The progressives will not be ignored.

[kentuck]

The moderate, DLC-types that took over the Party in the 1990's are facing a real challenge to

maintain control of the Party. Their Republican-lite policies and legislation, plus their proclivity to help

the big banks and the wealthy, has driven the progressives in the Party to the brink of desertion. The

old arguments about keeping the Supreme Court out of the hands of the radical right and protecting

the rights of individuals no longer carry as much weight as they once did.


The wink and nod to right-wing policies, especially trade deals and tax policies, can no longer be

tolerated. The Democratic Party can accept the Bernie Sanders-type Democrats into the Party or they

can suffer the consequences at the polls. There will no longer be a coalition to protect the status

quo. The Democratic Party must change and the time is now.

[metroins]

1. What are you trying to say?

The Democratic party let an independent run on our ticket, Sanders has only been a Democrat for a year but we let him run for President.

I could list all of the progressive movements the Democrats do, but you know them.

What are you trying to say?

[kentuck]

2. "we let him run for President" ?

You didn't let anybody do anything.

[99Forever]

5. The hubris and arrogance is incredible.

And they wonder why we are so pissed off.

[bvf]

89. As is the ignorance, feigned though it may be.

If you haven't already gotten one, be sure to check your inbox for a "Who? Me?" from this one.

Interesting tactic, but unusually lame.

[99Forever]

104. I won't be hearing anything from that one.

Just one click and that one disappeared from the planet!

Presto chango!

[metroins]

6. Yes I did

My votes and contributions elect the members of my party who represent me and who decide who runs on the ticket.

You're ignoring the voice of the actual voters and Democratic party supporters.

[kentuck]

7. And what are you ignoring?

Could it be the millions of Democrats that disagree with you?

[RKP5637]

13. The democratic party left me, I did not leave them. Then I was an outsider, so I changed to

independent/unaffiliated. I will vote democratic by the candidate.

[metroins]

10. Who says they disagree?

What are they disagreeing with me about?

Which candidate they support? That's preference but most people voting in the Democratic primary, support...Democrat's.

What is the disagreement you're going on about? I'm still trying to figure out what your post is.

[hobbit709]

12. If you need it explained that much, you will never understand the point.

[kentuck]

14. People are not voting for Bernie Sanders for no reasons at all.

There is disagreement, whether you see it or not. Where is the Party that talks about the poor and the working class? Have they all become the middle-class and the wealthy? We cannot continue the road we are on. Democrats must fight for an economic democracy.

[metroins]

18. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IT!

The past 6 months of the primary has been about it!

How can you claim it's being ignored, when it's part of the Presidential primary race?!?!? It doesn't get much bigger than that.

If you support Sanders, he got to run for president and he has committee spots. He's been on TV and in person making a case for his beliefs. The Democrats allowed him to run in our party because we're the left.

You make an op about being ignored, how is your message being IGNORED?

[kentuck]

22. Let's see who the VP choice is?

...and if they walk the talk?

[BillZBubb]

45. We were the lefty, many years ago. Now, with the Third Way, we are center-right.

The left, as usual has been marginalized.

[forjusticethunders]

69. The """""""""""Left""""""""""""" marginalizes itself

Because they're more interested in virtue signaling than winning.

[nadinbrzezinski]

74. So what has "winning" gotten us

Mass incarceration, check.

Segregated schools... Check GAO report to read this morning so spare me.

Privatization of schools...check

Globalization. Check

"Free trade," check

The destruction of the Union movement...check

A middle class that is disappearing...check.

Triangulation...check.

Welfare "reform". Check.

Should I go on?

[potone]

83. I would add to that...

the privatization of higher education. I teach in a state university, and our department has been told by the Dean that we have to cut 39 courses in the next three years. Enrollments are falling because of tuition increases, highly paid administrative positions have proliferated, and the faculty are being treated as if we are deadbeat slackers rather than highly-trained professionals. And this is not just my university; it is happening nationally as both the federal and state governments have cut funding to universities. The transformation of higher education into a privilege for the upper-class, rather than a social good for the country, is nearly complete.

[nadinbrzezinski]

85. Good point

[JEB]

94. There it is. Plain as fucking day. Excellent post. nt

[BobbyDrake]

55. "How can you claim it's being ignored" Permanent victimhood explains that.

Modern leftist politics is about complaining, not achieving. And it's always someone else's fault, naturally.

If they wanted to achieve anything, they'd build a majority coalition instead of a purity brigade like they have now. But building a majority coalition means you can't call your allies "shills" or "corrupt" or "neoliberal" and still expect them to be on your side. A lesson this new generation of "progressives" (and I use quote marks because real and genuine progressives do not treat women and minorities the way these "progressives" treat them) has yet to learn.

[Fumesucker]

105. Better to call your allies fornicating cognitively challenged

The over the top language goes both ways.

[JRLeft]

84. The neoliberals in the party never include the poor. The words poor, poverty, impoverished,

or slum are never mentioned by them.

[Armstead]

17. If you can't figure it out....That's the problem

This is not simply about two candidates. Each of them represents different sides of a long-running set of differences and tensions within the democratic Party (and Democrat leaning progressive independents.)

Perhaps a little lite readi ng in history since the 1970's would be helpful to understand it.

[metroins]

19. And both candidates got to campaign

Nobody is being ignored.

Voters are choosing Hillary.

[Armstead]

20. I stand by what i said

[RKP5637]

39. FYI: The democratic party is no longer one party! n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

75. FYI the Democratic Party is fracturing before your eyes

[geek tragedy]

26. So your argument is that actual Democrats and black voters

are on the wrong side of history in this election?

Really, Sanders supporters need to drop the sanctimony.

[Armstead]

30. In some ways yes....I'd prefer that we not hand over the Government to Goldman Sachs again

[geek tragedy]

34. Perhaps, difficult as the task may be, you should begin to contemplate the fact

that Clinton supporters know what they're doing and had perfectly valid reasons for supporting her.

Perhaps Dolores Huerta and John Lewis know something that Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon don't.

[Armstead]

44. Don't be condescending about being condescending

Don't assume that Sanders supporters assume people who disagree with them are stupid.

I'm not an idiot. I know full well why people support Clinton. Many actively like her -- but many are only supporting her because they believe there is no "pragmatic" choice.

And many have very mixed feelings.

[geek tragedy]

50. Most Clinton supporters actively like Sanders but rejected him anyways.

And it's not about cowering in fear of Republicans, it's because they think she'd actually do a better job of getting stuff done.

[seekthetruth]

54. All this stuff about getting stuff done.....

......for Sanders supporters, it's simply that we believe that the things that are critical won't be the focus, and we have a candidate that we simply cannot trust.

Just so happens there are millions of us out there.

The establishment is asking us to support someone we don't trust and disagree with on the most important issues.

That's it. I don't blame Clinton supporters, but I blame the system that is putting her into power. How would you like it if all of these super delegates (who make up the establishment) announced their support for the candidate you vehemently disagreed with months ago before any voting took place? You'd be a bit pissed, yes? Just think of it from our perspective......else you risk losing the supporters you'll need this fall.

[geek tragedy]

57. I think non-elected superdelegates should be abolished.

I'm still okay with all governors and members of Congress getting a vote, since they have to face the voters.

Clinton would have won without superdelegates.

[seekthetruth]

59. Perhaps.

But I go one step further.....the media has been so incredibly biased.

We simply need more parties in our system. A quick glance around the world shows that most countries don't do democracy this way.

[geek tragedy]

61. presidential system sucks, I would prefer a parliamentary system.

our constitutional order is set up to prevent change

[Yurovsky]

23. The disagreements are fundamental...

I don't know the corporate wing and the progressive wing of the party meet halfway. Something will have to give. I don't suspect progressives are in a compromising mood. Not sure if they can win the battle this year, but I'm certain the long range arc of the party bends Left.

[kentuck]

24. You got it!

There is something going on and the winds of change are blowing.

[RKP5637]

42. Well said!!! n/t

[Fawke Em]

86. The party is split down the middle.

That an unknown (by last year) senator could sink the Party's Queen Poobah's 60 point lead into a near tie should tell you that.

The right-wing of the party has been in charge for 30 years and has failed us. The left-wing wants its time and will no longer be placated by, "We have to unite to beat so-and-so...". It's just not going to work this year. The left is willing to let the party drown in its own hubris to bring the party back to its working class roots.

Trump is horrible, but Clinton is, too. Clinton isn't for the working class. Her trade policies will continue to hurt us. Her criminality means she'll be under constant investigation. Honestly, we have the fascist v. the oligarch. No one who isn't rich wins.

That's what the OP means.

[2banon]

92. The OP is quite clear. My Second Grade Grand Daughter understands the concept

it's not that hard to grasp.

The question is, why are you being so obtuse?

How does it benefit you and the party?

[puffy socks]

32. Millions MORE

voted for Hillary
WE will not be bullied by an Independent who ysed the party infrastructure.
If the minority wishes to follow Sanders off a cliff , go right ahead!

[kentuck]

35. Follow that strategy at your own risk.

There were big states, such as New York, that Hillary won big popular votes. There were caucus states that Bernie won big, but would have had many more votes if there had been primaries instead. The present popular vote is not necessarily indicative of the total support for either candidate.

[puffy socks]

47. Blah blah blah

Washington was one of those caucus states and she kicked his caboose in a blowot when they held their primary!
Lol! Try again.
Bernie lost
Hillary won!

[Bohunk68]

87. While Hillary did indeed carry NYS, in Upstate she only carried the

cities of Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse. She lost Albany, the state capitol, big-time. She also won in The City. But she lost Democrats who live who in the non-urban areas and in cities like Ithaca (college) and Binghamton. Bernie carried my county by 63.63%. In my own town, where I am an election inspector, he carried it by 66%. I have yet to see a Hillary sign.

[democrank]

15. "WE let him run for president" is quite telling.

[metroins]

21. We did!

He wasn't a Democrat until last year. He could've ran as an independent, but he asked to run as a Democrat.

It's simple logic.

[99Forever]

28. You prefer Senator Sanders run 3rd Party then?

Careful what you ask for, you just might get it.

Keep fucking us around and see what happens.

[puffy socks]

33. He cant

until 2020
Its too late..
Sanders and his zealous supporters have LOST!
..and now want to call the shots.
Talk about hubris!

[99Forever]

37. The fuck he can't.

Run along now little sockie.

[puffy socks]

40. Go look it up

State sore loser laws
and in many cases too late fot the ballot.

If you don't understand the election laws you should ask, I did.

[99Forever]

46. You "go look it up."

For me, you'll be going *poof* gone.

Ta ta

[puffy socks]

48. Nah

If you wish to stay uninformed that's your choice.
It's too bad people didn't learn from the primary that being uninformed is what caused Bernie to lose.

Oh well
The losing team will remain losers forever because they refuse to learn the rules and follow them.

[RKP5637]

43. Remember, you are in a minority party in the US as is the republican party. The majority

of the US is Independent/Unaffiliated.

[nadinbrzezinski]

76. They still have not internalized what that means

[RKP5637]

79. They are often so in denial, not looking/understating the political spectrum, treating it

like a sporting event.

[nadinbrzezinski]

81. Exactly. It is a hockey game to these people

[coco77]

16. I remember when the DLC wing started taking over...

Bernie didn't like what they were doing with this REpubliCON lite shit and that is when he said he would call himself a Independent. The party left us not the other way around. Bernie is the real Democrat.

[yodermon]

31. Yeah, he should have run as an independent.

This much is clear now.

[CorporatistNation]

97. DEFINE A DEMOCRAT! If This Defines It Then One Is Sacrificing Their Personal Integrity In Voting

FOR THIS...

MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...

Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...

Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"

Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"

Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!

[Cali_Democrat]

3. ...

[grossproffit]

8. Bernarious!

[workinclasszero]

62. buhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!11!!!!11!!!!1

Perfect Cali_Democrat!!

[Cobalt Violet]

4. K & R!

Not drinking right-wing Third Way kool-aid.

[silvershadow]

11. K&R

[geek tragedy]

25. A lot of progressives voted for Clinton.

And Sanders won conservative voters in more than a few states.

[kentuck]

27. Change is coming.

The Democratic Party must change.

[geek tragedy]

38. parties always have to change to survive.

Republicans are showing what happens when they don't--change is forced upon them.

Whoever is going to change the democratic party has to have a more modern version of socialism and activism going for them--and it has to have organic roots in communities of color.

[Armstead]

29. A lot of progressives voter for her for different reasons....

but prefer Sanders values, message and policies

[geek tragedy]

36. Ah the "dumb sheep afraid to vote their values" argument. Cute nt

[Armstead]

41. Did i say that? Don't put words in my mouth

I know a number of people in that category personally. They are smart, generally well informed and I respect them.

But we have a basic disagreement on Clinton. They have decided to support Clinton for specific reasons-- they bought into the "elect-ability" sales pitch, they are heavily influenced by the "first woman president" sales pitch.

But they say they don't really like or trust her, and they prefer Bernie and would prefer to see the Democrats reflect his actual message and goals and values.

They're not sheep. But they are "afraid' to an extent, because of the perennial "GOP is so bad" argument.

[geek tragedy]

49. Oh lordy.

You are repeating a trope that Bernie supporters like to peddle--that even Clinton voters really prefer Bernie, but at the end of the day they're afraid to take a chance on him, or are caught up in identity politics, blah blah blah. Based on 1-3 conversations they supposedly had.

If the majority of Democratic voters really:

--preferred Bernie
--preferred Bernie's message
--preferred Bernie's goals and values and policies

he would have won. Instead he fucking lost. And it wasn't close.

He lost amongst women, he lost amongst people of color, he lost amongst union households, he lost amongst registered Democrats.

No, you don't get to claim a mandate when you lose.

[Armstead]

52. It is my own experience, but it is also widespread, as frequently reported

My brother is a classic example. We had a looooong talk about it one day.He is a middle-of-the-road liberal kind of guy. He supports Clinton.

He agreed with just about everything Bernie represents, and said he has a lot more faith in his integrity and honesty. He said he would have preferred to see an alternative to her.

"I'd love to see Bernie get it, and I think we need someone like that. But I just don't think America is ready to vote for a cranky old guy who calls himself a socialist right now."

You multiply that by millions, and add in the (appx.) 40 percent who actually voted for Sanders and you have -- if not a "mandate" a very strong argument for change from the Clinton Inc. model of politics.

[geek tragedy]

53. "multiply that by millions" perhaps you're familiar with the saying that the plural of anecdote is

not data.

[Armstead]

56. I merely used him as one example...And the data bears it out

http://abc7news.com/news/trump-clinton-could-be-most-disliked-nominees-in-decades/1351859/

If Americans don't change their current views, the match-up between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton could be a race between the two most disliked presidential nominees in at least three decades.

The latest ABC News/Washington Post poll has Trump with a 60 percent unfavorable rating and Clinton at 53 percent unfavorable.

Should the two front-runners become the nominees and their current ratings remain roughly the same through November, this presidential election could have two candidates with the highest unfavorable ratings since 1984.

Since 1984, according ABC News/Washington Post polls, the presidential nominee with the highest unfavorable rating was George H.W. Bush in his 1992 re-election bid, when he lost to Bill Clinton. He had a 53 percent unfavorable rating - the same as Hillary Clinton's current rating.

The only other major candidate to garner an unfavorable rating higher than 50 percent was former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney in 2012, at 52 percent.

No Democratic candidate or nominee has had an unfavorable rating above 50 percent until Hillary Clinton in this election......

[geek tragedy]

58. Yes, because Clinton is facing a double-barreled attack--the rightwing noise machine on one side

side and the puritanical left on the other side.

She was above water in her approval ratings until the Sanders crowd began talking about how Crooked and awful she was.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating

[Armstead]

66. In May 2015 her unfavorable was over 50 percent....Can't blame that on Sanders

He had just announced and most people had either never heard of him, or thought he was just a mraginal "fringe" candidate.

[geek tragedy]

67. yes, the rightwing barrage had started to take its toll, but the constant delegitimization and

from insinuation of corruption from the Sanders people certainly contributed to the negative trajectory.

[Armstead]

95. Don't blame it all on the right wing barrage eitehr

The Clintons have an accumulated legacy of distrust the old-fashioned way -- They earned it.

[geek tragedy]

102. she was +26 before the Benghazi/eGhazi stuff started. nt

[Armstead]

106. That stuff was nothing -- Most Americans knew that

The only people that bought into it were right wingnuts who already despised her.

Most people in the middle and on the left dismissed it for what it was.

The credibility problems go much deeper and longer than that.She tenbds to have high ratings when she is out of sight or in a non-political mode (including being appointed Sec o State), but drop when she is running for something, or people have prolonged exposure to her in a prominent position.

[geek tragedy]

108. that's how brute force propaganda works. Just call someone a liar and evil over and over and over

and people internalize it regardless of whether they know better, or if they have no reason to believe it at all.

Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Michael Dukakis--that technique has worked on all of them. Even Barack Obama hasn't been immune to it.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/obama-favorable-rating

Note how popular Bill Clinton is:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1618/favorability-people-news.aspx

Despite (a) being much more reckless with the truth than Obama or Hillary and (b) being more conservative than either

Why? Because he's no longer a target.

[Armstead]

109. You mean force propaganda like Bernie is a mean old white man?

[geek tragedy]

110. There hasn't been a mass coordinated effort to paint him as such.

A few angry Internet commentators, yes, but nothing like the Fox News/Drudge/talk radio bullhorn.

[nadinbrzezinski]

90. Incidentally we have heard the same

From more than a few liberal democrats who don't like or trust Clinton. One is plain out sitting it out. Two are just leaving, becoming decline to state in one case, green in another.

[beachbum bob]

51. progressives stay with democrats...its those way further to left

that really don't care about the democratic party,,,or really america free of trump

[workinclasszero]

60. Blackmail is ugly

I wish berners would layoff of that crap.

[B Calm]

78. So is holding your nose to vote.

[CrowCityDem]

63. They are welcome in the party. Right now, they happen to be outnumbered.

[Doctor_J]

64. Yes we will

Like always.

[Trust Buster]

65. The Democratic Party will not be hijacked by the radical fringe.

We've seen what that strategy has wrought upon the Republican Party. You will fail in this instance IMO.

[nadinbrzezinski]

70. No you are correct it will not...it already has

And I do not expect you to get it...but the country has two right wing parties. If you think that is healthy the more power to you, but do not complaint when you have to work more hours and for less pay.

Chickens for colonel Sanders.

For the record...you might learn a tough lesson. Because it will happen, in spite of the fusion centers. What's the matter with Kansas indeed. But the Right Wing, in some ways a fringe radical globalist right wing captured the Democratic Party

[Trust Buster]

71. No it hasn't. History is on my side. Just watch, you'll see what I mean.

[nadinbrzezinski]

73. Kennedy would not be considered a dem today, but fringe

Carter is not considered mainstream, so spare me. You must be somewhat well off not to understand the anger. Enjoy it while it last. But we have two right wing parties. One radical, the other moderate right and both are following globalization which is destroying middle class living. This is a recipe for social instability. You do not realize it, but we have seen it, starting with the battle of Seattle. Blame the corporate media by tje way.

No, history is not on your side. You are witnessing the fracture of the Democratic Party as well. These forces have been at play for a while. This is not about one fucking election. But your party stubbornness will hand the nuclear button to a madman. Historians won't be kind. Oh and normally I trend left in my voting patterns. So spare me.

[Trust Buster]

77. I understand the anger. The problem is that the angry don't understand their anger.

We live in a global economy now. That will not change regardless of Socialist panderings. It's human nature to look for a quick fix in times of economic anxiety in a reshaping world. It never works though. As world wages rise and the Baby Boom generation retires, America will become more competitive. Political expediency will play no part in this IMO.

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. The backlash against globalization

Is not just in tne US and with climate change it will be gone. More wars are coming. Syria is a preview...ten years of severe drought are part of it...not that the media you read goes into that, unless you read elite media.

This is not just limited to tne US. You are on the wrong side of history on this one.

Oh and world wages are rising...really...for example in Mexico and the US they have not just stagnated (the Us and to a point Canada) but dropped by a good 40 percent. Care to tell me what these three are part of?

Better standard of living, my ass, as farmers are pushed out of their ancestral lands in Mexico, and Central America and end in places like Tyson farms in old Miss..

Those are the actual leading edges of what will happen. Blah, blah, blah, as we go around the world and weaken labor unions by treaty world wide, and labor leaders are murdered.

You might believe that fantasy, after all CNN will just tell you about those Central Americam and Mexican illegal aliens pouring through the southern border, but they won't tell you why.

You are on the wrong side. It gets worst, your greed might lead to extinction. And at this point, maybe within your lifetime. Look on the bright side, neither of us will be right, since the species will be gone. Again CNN does not explain this shit either.

Also look on the bright side, while JFK and FDR and LBJ and Carter are fringe for the right wing Democratic Party, the republicans would not elect real Ronald Reagan today, very different from the myth. On the other hand he would be a democrat today. That is how far right Dems are at this point.

Keep hiding your head...you will be taught that lesson, in spite of fusion centers.

[Trust Buster]

91. Digitalization and large container ships have made the world much smaller. There's no reversing

that. This is a change of immense magnitude. The growing pains of this new global economy are largely unavoidable.

[nadinbrzezinski]

93. What part of climate change will end that

Are you missing? You do not understand how serious that is. Not for lack of information. It is out there.

And no, these are not growing pains...you will learn. It will be a bitter pill as more and more countries do have more and more frequent social convulsions, brought by hungry, yes angry, and chiefly desperate people.

Again, CNN does not show you the quiet desperation in this country. That will result in more social unrest, why do you think those fusion centers are there for? Not terrorism...but I do not expect you to put that puzzle together. For the moment your right wing, radical as it is, has "won."

This is not about a fucking election. You will learn.

[Trust Buster]

96. Climate change is a concern but will not reverse the effects of digitalization and large container

ships. The world is smaller now and that will not reverse. Again, your CNN condescension is unnecessary. I am very well read on the issues. Americans have become very soft. We've had it good for a long time. Now we must compete like we never have in our lifetimes. A politician bearing phony promises will not fix that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

98. Blah, blah, blah

Seriously.

It is more than a concern. Species extinction is no longer a radical idea. Last person with the most toys wins?

I do not expect you to get it. But right wing, neoliberali capitalism is one of the major causes. Blah, blah, blah. This is why your fucking party is also splitting and why many of us, who are concerned about shit like that and realize this is very serious are leaving your fucking party. Ideologues to the end that are on the wrong side of history and will kill the species for one more fucking dollar.

Yes, it is that serious, and you don't get it. I hope someday you will apologize to your children

And with that. I am find I have as much in common politically with Right Wing democrats and republicans. Both of you are the same, one less radical.

[-none]

88. The Democratic Party has already been high jacked by the Right.

What is wrong with dragging it back to the Left where it belongs?

[nadinbrzezinski]

68. Ignored nope, kicked out

Two conservative parties...what is not to love? Something is cooking in that regard

[Demsrule86]

72. You are not planning to boil any bunnies right?

Glenn Close...Fatal Attraction ..."I will not be ignored!"

[oldandhappy]

82. Thank you, true for me

I am already in touch with some progressive groups. Speaking only for myself, not saying many or most, I will change to no party after the primary and then wait for a progressive party to be recognized so I can register with them. The Dems left me. I know the clintons will not let anything change right now. But maybe someday!

[potone]

101. The question is...

how much time do we have? In addition to all of the other problems we face, climate change won't wait on our convenience. Hillary, for all her faults, is not stupid. I don't understand why she has not talked more about this issue and made it clear to any doubters that this is an emergency that needs to be addressed now.

[oldandhappy]

111. too busy manipulating the rest of the primaries

I acknowledge it is hard for her -- running in primaries, managing the Dem structure, juggling investigations, making MSM appearances, and I hear rumors re her health. She does not seem as active as Senator Sanders but that could be the investigations stuff. Maybe she will speak up doing the GE. Or not. She spends a lot of time on money. Betcha betcha she comes after Bernie for money and email lists.

[stillwaiting]

99. They need to begin FIGHTING the Repub agenda instead of

enabling it via bipartisanship.

Current elected Democrats are doing a piss poor job of representing average Americans when they pretend the economy has recovered from the '08 crash. It has not for a large majority of Americans. Now, please be kind enough to acknowledge this reality and begin fighting for an agenda that can begin HELPING average Americans and not one that will further damage them.

Like Bernie.

[JEB]

100. So half the party is "the Puritanical Left" because

they don't want to be ruled by greed and corruption?

[BootinUp]

103. gobbly goop. unrec. nt

[Waiting For Everyman]

107. The Clinton DINOs are asking for a crushing defeat.

And they're likely to get it. Apparently that's what it takes to finally be done with the Clintons.

The Repubs, as fucked up as they are, at least had the sense to reject the Bushes.

It's really pathetic that we can't say the same. Both of those malignant families need to never darken the door of the White House again.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

112. Third-generation liberal Democrat here. The party moved away from me.

Roosevelt stole his socialist New Deal ideas from Norman Thomas.

Who's Norman Thomas? Norman Thomas was a Presbyterian minister, well-spoken, and Presidential candidate several times of the Socialist Party, once in 1932.

We used to have viable Socialist parties and unions in this country, many decades ago. The New Deal is actually the Norman Thomas Socialist platform to some extent. And we need the New Deal expanded NOW to get us out of an economic death spiral of corporate greed.

My parents told me how bad the Depression was and how desperate people were, and hungry and ready to kill. Like "The Grapes of Wrath" type stuff. That Huey P. Long was going to be the fascist dictator of the United States and he had to be stopped at all costs.

Read about the "Bonus Army" protests in Washington D.C. for an example of angry people who are mad because their government didn't give them what they had been promised. And in the 1960s there was a protest campout in Washington D.C. called "Resurrection City". I remember that on the news as a child.