2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf Bernie is not accepted here as a Democrat
as some say, then why was his icon available at DU for so many years???
marym625
(17,997 posts)Since when does logic play into this?
#FeelTheBern #Bernie2016
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)what was I thinking
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)of his face while badmouthing the party from the other for years? Because he is on the left, like we are, and we are the genuine Big Tent, and proudly.
In all this silly discussion, please note that Bernie is proudly and insistently NOT a Democrat. He never has been a registered Democrat. We still don't know if he'll qualify to be on the New Hampshire primary ballot as a Democrat.
demwing
(16,916 posts)then we're revealed as just another umbrella corporation.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Or something.
demwing
(16,916 posts)Even if he doesn't win the nomination, he has forced your candidate to act like a Democrat. That must Bern for you.. Being taught how to be a Democrat by an Independent!
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)entered the race and would be surprised if he didn't feel he's won what he initially intended to and then some. The Democratic Party and the nation are winners thanks to him.
demwing
(16,916 posts)not the management of the party.
Vote for Bernie.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)to take on the GOP in the general, Demwing.
The next president will elect at least 2 (two!!) and as many as 4 (four!!!!) supreme court justices. The next president must NOT be any of the GOP candidates -- not if you want to see your dreams for your country achieved in your lifetime.
demwing
(16,916 posts)So concentrate on which candidate is more progressive. That should be an easy choice...
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)way with big solutions and using government to advance our nation. I.e., are "progressive." The question is more how incremental and conventional or bold and experimental we want the solutions to be.
You may or may not realize it, but many experts feel some of Bernie's "solutions" are not doable or just plain wouldn't work as stated. Even if he were elected he'd have to retrench to what was achievable. Presidents have real limitations to their power. The more ambitious the promises and the bigger the change required, the less likely they are be able to fulfill them.
Remember, FDR and Truman enacted their reforms with support from both GOP progressives and Democratic Party progressives. Our next president will be facing mostly the same GOP this one did.
I wish that Hillary Clinton at least got more credit for the realism of the reforms she intends to implement. They may be less exciting in scope than Bernie's, but we're also more likely to see them realized in some form not too different from what she's describing.
demwing
(16,916 posts)She is hated by the GOP. And no we don't pick our candidates according to the GOP whim, but we are discussing whether Hillary would be more or less effective than Bernie.
Her ideas are tepid, and when you don't try for big reforms, you don't end up with big reforms. Your goal defines your negotiating starting pint, and your starting point often determines your ending point.
Hillary will start in the middle and negotiate to the right, ending up to the right of middle.
Bernie will start with Socialism, negotiate to the right, and end up with the whole damned Democratic Party platform in legislation.
And don't get me started on coat tails, Hillary has none. Our best bet for changing the dynamic in Congress is by sending Bernie to the GE, not Hillary.
Bernie gets a million donations, Hillary gets a millionaire's donation. Major difference.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)opposing our next president as Obama. Is Obama so hatable or so radical that they couldn't work with him? No, and it made absolutely no difference at all.
And the same, tedious yada over Hillary. I don't expect you to support her, but you and the GOP, especially the TP "ReThugs," are so constantly and intractably opposed to her that, frankly, I see no difference between you on that topic. What's the difference between 100% and 100% knee-jerk oppositional at every opportunity?
demwing
(16,916 posts)Every post I read from her followers offers the same sleep enducing tedium. I'm sorry your candidate is the way she is. I wish that she were inspirational, I really want the US to elect a woman POTUS, but though Clinton may win, she won't win my support.
She has small ideas, everything is taste tested, and there's no sense that she'll do jack shit about Wall Street.
I want the establishment to change, why in the name of God should I vote or support a candidate that is running as the insider?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Bernie knows how to register if it becomes an issue in New Hampshire.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)than to try to stop the people from being able to vote for their choice of Democratic Candidate for the WH.
It would show, eg, that Bernie is doing so well that they can't stop him other than to try to deprive his supporters of voting for him.
We need to have all these dirty tricks that have been suppressing the vote for so long, exposed thoroughly.
Even some of my friends who still support Hillary are disgusted by even the thought of that happening.
I imagine if it does, since their support is more sentimental than anything else, I will be able to sign them up for Bernie.
Do you know anything about Vt and registering as a Democrat?
Has Bernie broken any rules, done anything illegal, anything that prevents anyone else from voting, anything unconstitutional in any way?
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)say Bernie has register as a Democrat to be in the DEMOCRATIC PARTY PRIMARY, he can do that. Big deal. Or he can just continue as an independent. Bernie made this situation, not the Democratic Party he does not belong to. And he's had months to decide what he'll do.
As for me, I'm not into petty family squabbles. The real wars get my guts in enough of a twist when I imagine losing them.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Sanders said.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bernie-sanders-files-new-hampshire-state-ballot
He filed on Thursday. There were numerous threads, you probably missed them though, I get it people are busy and don't read DU every single day.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Response to marym625 (Reply #1)
William769 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)everyone wants to discuss and his electability facing the propaganda machine of the GOP corporate media, he is not accepted* by the majority....no need to guild the Lilly.
I like Bernie, I do not like his odds with little money against the unlimited money and controlled media of the other side. Passion will beat money?..maybe...but is 2016 the right time to roll the dice just to answer that question?
*as in not the number 1 preferred candidate
cui bono
(19,926 posts)that he is running as a Democrat. You see it over and over again, "he's not a Dem", I just had someone say that to me a day or two ago.
Polling shows he beats every GOP candidate by a larger margin than Hillary. And there was just a poll showing that Dems favor Socialism over Capitalism. So I don't know what you can possibly think is an issue with his policies. He is NOT fringe. He is an FDR Democrat. He is what the Dem Party is supposed to be.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)[center][/center]
[center][font color="green" size="14" face="face"]And in 1985:[/font]
[/center]
cui bono
(19,926 posts)He is running "as a Democrat". It's very simple.
Claiming he is not a Dem is the equivalent to bringing up Benghazi. There's no there there.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)I've even added images with his quotes to make it easier for people to understand.
Once again...Bernie Sanders is running AS a Democrat, but he's NOT a Democrat, and his supporters need to stop trying to browbeat people into believing otherwise.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)But, I'm a Marxist who thinks that the Capitalist system is broken beyond repair and that our government has been overrun by corrupt politicians that have been bought off by Wall Street and Energy corporations....
So, I guess I'm NOT a Democrat in your perception.
Interesting.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)If yes, then you're a Democrat, no matter your personal political philosophy.
I'm a Social Democrat, but I'm a registered Democrat, canvassed for and donated to Democrats, and vote straight Democratic ticket.
Bernie Sanders has never registered as a Democrat, has never campaigned for Democrats, and has maintained, again and again, that he's a Democratic Socialist not a Democrat. I'll take his word on it.
bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)You said he didn't campaign for any democrats. He delivered the Vermont caucus for Jessie Jackson when he was running for president.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)He's supported and endorsed Jesse Jackson twice - in '84 and '88 - the same Rev. Jesse Jackson who said about Senator Obama that he wanted to "cut his nuts off", by the way, and has, since his off-air remarks had come to light, had to apologize to the Obama family profusely. But he hasn't endeared himself to the African American community who love President Obama, so I wouldn't mention the Rev's name in connection with Sanders as a plus if I were you, considering his single-digit support in that community.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)He is running as a Democrat on the Democratic ticket.
That's good enough for me.
As a Party, we seem to be all fine with people who say they are Democrats (and register as such) but don't act like or vote as Democrats. Why is that? Is the label more important than actions?
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)belief in the Democratic Party platform to want to take the next step and make it official and register as a Democrat. It speaks to character.
He is running as a Democrat on the Democratic ticket.
That's good enough for me.
If, for example, Rand Paul decided to run on the Democratic Party ticket but doesn't register as a Democrat, would that be a-okay with you? It wouldn't be okay with me.
As a Party, we seem to be all fine with people who say they are Democrats (and register as such) but don't act like or vote as Democrats. Why is that? Is the label more important than actions?
Fist of all, we need to understand that not every single Democrat is perfect. We need to look to their constituency to understand why that is. No politician is perfect. Not a single one. Even Bernie Sanders.
That said...
Labels are NOT more important than actions. I make that case every day. Actions always speak louder than words. I have NO problem accepting Bernie Sanders as a Democrat. He's voted with Democrats 98% of the time (the core reason the Democratic Party has allowed him to run in their primaries). He's strong against wealth inequality. He's pro-labor, pro-Social Security, pro-universal healthcare, pro-education, pro-strong national security, pro-veterans, and isn't afraid to vote for war when it's necessary. So why is HE so adamantly against registering as a Democrat and making it official. Because he doesn't, and his resisted all these decades, people who vote Democratic Party distrust his motives. It's why his poll numbers seem frozen. They don't trust him.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)would be first in line to say so...
http://progressillinois.com/posts/content/2015/04/03/us-sen-bernie-sanders-stumps-garcia-garza-chicago-calls-political
So would Susan Garcia
Just because you haven't heard that he's done it, doesn't mean he hasn't.
Furthermore, I know you know this but the candidates in Vermont can't register for a party.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)He can't. They don't have party affiliation/registration there. You run as the party you want to run as. That is just how it is.
He is running as a Democrat in the presidential election. That is as much as he can do to become a Democrat. He is a Democrat in the primary race.
When he ran for Senate he ran as an Independent. He was elected as an Independent.
If you want I'll try to find my post where I explained all this to someone else. Hopefully I added it to my journal. But it's all explained in full on the Vermont SOS website.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)that he "is not, and has never been, a Democrat".
Over and over again he calls himself a Democratic Socialist (Socialist). I'll take his word on it.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Obviously you missed that news. I expect you will now remove your false posts.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Up until he had to file his candidacy with New Hampshire, he continued to claim that he's an "Independent" and "Socialist" and "Democratic Socialist". But I didn't hear his tone when he spoke those words to those reporters, so I don't know if he was exasperated, facetious, or genuine.
And I'm certain the majority of Democrats - especially minorities - feel the same way.
When Charlie Crist changed his Party affiliation from Republicans to Independent to Democrat in order to run as a Democrat for Governor of Florida, not many people bought his "change of heart", and he lost.
So no. I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I will NOT remove my factual posts just because Sanders told reporters after having to file as a Democrat in order to run in New Hampshire (the ONLY State where he has a shot at winning from Hillary Clinton) that he's NOW a Democrat.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)But, I didn't really think you would remove it just because of that little fact.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Nice imitation of O'Reilly on all accounts.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Whatever.
You are choosing to harp on the equivalent of Benghazi. Tells me all I need to know about trying to have a discussion with you.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)a Democrat just because he filed his candidacy in New Hampshire (the only State that he has a shot at winning from Hillary Clinton) while uttering to reporters that he's "a Democrat now", isn't going to make me more inclined to believe he actually is one, no more than I'm inclined to believe Rand Paul should he have done the same thing.
If and when Sanders actually does the hard work, solidifies Democratic alliances, and actually goes out and campaigns with and for Democrats, rather than just file as a Democrat in a State that requires him to be a Democrat in order to run on that ticket in that State - which smacks of political expediency - then I'll be convinced he actually is a Democrat. Not before.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Okay, fine. Be the Benghazi type. That's what you are doing is the equivalent of, yelling Benghazi.
Political expediency for what??? What is his selfish motive??? He desperately wants to fix this democracy and give the 99% better lives. What is wrong with that?
I see that's the new meme, someone else said that just a little bit before you. Or was it you? What's the negative to it? Why does it matter?
Armstead
(47,803 posts)Is there like a written test or something?
Any party that has been home to Zell Miller and Paul Wellstone is not real easy to define.
Capn Sunshine
(14,378 posts)I've always appreciated your thoughtful insights. I think like everything political, the party is in constant flux depending on who allies with whom, what becomes important, etc.
I suppose you could start here at the NY Times. There are variations depending on state party platforms, but it's important to note the first priority is support of the middle class.
TBF
(32,098 posts)Android3.14
(5,402 posts)Polling for the GE indicates Sanders has a better chance than Hillary. Sanders has won many more elections than she has, and she has lost more than he has.
The folks who trot this distraction out at every turn need to ask themselves whether they are simply puppets of the DLC/GOP/1-percent propaganda machine, or if they have the spine to stand up for what they know in their hearts to be good government. You say, "I truly like Bernie", but a person who "truly" feels this way would try to think of ways to overcome the challenge of the GOP machine rather than hide behind the knees of the biggest spoiled bully in the DLC playground.
trumad
(41,692 posts)UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)boot. So you are now comparing Bernie to Bush? Please lets be real here. BTW who is closer to Bush out of the two, Hillary or Bernie???
trumad
(41,692 posts)Having an avatar on DU doesn't mean shit.
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)a Hillary icon????
trumad
(41,692 posts)don't mean nothing....yeah right
bravenak
(34,648 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)The site has sports avatars too and I don't think anyone thinks the teams are Democrats.
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)it doesn't mean shit
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)politically. But we all know Bernie is running as a Dem so hopefully people saying he isn't a Dem will die down. It's really so stupid. It's the equivalent of bringing up something as idiotic as Benghazi.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)who'd a thunk?
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)use such things to show support on the inter webs these days. If you do not realize that then I can't help you.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)I hear Bernie finally said he was a Dem just yesterday. Took him fucking long enough, and only because he was pressed into it so he could register in NH. I wonder if that political expediency will last after the Primaries?
demwing
(16,916 posts)not when so many are devoted to party brand names and corporate logos.
senz
(11,945 posts)Wish I could say I'm surprised.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)The great avatar issue of '15!!!!!!!
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)when he finally...FINALLY stopped being a Socialist.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)One is an economic philosophy, the other is a political party.
I'm a post-capitalist and I'm a Democrat for example.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)And yes those are mutually exclusive....one accepts some Capitalism and one rejects it all.....Bernie NEVER called himself a Socialist Democrat....the one that accepts regulated Capitalism
blackspade
(10,056 posts)I just explained to you that I have been a lifelong Democrat and a post-capitalist.
I think that economically that capitalism has run its course and is a failed economic system.
And I am a member of the Democratic party because it is the only viable party that could create an environment to enable us to move beyond the crushing failure that is capitalism.
So no, they are not mutually exclusive rather inclusive to each other..
This whole argument about his status and label is just another distraction created by the M$M to divide the party.
We would all do well to move on from such transparent manipulation.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Democratic socialism
Democratic socialism is a political ideology advocating a democratic political system alongside a socialist economic system, involving a combination of political democracy (usually multi-party democracy) with social ownership of the means of production. Although sometimes used synonymously with "socialism", the adjective "democratic" is sometimes added to distinguish itself from non-democratic forms of socialism, such as the MarxistLeninist brand of socialism.[1]
Democratic socialism is usually distinguished from both the Soviet model of centralized socialism and social democracy. This distinction arose from the authoritarian form of government and centralized economic system that emerged in the Soviet Union during the 20th century.[2] A distinction is also made between democratic socialism and social democracy in that the former is committed to systemic transformation of the economy while the latter is not.[3]
Democratic socialism rejects the social democratic view of reform through state intervention within capitalism, seeing capitalism as inherently incompatible with the democratic values of freedom, equality and solidarity. Democratic socialists believe that the issues inherent to capitalism can only be solved by transitioning from capitalism to socialism, by superseding private property with some form of social ownership, with any attempt to address the economic contradictions of capitalism through reforms only likely to generate more problems elsewhere in the capitalist economy
blackspade
(10,056 posts)End of story.
You keep parroting an M$M meme designed to divide the party.
Why is that?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)The fact that he HAD to proclaim he IS a Democrar now proves that fact...
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)I welcome Sanders with open arms into the Democratic Party race, which proves the grace and vision of Sanders and the inclusiveness of the party as it exists, without needing to be redefined from the outside.
And so of course Sanders had to run as a Democrat in order to be included in 5 nationally televised debates, the first of which got 15.5 million individual viewers! How much of Sanders limited funds would purchase that many eyeballs for two hours in prime time?
Quid pro quo.
We should all settle down.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Last edited Sun Nov 8, 2015, 04:49 PM - Edit history (1)
He had to suck it up......and become on of the ones be spoke so disparagingly about.....because he hasnt a snowballs chance in hell without us....
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)There has had to have been some kind of written agreement for this kind of very big quid pro quo that I think is clearly happening.
Someone should ask them....get it out on the table, because it is a good thing.
You may not be the one to ask, but what is the news on Sanders TV ad buys in Iowa and NH, now into it's fourth day?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Should the Right have cowtowed to the Teabaggers? Has that served them well? Look at them now for the answer. You do not let the extreme call the shots for that reason.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)"The fact that he HAD to proclaim he IS a Democrar now proves that fact..."
Only in your mind, back in the real world not so much.
I'm done getting baited by you.
You repeat the same debunked M$M talking point over and over like some religious mantra, answer no questions, and refuse to engage in some sort of meaningful dialog. Sad.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Democrat? After years of proclaiming proudly that he was NOT one...Democratic Socialists are Socialists not Democrats. He never said he was a Socialist Democrat....and the difference between them is one accepts regulated Capitalism and one simply does not..
Point proven...
Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #124)
Kentonio This message was self-deleted by its author.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)nomination.
Formerly he was an independent and a Democratic Socialist, self Identified. Most of the elected politicians in his state were Democrats and members of the Democratic Party.
Lots of politicians change parties.
I am glad Sanders joined the party.
His Icon was available because people liked his policies.
My icon, Cthulhu was never a Democrat. Because he sleeps in R'lyeh he was never a democrat, or even a citizen. Since Cthulhu will rise up and rule over Earth where mankind will cast aside concepts of civilization and inhibition. Since Chaos will ensue, upon earth, and men will revel in their most base instincts, I suspects Cthulhu is either a Libertarian or an Anarchist.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I suspect that if he looses he will return happily to being an independent, a socialist, a Democratic Socialist, or what ever he is content to call himself.
He is attempting an insurgent revolution to redefine the Democratic Party.
It looks like he is not going to be successful, but not a vote has been cast yet.
Whether or not he is a Democrat is irrelevant to me as a voter. It is his stand on gun regulation, and specifically his vote on the Brady Bill and immunizing gun manufacturers that make him my last choice in the Democratic Primary.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)or his campaign was over...he had no choice but to do the one thing he hasn't done in 40 yrs.....Say he is a Democrat.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Those entities are not synonymous.
According to a Democratic National Committee aide, Sanders would not have a problem getting on Democratic primary and caucus ballots because the current party rules do not call for presidential candidates to be registered members of the party.
The DNC defines a presidential candidate as someone who "has accrued delegates in the nominating process and plans to seek the nomination, has established substantial support for his or her nomination as the Democratic candidate for the Office of the President of the United States, is a bona fide Democrat whose record of public service, accomplishment, public writings and/or public statements affirmatively demonstrates that he or she is faithful to the interests, welfare and success of the Democratic Party of the United States, and will participate in the Convention in good faith."
I will still not vote for him in the primary.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)He had to eat his words and become a Democrat.finally after 40 yrs...because there was no requirement by the DNC to be a Registered Democrat.and that therefore doing so didnt make him one BUT..Exactly as I said 5 states DO require it to be on their ballots...New Hampshire is just one of them.
And just like I said months ago...either he finally becomes a real Democrat....or his campaign was finished......yesterday he acquiessed and admitted he had no choice but say he is officially one of us....after 40 yrs of denigrating us and even running in campaigns against us......Bernie finally ate that crow...
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Maybe you were thinking of the pre-evolved Elizabeth Warren?
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)he had never announced prior to yesterday that he was a Democrat and in fact went to great pains to avoid addressing that issue outright. He is on record telling people he is "Not a Democrate" and instead, "I am an Independent". He could no longer evade the "D" designation and I suspect will look to to drop it as soon as it's no longer politically expedient for him to use it. Perhaps after the Primaries.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)New Hampshire, however, has different rules.
His fellow Senator, their governor, and a majority of their State Legislature are members of the Democratic party. He could have chosen to join the party at any time in his long career.
I applaud his joining the party.
I still won't vote for him in the primary. It has nothing to do with his membership in the party.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)and will only last as long as is politically expedient.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)If he wins, he becomes the de facto head of the Democratic Party and can change it however he sees fit.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Or is that avatargawzi?
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)Buttgate....
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)The long, troubled history of Bernie Sanders and the 'ideologically bankrupt' party whose White House nod he now seeks.
By MICHAEL KRUSE and MANU RAJU August 10, 2015
"You dont change the system from within the Democratic Party.
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 dont agree with anything the Democratic Party says?
Bernie Sanders, everybodythe same Bernie Sanders who is running to become the Democratic Partys candidate for president of the United States.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-2016-democrats-121181
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Maybe it's just you.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)on DU for years and no one complained.....until he was a threat to Hillary's campaign of course.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)in contempt for most of his life until right now.
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)what the Democratic party use to stand for...............before the Third Way got involved that is. It's not Bernie's fault the party veered to the right.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)He will go back to his normal democratic party hate. The republicans appreciate the effort no doubt.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)the largest Democratic Caucus in the US Congress, the Progressive Caucus.
How is that 'hate'? He founded an enduring and powerful Democratic legislative caucus. You just sound silly.
workinclasszero
(28,270 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 dont agree with anything the Democratic Party says?
"I am not now, nor have I ever been, a liberal Democrat."
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)much of the time. This Party voted for DOMA and still excuses it. Bankrupt. But to you DOMA was fantastic and thus any criticism of the Party a big sin.
Quotes without citations or dates attached. Liz Warren was a Republican, there are quotes of her praising Supply Side. There are quotes of Hillary strongly opposing marriage equality in great, great detail. Do you think she still does oppose it?
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)himself a Democratic Socialist (Socialist) and not a Social Democrat (which is the ideology of the Democratic Party and Democrats). He's to the left in some things of the Democratic Party, but he's NO Paul Wellstone.
Senator Wellstone and Rep. Sanders debated H.R. 629, the 1997 Texas-Vermont-Maine Compact, the Texas Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact Consent Act and Senator Wellstone was one of that bill's biggest detractors. That bill would dump low-level nuclear waste from Maine, Vermont, and Texas nearby a predominantly Spanish-speaking Mexican-American community: Sierra Blanca.
In 1998, Paul Wellstone decried the dump as "part of a 'national pattern of discrimination in the location of waste and pollution' that preyed on those lacking political clout and financial resources." Sanders was a staunch supporter. Thanks to the Sierra Club, the bill got a lot of nationwide exposure and although it passed, Texas officials denied the necessary licenises to build the establishment of the Sierra Blanca dump site.
Just as an aside? Bernie himself has stated, in 1985, that he's not now and has never been a Liberal Democrat. He said this thirty years ago. Today, he says he's not a Democrat. He just caucuses with Democrats. Or is he lying?
Avalux
(35,015 posts)I would never expect him to waffle and suddenly proclaim he IS a liberal democrat because it's politically expedient.
As I've gotten older, I've tended to pay more attention to people's actions than their words, or labels.
Bernie Sanders represents my philosophy, and is closest to what I consider the Democratic platform. The party itself has veered right of this in the past several decades.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Was he a Democrat?
How about John Adams? George Washington?
Hell, you can have a Bush avatar, if you really want.
Sid
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)Sid, going into the 1770s and 1800s good points BTW I already addressed the Bush icon. But thank you for your reply it was so enlightening.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Is he now a Democrat too?
Your post is ridiculous.
Sid
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)has..... Under 'Democrats' in 'Topics' no Nelson. Different Party, but one I also supported.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)The Bernie Sanders group you're referring to was only added after he decided to run for the Democratic nomination.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)and who have been actively advocating against the objectives and intentions of the Democratic Party of New Hampshire. Oddly, this handful claims they are very super ultra Democrats even as they openly oppose Democratic Party positions.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)But HE refuses to be seen or acknowledged as a Democrat.
So now you want to browbeat DU members into accepting him as a Dem even when the man himself has always vehemently rejected that label? That's pretty pompous, don't you think?
Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #35)
Post removed
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)nt
-none
(1,884 posts)He isn't a part of Group Think. He has a 40 year long history of working with the Democrats, for the people.
People who insist on using party labels for a person, such as Democrat/Republican/Independent, instead of using where a person is in the political spectrum, are purposely muddying the waters to confuse the issues.
Democrats and Republicans have switched places in the political spectrum from which they started. The Republicans used to be the liberals and Democrats used to be the conservatives. So we need to start using Liberal/Conservative, instead of party affiliations when describing people running for office.
There are many former Republicans in the Democratic party now, because the Dem leadership has moved so far to the Right to align with many Republican's world view.
What has not changed is whether a person is conservative or liberal or somewhere in between. Burnie Sanders is a liberal working for the people, regardless of party affiliation. As a result, the people are financing his campaign.
Hillary is financed by the same 1% big money backing as the Republicans canadates are. And that is why Bernie is being supported more and more by those who know about him, over Hillary's high profile name recondition, backed by the 1% to maintain the status quo.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Senator Manchin doesn't think for himself? Former Senator Mary Landrieu didn't think for herself? Barbara Lee - the ONLY person who voted against the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) Against Terrorists (which Sanders voted for, by the way) doesn't think for herself?
Of course they do. The difference between them and Senator Sanders is, they're registered Democrats and proudly so. Senator Sanders is somewhat of a registered Democrat (needed to be in New Hampshire or he wouldn't be able to file his candidacy papers there), but it comes across as an act of political expediency.
So your argument is specious.
Burnie Sanders is a liberal working for the people, regardless of party affiliation.
On guns, he's NO Liberal. On voting for wars, he's NO anti-war liberal hero. On immigration reform, he's more of a Republican, using Republican talking points to justify his vote against immigration reform and voting with Republicans.
However...on publicly declaring that it would be a "good idea" to primary President Obama, our first African American president, he's an odd one out. Not even Republicans dared to say it, knowing they'd piss off the African American community. So if that makes him a Liberal, fine. But I seriously doubt Senator Sanders is as liberal as his supporters would like to see him.
moobu2
(4,822 posts)he's just using the party to give his presidential run a credibility it wouldn't have had had he run as an independent.
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Bernie will go right back to attacking it and its democratic members, I have no doubt.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Just when I'm thinking of leaving the site you guys make it funnier than the Onion.
"using the party for his own ends"
Yeah, his own ends happens to be saving our democracy and the working people who live here. What a selfish man who is taking advantage!!!1 This is series!!!!!1
blackspade
(10,056 posts)pinebox
(5,761 posts)That's what Hillary supporters are about.
Issues don't matter, they honestly don't and all they want is some Dem in office and nothing more even in despite of everything below. When confronted with facts they try and deflect with "but GUNS! Bernie and guns! He's an NRA dude!" Or the infamous "He's a socialist! He's scum!" I wasn't aware that it was suddenly 1960 all over again. It speaks volumes really between ideology of old and how we've progressed as a country. Some are stuck in the past and don't realize the issues which we face today. Sorry, but people should be able to feed their kids on a living wage at $15/hr and college students shouldn't be swimming in $100k in student loan debt.
It's time for a change, a very big change!
Bernie is more of a Dem than Hillary EVER WILL BE.
senz
(11,945 posts)And that's all I have to say about that.
senz
(11,945 posts)in order to keep all the graphics handy, but I don't see the "bookmark" button any more. Am I missing something?
pinebox
(5,761 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)Wonder if this is an oversight from the website overload DU experienced yesterday? Guess I'll go over to the Welcome thread and report it.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Once upon the Democratic party itself was small d Democratic, but most of the members still are.
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)correct.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Because his message is rooted in basic, simple truths. Just like the Democratic party platform was once upon a time rooted in basic, simple truth.
senz
(11,945 posts)Instead of calling themselves Democrats, they should have formed a new party back in the 1990s. If they had, we wouldn't be dealing with this confusion because Democrat would still represent democratic ideals.
They invaded the Democratic Party and took over. They assumed the mantle of "Democrat" while discarding many of the party's traditional, defining beliefs and aims and are now attacking a TRUE democrat for not wearing the compromised mantle of the blended, diluted remains of the Democratic Party.
Seriously, this is the problem. The Third Way should form its own party. And take DWS with them.
William769
(55,148 posts)There are others also that are not in the Democratic party that can be used.
You might want to do a little research before posting a OP like this.
Feel the Burn now?
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)imagine that.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Did we ever track the guy down from reddit so we can compare rates?
merrily
(45,251 posts)Not that it matters legally, but the DNC and the Vermont Democratic Party have accepted him as a Democrat. That has been clear to sane, honest people since May, when he announced informally that he was running for the Democratic Presidential nomination.
All else is bs wankery. Shun it. Attempts at honest discussion are wasted anyway. This is not a point honest people of good faith are disputing.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)Tarc
(10,476 posts)But at the end of the day that's just a ticky-tacky thing to debate. I'm fully in Clinton's camp, but Sanders espouses everything that the Democratic Party stands , just as Clinton does, so I have no problems with him being on the D's ballot.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)(noticed I said some not all because it is a dozen or so really obnoxious DUers).
99Forever
(14,524 posts)... I care fuckall what or who this site or any of it's members "accept" as Democrat.
They aren't in charge of that, anywhere but in their own heads.
sellitman
(11,607 posts)She voted for the War along with ALL the Republican's
Oh wait......she's evolving once again.