2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumA Bernie Sanders Shocker Is Coming
First, on Saturday night, a spectacular crowd of 15,000 people turned out for a Sanders rally at the Alaska Airlines Arena in Seattle. And then, on Sunday, Sanders roused a humongous crowd at the Moda Center in Portland, estimated in The Oregonian to be 28,000.
For serious analysts of politics the summer belongs to Sanders—and no other candidate can come even close to the size of his crowds or the clarity, passion and idealism of his message. The Republican campaign has become a reality television show while the Sanders campaign offers the reality of a surging movement of progressive politics, progressive organization and progressive inspiration that is transforming American politics under the radar of the national political media.
Remember where you heard it first: When the next quarterly campaign finance reports are released in October the political world will be shocked by the breathtaking increase in small donor money to the Sanders campaign.
Read more at: http://tr.im/E9ZHs
Wow...Portland event estimated at 28,000 attendees. Anyone still care to insist that "Bernie will not be the nominee"?
Even thought it's still way early, I personally think Bernie already has the Democratic nomination in the bag, baring any vote tampering. I think the Clinton camp knows that as well, as do her Wall St. benefactors. Prepare for things to get even uglier. #Bernie2016 #FeelTheBern
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)i agree on all counts, and sadly, the way things are going to get uglier. i have to agree on that too.
the ruling class is not just going to hand over the keys with a smile.
but bernie's got it goin on...go bernie go!
oligarchy knows no party lines...we need REAL reform
we need bernie!!!!
merrily
(45,251 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Let's send Hillary packing into the Republican Party where her real friends are. Jeb Bush like his father and brother are close allies of hers. She should be roasted and embarrassed publicly for that fact alone. Disgusting that she is in their inner circle.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)and mentioned the rally! and anderson did also on cnn
word is getting out on msm i can't believe it!
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)I don't know one person talking about anyone else except Trump and he is mostly for entertainment like the movie Idiocracy. Hillary is done and over. Her self entitlement and thinking one can plan the destiny of our country years ahead and behind closed doors is an anathema to democracy. These overlords of the "masses and useless eaters" deserve a special place in Hades.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)and people on both sides seem to be seeing it.
Bohemianwriter
(978 posts)Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)IMHO
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Judge people on character not antiquated gender roles and tricks. Give us Liz Warren and I'll be happy forever. Clinton is a Trojan Horse for the military contractors and Wall St charlatans.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)But I know a couple of female Clinton supporters who seem to think Hillary has earned this nomination already, and seem to be so offended that people are more excited about Bernie Sanders than Hillary.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)And they all are in the Clinton camp. I can't tell you how many DU juries I've served on recently where there was nothing worth flagging. Clinton supporters just didn't like the point someone made. And you could tell a couple Clintonites on the jury went along with it...just as Closeminded as any Dittohead or Bush supporter.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)would like to think liberals are less likely to behave like that, but maybe not
glinda
(14,807 posts)and THAT is what they are trying to break apart.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)'in the bag'. We still haven't even caught up in the polling. I want to see Sanders break into the mid 30s over the next month or so, and into the 40s within a couple of months, continued steady growth among Democrats as he gets more exposure, despite the begrudging and limited press coverage that still treats him as a sideshow oddity.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)until Bernie has a seat at the White House.
At which point it will be time to take a breath and get ready to really go to work.
Volaris
(10,273 posts)It's my sense of Congress that a President Sanders will spend the first 2 years of his time using the Bully Pulpit to get a truly liberal Congress elected, because it's likely that nothing else will get done.
If you think the obstruction has been bad for Obama, you ain't seen nothin' yet.
WE are the ones that will make the difference.
The battle cry for 2016 should be:
"I'm not electing you to re-elect you. I'm electing you to enable Publicly-funded elections, and if you don't there are NO circumstances under which your ass gets to come back to DC."
merrily
(45,251 posts)*hypnotic voice* Let yourself experience the joy in this moment fully. You're feeling more and more joyful in the moment.
tblue37
(65,457 posts)won't rest easy until it realy *is* "in the bag."
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)but Dean's run had nothin' on what's happening here. It's actually kinda funny how he's getting scant mention in/on the MSM - and STILL the phenomenon snowballs! 
The other "Dems" are as woefully ineffective as Lindsey Graham or Doctor Carson. Hillary's fading chances are from still riding the skirt-tails of her previous failed quest. Folks are "getting it" - the donor lists don't lie.
I'm dyin' to see what sorta turnout shows up in Los Angeles!
tblue37
(65,457 posts)(SNIP)
In the grand scheme of things, the delegate counts, the win in Oregon and the big loss in Kentucky, didn’t matter in the least. Obama had effectively wrapped up the nomination months earlier. As for Washington State, the final allocation of delegates were not made until the state party convention on June 15th. In the end, Obama had a big advantage in total delegates but only a modest nine vote advantage in pledged delegates who were obligated to vote for him at the convention.
I mention this because Oregon and Washington are areas where Bernie Sanders should do well. If he’s going to actually win any primaries or net some delegates in some states, the Pacific Northwest is one of his most promising areas to do it. As the Washington Post notes, he’s been drawing “eye-popping” crowds there, getting an overflow attendance of about 28,000 in Portland, yesterday.
But it’s not a region that has enough delegates or that fits into the calendar in a way that it can much influence the contest. The rallies help Sanders identify potential organizers, some of whom can work phones or go work for him in more vital regions and states. They help him raise money. And, at this stage, they show that he’s got enthusiastic supporters which helps him with the media coverage he gets.
So, I see what he’s doing and he’s having some success with it. But it’s easy to get irrationally exuberant about his chances. The Pacific Northwest just isn’t going to decide the nominee.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)Bernie is up against a candidate (candidates) who are reaping the monetary rewards from the billionaire class, so he has to reach out to his base and this was a SMART way to do it.
He and a small staff flew business class to the West Coast and probably didn't spend a lot on overhead, but he, through social media, managed to come in direct contact with 70,000 people and the majority of those people will now become foot soldiers and/or small donors to his campaign.
While the M$M continued to virtually ignore him and the 70,000 who came out to see him, the ROI he garnered from this trip is probably enough to sustain him handsomely until the debates. Once those get underway, his no-nonsense, plain speak will help him gather up another several thousand staunch supporters. His base will continue to grow.
After all this, then we can talk about votes - which are a half a year away.
tblue37
(65,457 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)
I was pointing out that the article you posted, while interesting, isn't taking new strategies (new media, for one) into account.
That's all!
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)It would be all over.
azmom
(5,208 posts)
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)they like and want him. The political system in the US is a mess. It's a constant pissing contest of R vs. D. It's ridiculous. It's in a rut. And, the cast of characters for 2016 are the SOS, except for Bernie and Trump, and I side with Bernie. ... but, if it's HRC as nom., I'll side with her.
My coworker came in my office the morning after the Fox debate asking if I watched. Now I'd assume anyone that would ask another about watching a political debate would be somewhat in the know, but guess what, she has never heard of Bernie Sanders.
I was shocked, so I asked what she watched for news. You can only guess her answer.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)FOX?!
nxylas
(6,440 posts)RKP5637
(67,112 posts)quote like they have a badge of knowledge and authority, because they heard something on Fox News, like it's the news from the supreme being or whatever.
And, often they are not rabid teabaggers or something, they just can't seem to wrap their heads around multiple sources of information.
It reminds me of my childhood of my grandmother saying, you know, they can't print in newspapers or say anything on the radio that isn't 100% true. As a little kid I use to think WTF granny, but said nothing. Everyone was so trusting. Now, everyone is certainly not like that, but seemingly many are ... it is ever so frustrating. And they are good people, but just ever so mislead.
The US population really needs a massive instruction course in understanding propaganda and half truths. Or at minimal, understanding who Paul Joseph Goebbels was and what he did, but now AKA 21st century Fox News.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)That is another element of this nation that must be challenged.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)of what is going on, and has been for a long time.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)People "talk amongst themselves" instantly now and Big Media fucking HATES that. They want to be the ones to decide who and what we believe.
artislife
(9,497 posts)I pet sit in the Puget Sound region. Granted it is a Tech community so they may be a little more outlier? or something.
But I have sat in many homes and 1 in 7 ( and I think I am being very generous) have cable. It is all Amazon Prime, Netflix, Hulu, Apple tv etc.
I don't have cable. I am in a home that has HBO go and I am catching up on last season's GoT. Which I got started on in another house. Like Orphan Black---watch it!--I personally have HULU + or whatever they call it now and I am a friend on my brother's girlfriend's Netflix.
I belong to secret FB pages, and l follow different people who are about the environment, real food and politics. and some woo, too.
Only news clips I see are the one I decide to click on through a link.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)As you know the internet is already full of paid sockpuppet liars. But most of us can see through their ruse.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)One great thing is how info and tech savvy today's youth are. They are pretty amazing in the regard.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)eventually the others will have to say his name if we keep working on getting him elected.
Baadger
(56 posts)It seems to me that any *thinking* person that watches any Bernie Sanders speech is instantly converted... and we all have screens in our pockets now... so pick your favorite Bernie speech ... and share and tag folks... share, tag and spam your friends. My personal favorite is this one
Definitely.
JEB
(4,748 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)in Blue states and bigger crowds then republican candidates in Red States.
So of course he has no chance.
TM99
(8,352 posts)that big and they lost too.
But Obama had large crowds and won.
razorman
(1,644 posts)After the primaries, when the general election is underway, will be crunch time.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)razorman
(1,644 posts)candidate's support enthusiasm this early in the game. It is a long way until the election. Keep your powder dry.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Bet when HRC set up her gathering in Roosevelt Park, her crew thought, Wow! We made sure there'd be 5,000 people there! That will discourage any other candidates! And isn't it curious that they got exactly the number necessary to fill the park, and no one showed up in the spillover area where they had the big screens set up.
What can HRC do now? Bernie has set the bar so high in terms of crowd turnout on short notice that she won't dare risk being showed up. Has she got ANY public rallies set up? Even one? It's gotta be incredibly tough to be one of her supporters looking for something - ANYTHING - positive to post about her campaign.
This is why I say that some people in the party are just not getting it. Presidential elections are won by turning out your base. Run an uninspiring candidate that inspires activism in your opposition and the result will go poorly.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)magical thyme
(14,881 posts)please don't in any way, shape or form suggest complacency. it is way to early in the game to even think it's over. the blm fiasco was just the first attempted hit job by a couple of strictly amateur, juvenile motormouths.
The stronger he gets, the more the opposition sees him as the one to beat, the nastier and more professional the attacks will get.
Hoppy
(3,595 posts)Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)They will undoubtedly be coming.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)What do you think the costs for a rally of 20,000 people are?
Do you think that Bernie is raising enough money to actually fund these massive rallies, attended by every single person who shares his ideology?
What is going to happen when reality strikes and Bernie is just plain out of money?
Planes cost money. Staff cost money (though less if you are paying them $12 an hour). Arenas cost money. Food and lodging cost money.
Bernie doesn't have it.
You don't even understand that the very things that you are so excited about are the very things that are going to tank the campaign.
mak3cats
(1,573 posts)...but isn't that a huge problem with our "democracy?" That the one with the most money always wins, and we shouldn't consider anyone else? If that's the mindset, why don't we all just give up and vote Republican?
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)My abacus shows the numbers aren't adding up. I'll give Bernie a call right away and let him know he needs to hire a better strategist and an accountant with one of those new-fangled adding machines.
Because he probably hasn't yet figured out that every event that draws greater numbers of supporters in parts of the country where he is still a relative unknown does not also draw additional donors.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)This isn't a new concept. Venues have always cost money.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Did you even read the OP? "When the next quarterly campaign finance reports are released in October the political world will be shocked by the breathtaking increase in small donor money to the Sanders campaign."
And unlike corporate megadonors and One Percent sugar daddies, none of us expect an invitation to a state dinner at the White House (Oh, thrill! Will I be seated next to Carlos Danger? Hugh Rodman? Rahm Emanuel? Henry Kissinger? one of the Koch brothers? Fast Eddie Mezvinsky?) or to right of approval, or right of first refusal on Supreme Court nominees.
Seriously, social networking has come of age since HRC last ran in 2008. In Pittsburgh/Allegheny County's Dem. primary last spring, the old establishment/machine dems outspent the new, progressive dems by 10 to 1, but the newbies won and they won BIG!
Bernie spends his campaign funds wisely. One small example - he flies coach, without a retinue of hangers-on & go-fers; as compared to HRC's private jets. I am confident that my campaign donations to Bernie will not be blown on overpriced haircuts:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2015/07/30/hillary_clinton_haircut_every_presidential_campaign_needs_a_hairgate.html
Hillary Clinton has earned millions of dollars from speeches and she’s well-known for her specific demands on the speaking circuit.
But the Democratic presidential candidate raised the bar last week when she stopped for a haircut at John Barrett Salon in New York City. As The New York Post reported, Clinton’s haircut cost a cool $600.
The haircut and subsequent blow-dry even shut down the whole area, as one source for the Post said:
“Staff closed off one side of Bergdorf’s so Hillary could come in privately to get her hair done… An elevator bank was shut down so she could ride up alone, and then she was styled in a private area of the salon. Other customers didn’t get a glimpse. Hillary was later seen with a new feathered hairdo.”
According to data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Hillary’s hefty haircut price is more than the average American individual earns each week.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)That is exactly what you expect.
Every action Barrack Obama has taken has been analyzed and judged by folks like you. People like you have labelled him a "sell-out" a "fraud" and a "POSUCS."
You will judge everything Bernie does, and if it does not meet your approval for ideological purity, he won't receive future donations.
You are no different than the corporate donors you want to complain about, your checks just have fewer 000's
jwirr
(39,215 posts)right to oppose things I do not like. Such as TPP. We are not looking for purity we want someone who is on our side. Who has not sold out.
As to the cost - wait and see.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)I never mentioned Obama, let alone analylzed or judged or labeled him with any of your insultling terms. Nor did I mention ideological purity or threaten to withhhold future donations.
If you don't understand the difference between corporate donors and small donors, go google quid pro quo. Your post is so bizarre and out of line you're in another galaxy. As to the entirety of your post, I paraphrase Inigo Montoya in The Princess Bride:
“You keep using those words, I do not think they mean what you think they mean”.
Take a deep breath and have a nice day.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Divernan
(15,480 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)Indydem
(2,642 posts)When a corporation give a candidate $50,000 in donations, via their superPAC, a quid pro quo exists. If the corporation wants a law passed and they don't get it, they will withhold future contributions.
But when 2,500 individuals give $20 each to Bernie Sanders, no quid pro quo exists. If they want a law passed, and it doesn't get done, they just shrug their shoulders and sigh. When they withhold funding in the next elections cycle it isn't in any way as a punishment? President Sanders will have no motivation to act in a way pleasing to those donors in order to keep them happy?
Right.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Bernie's integrity is unassailable.
Bernie Sanders is:
The one candidate not drunk on wealth and power.
The one candidate not irrevocably tied to the 1%.
The one candidate not beholden to Wall Street and corporate America.
The one candidate not tied to the Military Industrial Complex.
The one candidate who marched with Dr. King.
The one candidate who worked to elect Jesse Jackson president.
The one candidate with a solid record of fighting racism and inequality.
The one candidate who voted against the invasion of Iraq.
The one candidate who voted against the the first Gulf war.
The one candidate who voted against NAFTA and CAFTA.
The one candidate who voted against the USA Patriot Act.
The one candidate who wants to overturn Citizens United.
The one candidate who wants to rein in the NSA.
The one candidate who fights for the working class.
The one candidate with the guts to stand up to the 1%.
The one candidate who never sold us out.
The one candidate who never lied to us.
The only candidate who deserves our support.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)You seem to think that Bernie acts the way he does to please the voters. You have it backwards. Bernie acts they way he's ALWAYS acted. It pleases us, so we send money and vote for him.
Bernie doesn't have focus groups. I don't even think he has pollsters. He's a simple man. What you see is what you get. Sorry you're having such a bad day.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)You made a ton of bizarre, unfounded, hateful accusations against me. So I looked you up, and quelle surprise! You were a Hillary supporter last time around.
Indydem Donating Member (866 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 10:36 AM
Response to Original message
1. I'm voting on the 6th, but I'm right there with you!
GO SENATOR CLINTON!
Indydem
(2,642 posts)But I can tell you who I won't be supporting:
The guy who isn't a Democrat, has never been a Democrat, and has spent his political career sticking his thumb in the eye of Democrats.
That guy? Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Senate Democrats lock in key committee memberships
2/12/14 05:31 PM EST
The congressional merry-go-round of committee changes continued on Friday with Senate Democrats locking in their choices for the 114th Congress.
With Republicans set to take a 54-46 majority in the Senate next year, Democrats will lose a seat or two on each panel. Democrats are losing two seats seats on Appropriations, Banking, Budget and the Joint Economic Committee. They are losing only one seat on Finance and Small Business.In one of the more interesting moves, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) will become the ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee.
Golly! Maybe you should call Harry Reid. Obviously he doesn't know your super secret information about Sanders "spending his political career sticking his thumb in the eye of Democrats." In fact, you are the only person in the known universe with this knowledge! Wow!
Indydem
(2,642 posts)“My own feeling is that the Democratic Party is ideologically bankrupt.”
“We have to ask ourselves, ‘Why should we work within the Democratic Party if we don’t agree with anything the Democratic Party says?’”
“Is the Democratic Party a vehicle for social change? It is not,”
“Like millions of other Americans, NOW understands that the Democratic and Republican parties are intellectually and morally bankrupt, and that we need a new political movement in this country to represent the needs of the vast majority of our citizens,”
--- All quotes from Bernard Sanders (I-VT) ---
Bohemianwriter
(978 posts)Do you think that blue dogs and establishment plays with a clean deck?
arcane1
(38,613 posts)At least now we know why all the crazy posts exist 
Indydem
(2,642 posts)The man is a bomb thrower who has never accomplished a damn thing.
I share very few principles with people like that.
progressoid
(49,992 posts)You just criticized Bernie for not having enough money to run for President.
What is going to happen when reality strikes and Bernie is just plain out of money?
Planes cost money. Staff cost money (though less if you are paying them $12 an hour). Arenas cost money. Food and lodging cost money.
Bernie doesn't have it.
So which candidate do you think can afford to run for President? Hmmm, let;s see... Webb? O'Malley? They aren't exactly swimming in funds. So, I guess you'll have to be forced to support the only candidate that meets your financial standards even you haven't decided yet.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)He can raise the money, and is in line with my political ideology.
He hasn't made up his mind yet.
MoveIt
(399 posts)clearly it's time to panic when our best future ex-supporters finally decide to support the candidate they pretended to not support!
Indydem
(2,642 posts)I want Biden to run. If he runs, he will get my vote. If O'Malley looks viable and has a solid message, I'll vote for him. I am not certain who I will vote for in the primary.
It won't be Bernie.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)between the two, I don't know how to help you. And Bernie caucuses with the dems in the senate. And I'd love to hear about a few examples of the many times during his long political career where he has "stuck his thumb in the eye of Democrats". 
Indydem
(2,642 posts)It is in Bernie's best interests to caucus with the party that actually has power.
He doesn't support them.
He doesn't fundraise for them.
He doesn't help them get bills passed.
He doesn't share an ideology with most of them.
He isn't a Democrat. Period.
As for the thumb in the eye thing, a piece just went up on Politico with some great quotes. He has nothing but contempt for the Democratic Party.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-2016-democrats-121181.html#.Vcl5qJNVhBc
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)
Indydem
(2,642 posts)Just attacking and deflecting.
It's what you Bernie folks do.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)The words coming out of his mouth sound more like a Republican. He supports the status quo and has used progressive, socialist, and even communists as smears.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)I am a Democrat - a lifelong voter for Democratic candidates.
I am not as far left as many of the Bernie supporters. That doesn't make me a republican. It makes me in line with the Democratic party and the Democratic presidential candidates of the last 100 years.
Also, a member of the DU longer than you.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)You clearly are NOT a Democrat.
And by the way, I was a lurker for many years before I set up an account. I have also spent way more time interacting (posting) on this board then you have so people know who I am, which is better than those who jump out of the dark and scream boogyman.
You think a progressive is a Democrat. Or that a Democrat must be a progressive.
You think a socialist is a Democrat. Or that a Democrat must be a socialist.
Neither of these things are true. They are patently false. While you may be a progressive, and/or a socialist you are a minority in the Democratic Party. Period.
Further, if you deny that there are communists on the DU, and that they are part of the groundswell for Bernie, you don't know the Du as well as you think you do.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)One does NOT preclude the other. Absolutely faulty thinking on your part.
I'm sure J. Edger Hoover could have used someone like you on his staff.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)Never said they couldn't. Do you see somewhere where I said "expel/ purge the progressives / socialists / communists"?
But they aren't the mainstream of the Democratic Party. They are a minority in the party, which makes them a super minority in America.
But I don't have to be any of those things to be a Democrat. I am a Democrat. That's all the label I need.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)of their party. Face it, you outed yourself.
BTW I have seen no proof that progressives aren't the majority of the Democratic Party.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)The quote:
"Basically, to put not to find a point on it, I think we are looking at a division in the party where the "progressives/socialists/communists" are going to fall into the Sanders camp."
How is that a smear? Because they are a minority in the party? Well that's just math.
Sorry you haven't seen any evidence that progressives are the minority - you must be keenly selective in your observations.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Indydem
(2,642 posts)Where is the smear?
Post 173: "When you smear candidates with the words progressive, socialist, and communist"
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)I'm now referring to your claim that progressives are not a majority of the party. Since you 1) Obviously can't follow a conversation; 2) Continue to smear fellow D's; and 3) Can't back up your own statements; I'm done
Won't miss your insipid conversation where you can't/won't prove anything.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Never heard or saw that one before...LOL
Indydem
(2,642 posts)Where have you been? It was one of the attacks on the President making it's rounds on DU for months.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)What a stupid post.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)Will you withhold your financial support if Bernie Sanders supports a free trade agreement?
Because that's what Barack Obama did - he railed against NAFTA during the campaign, and now he is pushing TPP and oh so many are suddenly distancing themselves.
Bernie has never had to actually govern anything besides Burlington. His grand ideas are just ideological talking points.
If you think that the Sanders who is on the campaign trail is the Sanders who will be in the White House, you are more delusional than I could have dreamed.
SOOOO... if you punish him, or any other candidate or party (DNC?) by withholding your money, you re no different than corporate donors - you expect to see something for your donation.
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)we all know what happened to him
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)may make a donation at the door?
Let's see... 20,000 x $2700 = ? Oops wait, that's what Hillary charges to get in.
Let's try again shall we... 20,000 x $20.00 = $400,000, wow that's even more fun to type than 20,000.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)We send more. I have no problem buying my democracy back if I have to.
MoveIt
(399 posts)Indydem
(2,642 posts)Bernie doesn't qualify.
MoveIt
(399 posts)Indydem
(2,642 posts)And throw away.
MoveIt
(399 posts)Indydem
(2,642 posts)What kind of tears are those?
Tears of laughter at the crazy haired loon who is now a Democrat running you all in circles and dividing the party?
Or tears of sadness that the party, the DU, and America is never going to be whole again after Bernie Sanders (I-VT) gets done destroying all of the above?
MoveIt
(399 posts)I donated because of your "concern"
Indydem
(2,642 posts)I am not concerned about Sanders.
He's only important to you and a few radicals like you.
The rest of the party, and the rest of America is ignoring him for good reason.
MoveIt
(399 posts)NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)since you obviously dislike "crazy haired loon" Bernie, with a passions it seems; exactly which of his positions on issues are you in disagreement with and why? Your dislike must be rooted in policy, so exactly where does he veer from your preferred direction for the party?
I would love to see the discussions for or against on the basis of policy. you claim Bernie would be a "destroyer". I would ask you why you feel that. What policy changes and legislation do you feel he would push for that wold prove destructive to America OR the Democratic Party?
I am asking this as a Bernie supporter as I truly don't understand the vehement dislike for Bernie by many on the Clinton side. I figure it MUST be policy based dislike and certainly not solely because of his "crazy hair".
Indydem
(2,642 posts)Bernie Sanders seems like a fine guy. He does what he believes in, has a somewhat consistent track record, and seems like a totally personable guy.
My problems with Bernie are many faceted. Some of them are with Bernie himself, some of them are with his political history, and some of them are with his supporters.
Bernie himself is a radical. He may seem kind and grandfatherly, but his ideas are radical. He fashions himself as in the mold of Roosevelt, but he's far more radical than Roosevelt or any other Democratic president in the history of the party. He is a progressive and a borderline socialist - positions I don't agree with. I am more of a Kennedy Democrat - which is more in line with the mainstream of the party.
Bernie's political history matches his own radicalism. His legislative history is a lot of votes, bills, and support that falls far to the left of the party. As such, he's basically been a do-nothing member of congress and an even less important senator. He has consistently trashed the Democratic party and refused to do anything to support the party infrastructure. He caucuses with Democrats now, but for decades he refused to; finally realizing that the power is with the party.
Finally, my biggest issue with Bernie Sanders is his supporters. Their constant trashing of Hillary (or any other candidate) as "the lesser of two evils," or a "corporatist" or any one of the other 5000 disparaging names I have heard used for the rest of the Democratic field is disgusting. It divides the party, and poisons the well. In the end, when Bernie doesn't get the nomination, those people have to walk back and vote for Hillary - or they won't. If they won't, because they have convinced themselves that Hillary is just as bad as X, then X WILL WIN. If X wins, we are in for a world of trouble.
So, I use the term "crazy haired loon" because his supporters have attached themselves to his lack of grooming as some kind of symbol for authenticity, and I consider him more than a little bit of a loon - a politician who gets to be outside the mainstream because of his isolated and demographically homogeneous constituency.
He has already done more damage to the DU than I have ever seen. People at at each others throats. Alerting every 30 seconds because someone gets their feeling hurt. Banning of members from the Bernie group for asking reasonable questions. Harassing and dismissing of AA members and concerns. Take your pick. If he doesn't win the nomination, the furthest left of the party who support him will likely stay home on election day, or at the least, their heart won't be in it and they won't be advocating for Hillary (or Biden). If he does win the nomination, I do not think he can win the general election. He is outside the mainstream and in the end, he does not appeal to many of the demographics that the party needs to elect a President.
So there you go. That is why I don't support Bernie Sanders. He isn't a Democrat, and never has been. His radicalism is outside the American and Democratic mainstream, and in unelectable in the general election. And finally, his supporters are corrosive to the party and to the efforts to keep the White House.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)How about his position on:
Reinstating Glass Steagall? Is he wrong about that?
How about his position against TPP? Is he in the wrong place with that for a "Democrat"?
How about Medicare for all? Is that a wrong approach for America?
How about curtailing private "for profit" prisons? Is that the wrong direction for a "Democrat"?
Or what about free tuition at state and local colleges? Is that a policy that a tried and true "Democrat" should never support?
I get that you think he's a "loon", and "outside the mainstream", but what I want to know is what SPECIFIC policy stances of his go against that which a "Democrat" should stand for?
Please be specific, and yes I am truly interested in such a perspective because, as a Bernie supporter, I don't understand it. I have been a Democrat since the 60's as well, and Bernie seems much more like the run of the mill Democrat from that era to me than Hillary does.
Our recollections DO differ as you seems to recall the party being far more conservative back then than my memory tells me.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)1. The repeal of Glass-Steagall isn't what caused the economic collapse. Many many many factors went into the collapse, but allowing banks to diversify their holdings and make investments with their holdings was a minor, if not microscopic contributor. In fact, they were already doing this before the GLBA, and reinstating sections 20 and 32 won't protect us from a future collapse that is influenced by the same factors as the one that was suffered in 2007. I'd be glad to have a greater discussion on this particular topic but here is where I differ from Sanders on this: like so many of his "solutions" to the issues we face, Sanders points to the repeal of Glass-Steagall and says "SEE! This is why we have problems in this country! Reenact this legislation and everything will be great!!!" Never mind that the votes aren't there in congress to reinstate it, and they aren't going to magically appear if Bernie is elected as president. Beyond being the wrong solution, it's a solution he'll be incapable of instituting.
2. TPP is a free trade agreement. We don't know what's in it. We don't know what is being negotiated. We do know that Barack Obama is the President of the United States, and he has been working behind the scenes to build this agreement. We know that he has faith in it and supports it. So you can look at it two ways: A) "All free trade is bad and hurts American workers and we should oppose this and all free trade agreements from now until the end of time based strictly on protectionism of American workers." or B) "Barack Obama is the President I voted for, and he has shown to be competent, fair, and far smarter than his opposition - I will trust him on this issue and have a little faith that inside this agreement are clauses and agreements that will make the Earth a better place and America better off." Bernie is in the "A" camp. I disagree. I am at least in the B camp, and I can see an economic benefit to free trade in general. No, I don't know what is in the TPP - but Barack Obama does, and he's not let me down more than other politicians, so I'll give it a spin and see where it goes.
3. Medicare for all is a terrible plan for America. "Medicare for All" is a clever attempt at branding. It's not great, and it fails to acknowledge or even see the basic failures of Medicare. As a health care provider, I do not have to accept Medicare / Medicaid. And frankly, many health care professionals do NOT accept Medicare/Medicaid because reimbursement rates are too low, and the patients who tend to use it are the worst cases with the most health issues. Therefore, you have to do more work for the same outcome and you get paid far less than it is worth. My opinion on this is that we need to be transitioning to a more highly regulated health market. I want to advocate for single payer, but the realist in me recognizes that in a nation of 350 million people with diverse cultural and economic backgrounds, there isn't a silver bullet or magic wand. The ACA was a step in the right direction, but I do NOT like the mandatory purchase of health insurance from a private corporation - especially from those who have no choice but to purchase from one vendor via the exchange. There are a lot of ways to reform health care. I think Single Payer (at least in my lifetime) is a nonstarter - not only for the millions of people who will lose their jobs in the health insurance and administration fields, but because millions of people will have nowhere to receive care when doctors refuse to accept the product and people are left with a "Medicare for All" care that gets them nothing.
4. For-Profit Prisons is a scapegoating issue. It drives me crazy that this is given so much focus by the progressives in our party. The issue is being looked at through the wrong optics, as usual. Private prisons account for “6 percent of state prisoners, 16 percent of federal prisoners, and inmates in local jails in Texas, Louisiana, and a handful of other states” according to the ACLU - a tiny percentage of total incarcerations. Progressives and people like Sanders are so GD worried about a single dollar of public money going to private corporations in their continuing efforts to demonize corporations, business, and profits, that they completely missed the fucking point. TOO MANY GOD DAMN AMERICAN CITIZENS ARE IN JAIL!!! We need sentencing reform at all levels in this country - an issue that Bernie Sanders has never had a word to say about. Barack Obama supports this reform, as does O-Malley, Hillary, and even Rand fucking Paul. There are a number of sentencing reform bills in play in the Senate right now - Bernie Senders isn’t a cosponsor to a single one of them. So yeah, I don’t really give a crap who gets paid to keep a man in a cage. I care more about getting the man OUT of the cage. We need to legalize Marijuana, get drug users into counseling and programs, and quit sending them to jail - regardless of who is paying to keep them behind bars.
5. “Free” Tuition, again, is missing the point entirely. I’m not sure where to start this takedown, but I guess let’s start at the beginning.
a. High School is where this issue starts. It used to be that when you graduated high school, you were equipped to go out and get some kind of low-level job in some kind of industry. You might be able to go and be a secretary in an office or a book keeper. You might be able to go get a factory job, or even a retail job with the possibility of advancement. No longer. Kids are being taught tests in school, and nothing else. You can’t get a job out of high school that has any hope of advancing beyond entry level. If you want to have a career in America now, you need at least an associate’s degree. This is where reform has to start. Kids coming out of high school need to have real skills, even if that skill is just showing up on time and balancing a checkbook. They aren’t getting that, so everyone tells them to go to College - that leads us to the second issue.
b. College isn’t for everyone. Some people aren’t cut out for college. They lack the aptitude, the dedication, the commitment, or they just plain can’t cut it. But because of issue a - they have to go to college to make anything of themselves, and colleges are happy to let them in. They take their money, they send them off to some remedial classes, which the student promptly fails, and TA-DA, the student has debt they can’t pay, and the college got their cut. So what is the solution to this? Every college needs to increase their admission standards, and every student wishing to go to college had better show they have the ability to cut it. Otherwise, even under the current financing model, we are throwing money away every single day, on students who are never going to get a degree, and are never going to repay the loans they get. So, since college isn’t for everyone, we’d be a hell of a lot better off to encourage and develop vocational training programs that get students who aren’t cut out to go to college into a trade that they can make a decent living at.
c. College is expensive - but why? Most colleges are being subsidized by their respective states and communities. But you never hear a politician say “maybe a college president shouldn’t make $1 million (Ohio State) $853,000 (Indiana University) $645,000 (Michigan State University) $496,000 (Ball State University) $466,000 (Purdue University).” These are PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES, that receive a huge portion of their funding from taxpayers, and they are paying their president that much?!? Maybe we could reduce the amount students have to borrow by keeping the presidents of their respective universities from driving Maybachs? Of course, this trickles down to Deans, VP’s, etc. There has been an explosion of growth in costs for education in the last 20 years, and it sure as hell isn’t going to professors. So maybe Sanders could support some reforms in the education sector that affect those running the Universities? Yes, I know his plan includes some kind of cost cutting efforts that put the onus on the states to control the costs of education - but I have yet to hear Bernie Sanders (or any other politician for that matter) say - “hey, maybe college costs too much because of greedy fuckers in our public institutions.”
d. College shouldn’t be free. There, I said it. It won’t be popular with the progressives on the DU, but I don’t much care. I’ve lived it, and I can tell you that the old adage is absolutely true: when you have to work for it, you value it more. When I went to college, I started out on an academic scholarship, paired with a local scholarship I received from a non-profit. Put together with attending a lower cost state school and monies from my parents and savings from working summers throughout high school, I was able to go to college without borrowing anything. Ugh - what a terrible plan. That lasted the first two years. My academic performance was less than stellar. I skipped classes, had too much fun, and basically screwed myself out of the scholarships. As the scholarships fell off, my parents added more money and I burnt through my savings faster. Finally, after my sophomore year, the savings were gone, the parents cut me off, and I had to make a decision. That summer I worked 2 jobs, I went back in the fall with a student loan, and knowing that I was paying my own way from there on out. I worked a part time job for the University and took some side jobs. I got a 4.0 for the next two semesters. I only missed one class during that time (car accident) and I appreciated every minute of every class. Once I had to pay for it myself - it had value. When it was handed to me, it had none. Obviously, this isn’t going to be the case for everyone. I am making a generalization. But I am not alone in this experience. People I knew (including my college girlfriend) received tens of thousands in grants, and borrowed tens of thousands of dollars, and never even finished their degrees. Students should have to work for their education, either academically or by being employed. If they have to take out a loan - then I hope they recognize what that really means - that they will be paying for it later.
So there you go. This is long. You may not even read it. I probably won’t change your mind on anything, but I have legitimate reasons for not supporting Sanders. These are just the 5 you brought up. I also don’t hate Wall Street, blame corporations for everything that is wrong with our country, and demonize the “billionaire class” (all 615 of them). I recognize that we are a divided nation and that there is a huge group of people that don’t agree with me on social issues, and think I want to steal their money and give it away. I don’t hate those people, or call them names. I recognize that we have to work with them to move this country forward, and Bernie Sanders has shown that he can’t do that. So yeah - I’ll be happy to explain anything else if you want, throw it out there.
BTW, I am only 34, but I do understand the difference between what Kennedy supported, and what Bernie (and progressives) are after. They are not the same.
Depaysement
(1,835 posts)Compared to the money that flows in the door from an event attended by 19,000.
As a general rule about 75% of campaign funds are spent on communications/advertising, not arena rentals. Bernie doesn't really have a big problem there.
I'm more worried about something else.
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)I keep thinking about Bobby Kennedy.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)the guards at the SS event were comatose until it was way too late.
I keep thinking about JFK, MLK and RFK. Even my lifelong republican parents were going to vote for RFK.
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)The ones in SEA have had their minute of fame with their act...it's over.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)It's part of an organized "Stop Bernie" movement paid for by --> ????????
L. Coyote
(51,129 posts)it's an organized "Stop Every Liberal" movement.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)But I am almost afraid to express it.
But TPTB are not above murder and we should know that, even if it is forbidden by the CT police.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)What a sick world we live in.
pnwmom
(108,988 posts)The BLM imposter was a Palin fan and the whole incident had Rove paws all over it.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)
jwirr
(39,215 posts)As soon as they found out differently they tried to depose him. Bernie is starting with a clear statement of which side he is on.
True Blue American
(17,988 posts)This was my first thought when I watched them get so close to Bernie. The one even touched him.
They are not doing their group any favors.
Tab
(11,093 posts)
With another 9000 listening outside.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/10/this-bernie-sanders-crowd-shot-should-make-hillary-clinton-a-little-jittery/
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Los Angeles Memorial Sports Arena...seating is approximately 16,000 and that's inside.
Iowa events next weekend...including the "Soapbox" at the Iowa State Fair!
Go Bernie! Go Team Bernie! We Stand Together!
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Android3.14
(5,402 posts)This guy is freakin' awesome, and the way he handled the BLM fiasco over the weekend tells me he has the grace to pull this off.
shanti
(21,675 posts)i really want to see him!
Response to NorthCarolina (Original post)
LiberalArkie This message was self-deleted by its author.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)
Politicub
(12,165 posts)Hopefully the mainstream media will take notice and amplify the message.
I'm of the mind that this kind of attention can lift all boats.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)They are going to make more money in 2015 and 2016 than ever before in history.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
lark
(23,138 posts)All they want to talk about is donald, donald, donald and throw in a bit about Walker, Bush and Rubio.
No mention of the Sanders phenomenon at all. They think they can defeat him with silence and I do believe it's a conscious plot. They don't want people to realize how much he's resonating with folks just like them, they don't want the public to know who Bernie actually is and what he represents. He's a true breath of fresh air, someone who doesn't lie and triangulate, someone who isn't beholden to the powers that be.
I bet they don't even cover how well he's doing with donations, all they are about are the Super Pacs and really large bribes.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)They're about the soap opera.
The role of the media is to distract you from the issues with non-issues so Wall Street greed and how it's swallowing worker's pay and pensions becomes less important than gay marriage, immigration or Iran.
A while back I read an article where conservatives have a list of things they think is wrong with this country and every single one of them is considered to be a #1 priority. It's like a hoarder who values a bunch of styrofoam meat trays with the same value as their DVD player.
Everything is a #1 priority with them and they fail to see the irony that on their LONG list of #1 priorities of what's wrong with America,....is hatred for people who criticize America.
Elmer S. E. Dump
(5,751 posts)And I wonder how long they can go without making it obvious to people (outside of DU) that the game is rigged, and the MSM has NO credibility.
Stardust
(3,894 posts)coffers.
madaboutharry
(40,216 posts)He is the invisible candidate.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)questionseverything
(9,657 posts)oh noes...someone on the net was mean....so now the corporate candidate must be supported
the 1% will surrender nothing willingly
honestly i do not know if we the people can overcome but we must keep trying
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)[URL=
.html][IMG]
[/IMG][/URL]
Tommymac
(7,263 posts)
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)They ignore Bernie and yet the word is out and the crowds keep coming, while few come to see any one else and Trump pays the audience to come.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)Showing the people what a joke the MSM is. Not saying it was only him, but he played a big role, IMO.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)for a while now, well before the serious political analysts stopped pretending he was (a) non-existent or (b) the somewhat crazy guy who was Mayor of Burlington years ago and did nothing much after that.
GO, Bernie, go!
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)NOW.
zentrum
(9,865 posts)…..the Democratic Machine. I think they are as much against us having Bernie as the Republicans are, and will use every tactic.
But he has already changed the country just by running. The media and Hillary will not be able to avoid his policy points which for the first time since FDR have given a platform for ordinary people. He is slowly dragging the party back to the real center "left", which used to be the mainstream center for the Democrats. The Clintons dragged it way right in the nineties.
And Bernie is doing it without a phalanx of high priced operatives and expensive ads. He's got his rumpled suits, his values—and us. That's it.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)what. This is not about Bernie. He tells us that all the time and that is what you just said. It will be great if he wins and is there to lead us but if he does not we will still be here. Just as we have never stopped following the star of RFK. Of MLK. Of McGovern. Of FDR. They set us on this road and we will not be moved.
zentrum
(9,865 posts) jwirr
(39,215 posts)issues.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Before I went to law school at age 40, I taught various sociology classes at Pitt, including Intro to Women's Studies.
I have a fair amount of women friends from organizations I belong to, like AAUW, and I know women active in the local Dem. party. Have never heard a positive word about HRC and don't know of anyone, man or woman, who's planning to vote for her. That includes my friends and family - all Dems - in California, Washington state, Alaska, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Massachusetts, Florida, Indiana, Ohio, Texas and Illinois.
Thank god none of the women I know are so politically unaware and unsophisticated as to say they'd vote for her because she's a woman or because it's her turn.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)women of my family.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)zentrum
(9,865 posts)
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)an honest straight forward populist candidate that actually cares and will fight for issues that affect them.
He's making the "new" Democrats that believed that it is necessary to hop in bed with Wall Street and global corporations in order to win elections look foolish.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)be the first to do so.
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)You can feel it jwirr!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)tularetom
(23,664 posts)I don't actually know whether or not he can get the message out to enough people to secure the nomination.
But I do know this: he is the only hope the Democrats have of winning the WH in 2016. Hillary Clinton will never be elected president and nominating her would be a huge mistake.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)and infrastrcture
Divernan
(15,480 posts)The analogy I would make is to compare her candidacy in the general as the equivalent of a shark feeding dive - an activity in which I've participated several times. You have all the divers settled in well away from the area where the shark bait will be handled by the dive leader, before the container is opened and the smell quickly spreads through the ocean.
The shark dive master is fully protected by a dive suit specifically designed of stainless-steel mesh, manufactured to give both protection and range of motion. It takes a specialized machine 70 hours to individually weld enough chain mail to make a suit — ring by ring, link by link, almost 500,000 in total. And it takes a skilled craftsman another 40 hours to cut and assemble that suit completely by hand.
http://www.scubadiving.com/photos/underwater-suit-protects-divers-shark-jaws
So the GOP voting base is the pack of sharks which will be in a feeding frenzy, and HRC is right in the middle of them. Not only is she in the middle, but her "divesuit" has accumulated decades of chinks in the armor from all the scandals and past, recent and on-going actions of both her and Bill, and the GOP will be tearing at and exploiting them as ferociously as sharks attack bait.
Not a pretty picture, is it. And even worse, she will drag down other Dems on the ticket.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)her term will be the least productive four years in recent US history, because it will be scandal after scandal, investigation after investigation.
And she'd handle it just like Nixon, with paranoia, lashing out at her critics, and plans for revenge.
Yeah, it'd be ug-lee.
PasadenaTrudy
(3,998 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)After that I am going to try to do more. This is too important to all of us and our families to not give.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)mythology
(9,527 posts)He still doesn't have enough support among minority voters. I'm expressly not saying that I agree with the people disrupting his campaign events, but just structurally there isn't a viable path to the nomination with his current support levels.
Obama won white liberals and black voters while Hillary won Latino voters and I believe more conservative white voters. The polling doesn't even show Sanders winning a plurality of white liberals and he is badly losing with both blacks and Latinos. I haven't yet seen a plan for how he changes that. Sanders has been drawing big, even huge, crowds but that hasn't shown up in the polling.
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Hillary had far more black support than Obama did through much of the primary season, but once Obama proved that he had a chance of winning those numbers shifted dramatically and nearly all of Hillary's black supporters moved to Obama. I am not saying Bernie will pull as many black voters from Hillary as Obama did, but I do think he is going to end up with a lot more black supporters than the polls currently suggest.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Not true. His plan is to continue to do what he has done for decades, tell the truth. No planned "triangulation" is needed. People are responding to him in spite of the lack of coverage by the media, in spite of the obvious SwiftBoating. They want an honest politician.
Depaysement
(1,835 posts)I hope all that money doesn't soil the campaign. I hope some of it finds its way to the workers and is not vacuumed up by premature TV advertising and huckster Washington political consultants. He's doing just fine as is.
passiveporcupine
(8,175 posts)For many of you, like me, I want to contribute more to his campaign, but my head keeps telling me I can't afford it. But you know what? We can't afford NOT TO. It's that important!
Give what you can, as often as you can. Make it a small monthly donation and you won't feel it as much.
indivisibleman
(482 posts)I believe him. He has my vote.
litlbilly
(2,227 posts)Just an amazing night.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)Thespian2
(2,741 posts)GO BERNIE!!!
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)The bigger Sanders gets the more vociferous the voice that "He will not be the nominee!"
There isn't a discussion of policy at all when people say these things. There isn't even a discussion of the fact that his events are more attended than any other candidate running for president. All the mainstream media does is try to marginalize him and claim that he is "too left." And all the internet Hillary supporters do is shout out "no" and that "he will not win."
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)to me that Hillary is only holding more intimate $2700 per plate gatherings. I suspect she knows she could not draw large 15K and 28K crowds in an open event such as the ones Bernie is holding, and how would you "splain that" being the undisputed "official frontrunner" and all. This election cycle is turning out to be very revealing, AND very enlightening. It is unfolding in very "interesting" ways. Today's word: "interesting", brought to you by the letter "B".
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)Her team is desperately afraid of any public activism or questions that might push her or force her to take solid positions. Without Bernie in the race she would probably have been free to be as amorphous as possible so that she could just encompass any kind of opposition to the GOP that might be palatable without having to make specific promises.
Just by being in the race Bernie has forced her to take positions. Imagine what he could accomplish if he wins. He has a much better chance of demolishing the GOP clown car than Hillary does.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)the non-specific specifics such as her "we need to raise the minimum wage!" vs Bernies "we need to raise the minimum wage to $15/hr". Whats her idea of a specific target amount? Who knows...but she's all for raising it and don't sweat the details.
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)She really is very details light.
Oh except for her typical garbage like her revenue-neutral nineties rehash policies.
Like her tax credit for companies that pay out profit sharing bonuses. It really is the perfect little do-nothing policy that will actually diminish revenue needed for public programs while doling out tax breaks to corporations that are already giving bonuses. The breaks are not significant enough to actually be cost effective unless a company decides to make that part of their payment package to employees in which case they get to claim it on their taxes and save money for themselves while, once again, shafting the collected revenue.
This is one of the reasons that third-way bullshit is so dangerous. It pretends to solve a problem and ends up costing us more in the long run through uncollected revenue and increased deficits. Deficits that they will cut by cutting human services.
ARRGHH!!!!
Damn it, we really, really, really need Bernie!
It seems like her strategy is to meet with the wealthy, collect $$ and say very little, making sure that whatever she's said has been triangulated to the nth degree.
Uncle Joe
(58,378 posts)Thanks for the thread, NorthCarolina.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)That is absolutely the best way to get younger people to give money, imho.
MFM008
(19,818 posts)just NOT feeling a "Bern".
BeanMusical
(4,389 posts)
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)whereas Bernie is in the process of being elevated by the people in spite of harried attempts to dampen his growing popularity. Kind of a grassroots thing that Hillary camp doesn't understand I suppose. It's not too late to join us.
