The neo-liberals want those of the FDR persuasion (us) to leave the Party.

As long as we have a two party system and not parliamentary, one's vote is worth more within the Democratic Party or GOP.

I have spent my life backing into votes or even having candidates I truly supported.

McCarthy and Robert Kennedy I liked but was too young.

I was a strong supporter of young Jerry Brown and like Ron Dellums a lot.

One of good faith as an insurgent within a party.

I expect to be gone before the Democratic party represents my political interests but don't think the young should give up/

Sanders as a POTUS candidate has been a pleasant and positive surprise,something to get behind.

[kiva]

192. This year marks 40 years that I've been

registered as a Dem, never as anything else. If Clinton wins the nomination, I will change to unaffiliated as soon as possible.

She isn't the worst Dem, but I'm sick of enabling politicians who cheer the TPP, are content to let old people choose between rent and food and allow young people to take on crippling debt to get an education. Voting for them encourages DINOS to continue to move to the right because they get (re)elected.

No more.

[Joob]

195. This is the first year I voted ever and I agree already

[Arugula Latte]

209. The party left us, and the head poohbahs seem to not want progressives in their midst anymore.

I have a feeling I will no longer be a Democrat by this time next year.

[PufPuf23]

223. The head Democratic Party poohbahs / neo-liberals want

the remaining liberals and FDR Democrats to quit.

That is reason for enough not to quit (especially as ours is a two party system).

Quit only if there is someplace else to go, like a viable liberal party should it arise.

[pnwmom]

212. So what makes you different from Jim Demint, who also announced he'd oppose all Obama's proposals?

You'd rather keep the $7 minimum wage instead of supporting her $12?

And you'd oppose any fix she proposed to the ACA, because you'd prefer single payer?

You're just going to announce that no matter what she proposes as President, you're going to oppose it.

However, I will not support Clinton as POTUS nor anything Clinton proposes and will bide time waiting for the 2020 primary.

Well, aren't you special.

[Phlem]

219. "So what makes you different from Jim Demint, who also announced he'd oppose all Obama's proposals?"

I would think that he is different in that fact that he knows Obama is a Thirdway supporter as well. Hint: No bankers or wall street thugs were prosecuted for the "Financial Crash" that we the people bailed them out for.

You'd rather keep the $7 minimum wage instead of supporting her $12?

$12? Are you fucking kidding me? $15 at the bare minimum since it's actual adjustment should be in the $20's.

"And you'd oppose any fix she proposed to the ACA, because you'd prefer single payer?"

Fixes? Yea, we all know about fixes. What your saying is you don't support single payer so everyone can have access to health care.

"You're just going to announce that no matter what she proposes as President, you're going to oppose it."

And your 100% convinced she's honest and trustworthy. Wow.

you are special.

[pnwmom]

224. Failing to support an increase to a $12 minimum wage won't magically bring about a $15 minimum.

What a dumb idea that would be.

[Phlem]

242. Oh so we're all about incremental changes huh. The Frog March?

No that's not OK with me. We should be starting at $15 and shooting for $20.

We've done the incremental changes for fucking ever. It does not keep pace with inflation.

Incremental changes, what an old, used, worn out idea. What a FUCKING DUMB IDEA!

[pnwmom]

243. The dumb idea is to keep $7 because $12 is less than $15. n/t

[Phlem]

244. I'm sorry I'm good at math and critical thinking.

your fucking addition sucks.

[pnwmom]

248. You might be good at addition, but your reading sucks. n/t

[Phlem]

253. oooooo good one, I see what you did there but

Critical thinking includes reading.

So sorry.

[pnwmom]

254. No, it doesn't. Critical thinking is a separate ability from reading,

though deficits in them often overlap.

[Phlem]

256. And me giving a rats ass to whatever you have to say will still

never happen.

In your voting for Hillary, you've lost all hope of any with critical thinking. The Pro War, Pro Corporate, Habitual liar of a choice you made shows quite the opposite of critical thinking.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/article/2015/sep/02/11-examples-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-hol/

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511717607

But of course you won't read it.

[pnwmom]

257. Critical thinking is rarely associated with the use of profanity.

Profanity is often just a substitute for expressing clear thoughts.

[Phlem]

259. Yes, but dealing with willfully ignorant people

does.

[Phlem]

221. So what makes you different from Jim Demint, who also announced he'd oppose all Obama's proposals?

I would think that he is different in that fact that he knows Obama is a Thirdway supporter as well. Hint: No bankers or wall street thugs were prosecuted for the "Financial Crash" that we the people bailed them out for.

You'd rather keep the $7 minimum wage instead of supporting her $12?

$12? Are you fucking kidding me? $15 at the bare minimum since it's actual adjustment should be in the $20's.

"And you'd oppose any fix she proposed to the ACA, because you'd prefer single payer?"

Fixes? Yea, we all know about fixes. What your saying is you don't support single payer so everyone can have access to health care.

"You're just going to announce that no matter what she proposes as President, you're going to oppose it."

And your 100% convinced she's honest and trustworthy. Wow.

you are special.

[PufPuf23]

227. Thank you Phlem.

Of course, I am going to use discretion and look at specifics.

Even if Hillary Clinton is POTUS, Clinton will not be all Democrats.

My complaint is with neo-liberals, corporatism, and Hillary Clinton's lack of character to be CIC or POTUS.

[Phlem]

246. No worries PufPuf23

Don't let them push you around. Once one starts using data and actual facts they've got nothing. Make sure you research your data, then let them have it. It works like a charm.

Here's what they do. Read starting from #39, it's a short exchange. He was being an ass to the previous poster so I straightened him out. They weasel, squirm, change subjects, but hold them to the facts and they've got nothing.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1820526

[PufPuf23]

226. Not as special as you. eom

[yurbud]

214. DLCers will take the rest of us for granted or try to browbeat us into voting for Hillary

They invariably make elections closer than they need to be, by making us feel like idiots for voting for them.

[Karma13612]

235. +1

I also aged in in 1972.

Been a Dem my whole life.

After this election, I might actually switch to Independent unless there is a major shake up in the current Dem party.

I will follow Bernie's lead.

I also just took a gander at Jill Stein and found her positions compelling.

I pose this question if Bernie is not the nominee:

Out of curiosity, will all 50 states have Jill on the ballot?
And if so, who will she have as her running mate? I am only asking as I wonder what would happen if Jill selected Bernie as her VP.

That would turn a few heads!

[Blue_In_AK]

252. I'm seriously considering it,

and I've been a Democrat almost 50 years.

[Time for change]

260. Excellent post

I pretty much agree with you on everything you said, except that I am probably a little less hopeful than you that the Democratic Party is any longer capable of redeeming itself any time in the near future. And although I do believe that it is still better than the Republican Party, I am so disgusted with it, for many of the reasons you state, that I no longer consider myself a Democrat, though I am registered as one in order to vote in its primaries, since there is currently no viable alternative to the two major parties. But I do passionately wish for an alternative.

We have very similar histories: believing in FDR's 2nd Bill of Rights, first voted in 1972, and once switched our party affiliation to Republican in order to vote against an especially scary candidate (in my case, GW Bush.