2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumThere are two types of Bernie Sanders supporters
Last edited Mon May 16, 2016, 07:52 AM - Edit history (1)
Regular Dems who strongly prefer his proposals to Hillary's and are excited about Bernie and the chance to move the Dem party in a new direction, but will vote for Hillary if she is the nominee.
Disaffected liberal Dems who are often independents-- they love Bernie's progressivism and the chance to move the Dem party in a new direction. These are the types of people who often complain that both parties are the same, and no amount of arguing can ever convince them otherwise. They were never going to vote for Hillary, they seriously think she is evil. For some reason at least half of my liberal friends on FB are like this. These types of people drive me crazy.
Edited to add:
1) Importantly, I meant the people who say both parties are the same drive me crazy.
2) A third important class of Bernie supporters would be young people who just got involved in politics for the first time.
3) In no way did I mean to disrespect Bernie supporters here. What I was trying to get at was that I thought that a lot of people who support Bernie were not regular Dems and were never going to seriously consider voting for Hillary.
4) I am of the opinion that voting Dem at this point in time, no matter the candidate, is still better than letting any Republican into office.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
nc4bo
(17,651 posts)Most said HELL NO to Hill in 2008. The reasoning must be valid anf strong if these same people are saying HELL NO yet again.
Some have their line in the sand drawn in 2016 same as they did '08.
She's the same type of candidate she was '08 AND carrying even more baggage and some STILL don't or refuse/pretend not to understand why?
It's so clear to those paying attention and to those actually care.
highprincipleswork
(3,111 posts)on the fumes of the Reagan presidency, as if he had all the answers when actually his answers were horrible.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)I have had enough of these simplistic, hateful analyses!
My IL is entirely too long!
Logical
(22,457 posts)anything that might make them think outside their locked in ideas.
Its a fucking discussion board, people DISCUSS stuff.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)"discussing" with verbal bullies, sexists, racists, misogynists, and homophobes. I choose not to endure the hate-mongering and fear-mongering that passes for "discussion" these days.
Logical
(22,457 posts)
Trajan
(19,089 posts)Whether we like it or not?
Yeah .. let's discuss ...
Let's discuss your complete absence from my ears and eyes ...
Gone
Gone
NOW discuss to your heart's content ...
(EDIT: Ah ... A Gungeonite! .. that would explain the freedom hating attitude)
Logical
(22,457 posts)are clueless it seems.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Stated simply the Democrats and Republicans fight over certain issues, but on the underlying issues related to Wealth and Power, they overlap far more than they disagree. Time and again, Democratic "centrist" politicians like the Clintons raise the hopes of liberals that the bad old GOP has been beaten back, and finally Democrats can bring back enlightened, progressive/liberal government.
But it always turns out that we fight over certain specific issues, such as abortion and gun control, while behind the scenes both parties are bought and paid for by Big Corporations, Wall St. and their lobbyists. So we have seen an unending tide of laws, policies and messages that drain money and political power to the Elites, at the expense of everyone else.
The fact that Comcast -- one of the most distrusted and monopolistic corporations in America -- is a major sponsor of the Democratic convention, tells you all you need to know.
After a while, one starts to believe the actions instead of the pretty words.
-----------------------------
Here's a link to an article you might want to read.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511954521
But all this provided only a patchwork solution to the Democratic party’s crisis of legitimacy. Was it a pro-corporate (neoliberal) or pro-labor (New Deal) party? The actual tendency was for the party to move firmly in the former direction, while escalating rhetorical claims for the rights of cultural minorities, at the same time as the Republican party moved swiftly toward a neoconservative solution to its own crisis. Meanwhile, the Democrats never really addressed the popular roots of dissatisfaction: in a global economy with more dispersed power, both economic and political, how was the standard of living of the American middle-class to be maintained?......
The huge popularity of Bernie Sanders on the left today speaks to precisely this dilemma, fundamentally unaddressed through four decades of deceit and illusion to maintain elite power, as inequality continuously rose in that period of time, the middle class became ever more diminished, and real political power became confined to a vanishingly small elite group......
Had the elites chosen to be more democratic thirty or forty or twenty years ago, both parties would have naturally evolved and reshaped themselves in accord with shifting social and economic realities. Liberalism and conservatism, in their authentic manifestations, would have continued fighting the good fight, rather than the situation that has developed, where economic anxiety is continually suppressed and allowed to manifest only in twisted movements that have little chance of accomplishing any objectives given the present distribution of power.
It is noteworthy that a great many among America’s intellectual elite support Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders, offering standard neoliberal justifications, whereas those outside elite intellectual circles are more likely to support Sanders; likewise with Trump and his antagonists and supporters. What the establishment will not do is take either of them seriously; meaning that they will not, as they haven’t for forty years, acknowledge the concerns of the constituencies they are supposed to represent, and direct the very real anxieties felt on all parts of the political spectrum toward positive resolutions good for the country and for the rest of the world.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)and overall this is an old argument.
My basic conclusion is that ultimately it is better to vote Dem and get them in power, because saying both parties are the same results in more Republicans getting elected. When Repubs are in power, the Dems always have to end up compromising with the Repubs. Also, when Repubs are in power, it is easier for corporate Dems to get elected. If we got Dems in power, then we could start electing more liberal Dems, and have the corporate Dems be forced to compromise with the liberal Dems.
We can unfortunately only vote for one of two parties but not voting Dem because Dems are too corporate leads to Repubs getting elected. A corporate Dem is still better than a Repub, in my book.
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)I would have voted for her.
Not now.
What type am I?
I will tell you.
I am a 50 year old Dem in a red state that voted for Obama twice.
I voted for Kerry,I voted for Gore, and I voted for Ross Perot as my first vote.
At that age I didn't pay much attention to the issues I just hated the way things have been under ReaganBush and thought Washington sucked, So I voted for the guy that was going to blow it up.
This of course helped Bill Clinton win by dividing the vote.
Things seemed pretty good under Clinton because I wasn't black,gay or on welfare at the time.
I didn't see that the good things happening were because of a Dot.com boom and a credit bubble and Clinton left the doors open to what happened after he left with Nafta and the Glass-Steagal act repeal.
I love this President we have now. President Obama is a good man and I kind of have a crush on his wife.
So I, who have voted straight Dem since Al Gore see a candidate worthy of all of the things I hold dear in Bernie and I see blatant chicanery from supporters of the establishment candidate.
I didn't become Bernie or Bust on my own.
I had help. The Democrats made me Bernie or bust and have forever revealed to me their true colors.
I will never vote for Republicans! The real ones and the ones calling themselves Democrats.
AirmensMom
(14,643 posts)I couldn't have said it better.
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)Had a ton of fun with you and Misshoneychurch in the lounge back in the day.
AirmensMom
(14,643 posts)She and I are good friends away from DU.
So good to see you.
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)Nice lady. 
Good to see you too!
AirmensMom
(14,643 posts)But I stopped doing Facebook a while ago. It's a cesspool of right wing memes and I found myself losing respect for friends and family I otherwise like. We do the old-fashioned thing: email. 
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)I'll have to google that and figure out what it is/means. 
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)poorly. I meant that people who say both parties are the same drive me crazy.
I can understand Bernie or Bust. I have some similarities to you, though I didn't vote for Perot. My 19 year old son is actually Bernie or Bust. I don't want to push him on this, because I admire his position on Bernie.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Republicans
People who claim to be Dems, but are really just too spineless to admit that they are Republican.
djean111
(14,255 posts)Kinda funny - looks like the (another failed) tactic of the day is scorn or something.
The thought that I could be shamed or guilted into supporting someone that I would be ashamed of supporting is laughable at best.
ooooh - I cannot support Hillary because of ISSUES, but gosh! sarcasm and scorn! Lemme rethink that! Bwahahaha!
99Forever
(14,524 posts)
jack_krass
(1,009 posts)
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)antiestablishment, disaffected groups.
I agree with your first paragraph. The liberal block, which makes up most of the party, is split into larger Hillary and smaller Bernie blocks, the latter of which I also see as you describe them.
Thing is, although liberals may become discouraged and apathetic, they are least likely of all ideological groups to react to problems by resentment against an amorphous "the establishment" instead of the problems themselves and those who caused them. They're also comparatively less prone to react to anything with anger and resentment.
The strongly disaffected and angry people are actually mostly coming from both the left and the right of the central liberal block of the party. Radicals on the left are always "disaffected" with mainstream liberal ideology and want to change it, but especially now. The party has its own conservatives, who normally vote across the ballot, but -- like Bernie's conservative faction from outside the party -- many are drawn to Bernie's anti-establishment message, and/or to try to keep Hillary from being nominated.
As for "indies," there are very few true independents (and those also include the ones who do an eenie-meenie to decide on voting day). The "indies" tend to vote the way people like them who belong to parties do. Liberal indies vote like liberals, libertarian indies like wherever their ideological counterparts are, conservative indies vote like conservatives, radicals and reactionaries like their others.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)and I want to emphasize that it is not Bernie supporters that drive me crazy, but people who say both parties are the same.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)own profound negligence. Either that or they really are watching from Mars.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)with you that there are "2 types" of Sanders supporters. There are so many of us, from so many different walks of life, that sorting us into "compliant" and "non-compliant" really doesn't see the whole picture. For the sake of argument,though:
Both of your "types" want to move the party in a new direction. One is willing to give up, one is not. Why do those who don't give up drive you crazy? Personally, I think it's a strongly positive trait to be able to persevere.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)what I was encountering.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)Independent progressive here...and I'll never vote for Hillary Clinton. She represents everything that's gone wrong with the Democratic Party over the last couple-three decades. More importantly, I think she'd be an absolutely dreadful president, paying lip service to certain social issues while greasing the skids for yet more oligarchic dominance of our society.
Evil? No, of course not. I don't attribute that quality to people, only to actions.
pinebox
(5,761 posts)Bob Dole Republicans vs Ted Cruz Republicans.
Hillary and her friends built this.
firebrand80
(2,760 posts)
Dem2
(8,168 posts)I'd be perfectly happy if he was the nominee because he says things the way I like to hear them.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)their level of narcissism increase proportionately. It's the very nature of their personality on every issue in their lives IMO. political or otherwise.
Redwoods Red
(137 posts)
pmorlan1
(2,096 posts)And what kind of personality disorder do you have to have to think that way.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)
Vote2016
(1,198 posts)Elizabeth Warren to run, and when she didn't but Sanders did, we have been really pleased with his movement and the issues he raises. We're still pulling for Sanders to win the nomination, but if he doesn't win, we will vote Hillary or write-in Sanders or vote Jill Stein depending on what vote advances this movement.
If Hillary picks a progressive running mate, puts progressives on the platform and rules committees, does not breach her promises to progressives by "turning to the right" for the general election, and gives Sanders or other representatives of the FDR-Warren-Sanders wing of the party a prominent role at the convention, we're totally an board and will campaign for her.
Even if she doesn't do this, if the race is close and we live in one of the couple of states where a vote for Hillary might make a difference between a disappointing Hillary administration and a disastrous Trump administration, we'll pinch out noses, but if the race isn't that close generally or in our states, we won't feel any need to pinch our noses. Under these circumstances, some will write-in Sanders and some will vote Jill Stein.
You also ignore those who are desperately left behind by the economic recovery that has left so many out in the cold. These people need change. They are holding a losing and need to shuffle the deck to get a new deal. They love the chance Sanders advocates, and they see that Hillary doesn't get it. Trump gets that the current system is totally broken for them and he offers change (not the change they want from Sanders but at least a reshuffling of the deck), and Hillary is the country's number one figure arguing for the status quo establishment. "Change" is the number one issue and sometimes the only issue for these people. Some will vote for Trump if the choice is Hillary versus Trump.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)People vote for/against candidates for any number of reasons.
Some Bernie supporters will vote for Hillary in the GE because of party loyalty.
Some will vote for her because they consider her to be the "lesser of two evils".
Some will vote for her because they think she will make a good president.
Some will vote for her because of the urge to go along with the crowd.
Some will not vote for her because she's too conservative.
Some will not vote for her because of her record.
Some will not vote for her because she's dishonest.
Some will not vote for her because of ideology.
Some will not vote for her because they believe she would be a lousy president.
Some will not vote for her because they believe she's unfit to hold public office.
The list could go on ad-infinitum.
In the end, people vote (or, don't vote at all) as individuals with their own reasons. All of them valid in their own eyes.
That's why it's called democracy.
Matrosov
(1,098 posts)
I'm a socialist, but I'm not for Bernie because he considers himself a socialist as well. I'm for Bernie because he might finally pull the Democratic party in the correct direction. Democrats like the Clintons are nothing more than lite Republicans. Even if Bill and Hillary aren't exactly going to push to do away with Social Security and Medicare, outlaw Islamic migration, outlaw abortion, etc, corporate interests are still their primary concern.
How can you claim to be a champion for the poor when you actually work for the 1%?
There's a good reason why only Trump surpasses her unfavorability rating among candidates in the last +30 years.
So I'll still support her in the general election, if she ends up the nominee, but I'll do so while holding my nose and with a barf bag in hand.
jack_krass
(1,009 posts)They don't work for the 1%, they ARE the 1%
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)short trip
realmirage
(2,117 posts)The kind that see politics like a sports competition and get so angry when they lose they can no longer see reality clearly. It is "the refs fault," the weather's fault, a conspiracy to let the more famous team win for financial reasons, ANYTHING other than to admit your team lost and that's life. These people will react like a bull to a red cape whenever they see the opposing team's symbols on shirts or hats, and when the other team is even mentioned, it must be reacted to with boos.
These types make themselves irrelevant by taking themselves out of the system altogether. They cannot listen to reason.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Is everyone just an arm chair psychologist? Trying to "figure out" people and why they do what they do. That is NONSENSE.
The issue at hand is which CANDIDATE (not what kind of voter), which CANDIDATE, is better on the issues for the country.
Haven't the trade deals decimated the manufacturing jobs and the middle class? How much do we spend on war? How many people DIE? Those things don't matter? What's REALLY important is who has been disaffected by what?
Why can't people discuss the ISSUES? Are people without food and medical care too boring now days?
I agree. We really get some strange posts here. Authoritarians really like putting people in little boxes.
Sweet Freedom
(3,995 posts)I don't fall into either one of categories.
kstewart33
(6,551 posts)I had dinner with my daughter's partner last night who strongly supports Bernie. We had a pleasant discussion about our differences. No one changed their minds. It was a wonderful evening.
She'll vote for Hillary because she believes that Trump would be disastrous. She is an enthusiastic Bernie supporter who has valid reasons for her positions that I respect, and also a woman who sees all that is at stake in the general election.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)Funny that my 19 year old son is a Bernie supporter and says he won't vote for Hillary.
But I think he MIGHT change his mind as the election goes on.
kstewart33
(6,551 posts)Hillary says she won't go negative but she will have to. After a few months of information about just how terrible Trump is, I'd wager that the large majority of Bernie supporters will vote for Hillary.
But as you say, there is a measurable percentage that won't. These folks are or have been on the fringes of politics and many have never voted.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts) Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)1) Importantly, I meant the people who say "both parties are the same" drive me crazy, NOT the people who strongly support Bernie and think Hillary is too conservative/corporate.
2) A third important class of Bernie supporters would be young people who just got involved in politics for the first time.
3) In no way did I mean to disrespect Bernie supporters here, and I'm sorry if that was the impression. What I was trying to get at was that I thought that a lot of people who support Bernie were not regular Dems and were never going to seriously consider voting for Hillary. My opinion but based on what I've seen.
4) I am of the opinion that voting Dem at this point in time, no matter the candidate, is still better than letting any Republican into office.
5) particularly it's important to get Dems in control of Congress!
auntpurl
(4,311 posts)
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)But it doesn't matter who I vote for in my state (Alaska hasn't voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since 1964, and we're only three electoral votes anyway) and I'm no fan of Hillary, so I'm likely not to vote for president at all. I guess I'm another category since you're categorizing people.
trudyco
(1,258 posts)older Dems who remember what it was like before the DLC, remember the stolen elections of the BFEE, and are watching in disbelief all the corruption of the Repukes coming to roost in the DLC democratic party this primary.
The long time Dem party member who only now has learned that the parties, as they stand today, aren't much different. Not in the things that really count.
For the first time in my entire life I will not be voting Dem if the party chooses to nominate somebody who is under FBI investigation and should be indicted, possibly for multiple crimes. Anybody else would have been indicted.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)witnessed in this country, but simultaneously believe the reasons WHY they suck are different?
At this point, I couldn't care less who wins because I think both will harm the country, but in very different ways. Trump is an insane bigot without a clue and Hillary wants to continue the Third Way politics that have harmed the middle class. 
#ImScrewedNoMatterWho
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)especially in the these days of Obama.
If you care about climate change, Dems are far far better than the GOP.
Also, wouldn't it be nice to have Dems strongly in control and compromising with real progressives, rather than having to compromise with the GOP?
Binkie The Clown
(7,911 posts)Those who think there are just two kinds of people in the world, and those who know better.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts) Maedhros
(10,007 posts)I just don't vote for people in the upper right quadrant:
Hillary and Bernie are farther apart ideologically than is Hillary from all of the Republican candidates. Bernie plots at the center of the spectrum, Hillary in the Authoritarian Conservative quadrant. I don't vote for Authoritarian Conservatives. Period. I don't care what letter they tack on after their names.
The Democrats have traditionally occupied an ideological space in the Libertarian Liberal space. I'm simply choosing to be consistent in my ideology, rather than move to the right because I'm told that I have to by the self-serving candidates that have moved right for expediency.
Generic Brad
(14,275 posts)Random labeled dots on squares with contrasting colors. Lovely color scheme, I must say.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Qualitatively, I think it's reasonably illustrative of the situation.
In any case, my point stands: I don't vote for Authoritarian Conservatives.
Generic Brad
(14,275 posts)I'm glad you have found meaning where there is none. I should be so lucky.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)You. however, are not useful for anything.
/ignore.
