Bernie Sanders
Related: About this forumWhat would you want to see in a deal between Sanders and Hillary?
Hillary famously got her Secretary of State position by refusing to concede to Obama.
If it comes to a deal, what would you want in it?
djean111
(14,255 posts)not making a deal, just ordering Bernie to hand over his money, his email list, and his supporters. Being TOUGH.
So, IMO, a wasted effort. She is going to go full-tilt Maggie Thatcher.
Oh, and I cannot and will not be handed over to Hillary. No matter what smooth lies she tells. She is not trustworthy.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)that will protest and write letters to oppose the compromises that Hillary will make with the extremists on the other side.
I want a movement that will protect Medicare, Social Security and public schools and then fight for universal, single-payer healthcare, free tuition at public colleges and universities and the rest of Sanders' program.
I think Hillary is hopeless.
I cannot imagine her debating with Trump. She will get visibly upset, make faces and talk like a lawyer. Meanwhile Trump will ridicule and mock her. She can't handle that. She will try to, but she won't succeed. If she wins, it will be because people feel sorry for her, but that generally does not win presidential elections.
And Trump is a horrible man and a horrible candidate. But Hillary won't be able to handle him. Even the polls at this early stage show that.
We need Bernie. There is no alternative now to Bernie.
I know we need a miracle, but sometimes they do happen.
condoleeza
(814 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)I wouldn't be above throwing the kitchen sink at that campaign in a final concerted attempt to head off corporate rule, the end of democracy, and a new more ferocious American imperialism.
Because it is not too late. She has not won the nomination yet and, yes, anything can happen.
If it gets to the point that Bernie cannot possibly win, then I would welcome an entry by Biden or some other imperfect Democrat who is at least psychologically normal and not entirely devoid of decency and ethics. If it begins to look bad enough for Hill, TPTB might consider pulling in a backup.
Multitudes of determined Bernie supporters could make it "bad enough" for Hill.
Either way: promote Bernie, continue to reach out and network, publicize the truth about Hill, and don't give up.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)Turn everything over to him and spend her days watching after Bill and the female White House staff. This way she'd have more time to go into ex hot spots and make up stories of courage under fire.
Edit to add: Bill could be in charge of the Lincoln bedroom scheduling!
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)Because think it the Email thing probably not going to come till after then Election. So if Bernie is VP he has about a 90% chance of becoming the President just like Gerald Ford.
terrencebone
(11 posts)Some people have seriously suggested Bernie as a Clinton VP. Others have suggested Elizabeth Warren. I think both suggestions would be a huge step backwards for Sanders, Warren, and progressive forces. Trying to play the inside game with someone you never can be sure is on the same side is not the way to go.
Bernie puts it this way in his book:
The forces of reaction work most effectively behind closed doors, hidden from public scrutiny. When debate on an issue is pushed into the open..., when the close link between special interests, the wealthy, and their "representatives" in Congress is threatened with exposure, the opposition will often surrender rather than resist.
Both Sanders and Warren would have more influence on the party and the nation speaking out from the Senate.
deathrind
(1,786 posts)Debate/s is going to be an astounding spectacle.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)look like she just ate a lemon.
Not good for Democrats.
Oh, and every once in a while she will insert a cackle laugh, her concept of humor.
And then, she will recite very accurate but boring facts and waggle her finger, and he will tower over her, look skeptical and blabber a bunch of idiotic nonsense about America First and how our military is not strong enough because . . . . Obama.
Yes. They were playing Trump at the gym today. I read the captions -- two of them. What a disgusting guy.
Hillary could handle him if she had a sense of humor and were able to stay calm, keep it simple and not let him ruffle her at all -- oh, and use language that is easy to understand. But, alas, poor Hillary.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Consider the fact that these sock puppets are being paid to make intelligent conversation impossible everywhere intelligent discussion is found on the Internet and combine that with the obfuscation of hugely important things like the fact that the real reason for health care dysfunction is an FTA - GATS- and its extremist ideology that the country doesn't even know about or agree with, and the creation of prolongation of an unnecessary and artificial 'crisis' of afford-ability (caused by insurance, not doctors and nurses) - to allow the trapping of the country into bad irreversible policy, and we have a crime against humanity of heinous proportions- (which has killed easily between one and two million people or more) That is a crime against humanity. Denying care to people when it would have been cheaper to give it to people for free- is a totally unjustifiable crime-
Example of a similar crime elsewhere
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)hear "liberal" talk show host talk about changing the Democratic platform, like that means shit.
She's a fucking con artist. Her word isn't worth shit.
Svafa
(594 posts)but we also know that we can't trust her to do a single thing she says.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)service jobs, high skill semi-professional and professional service jobs, according to two recent articles in Inside US Trade, thats what the GATS commitments are.
This was done as bait in what amounts to a huge globalization game.
I have been trying to explain this to people, its a potentially huge, world changing thing. Neoliberals believe US wages are too high and should fall to global norms, which are likely to go into a race to the bottom as automation is increasing at an exponential rate. By midcentury there will be very very few skilled or unskilled jobs unless we completely change our society, but that requires free education which is banned by GATS, TiSA and others.
Read the following, and look for the word "unlimited"
March 4, 2016
India Requests WTO Consultations With U.S. Over
Visa Policy, Citing GATS Violations
March 10, 2016
India Takes First Step Toward Challenging U.S. Visa
Policy At WTO
India Charges U.S. H-1B Visa Commitments Made In FTAs Violate
GATS
March 10, 2016
senz
(11,945 posts)Baobab
(4,667 posts)She IS it.
Open your eyes!
This is what she's been pushing for decades- read below. Also read the paper linked in my sig.
Note the dates of when GATS was negotiated and signed Hillary's fake healtcare was a means of diverting the country from GATS. The same thing is going on right now with TiSA. TiSA is where people need to be focusing, in Geneva.
-----cut here---
For a deeper understanding of how migration could equalize the price of labour in two trading
countries, consider figure one (from Senior Nello, 2005:145): There are two countries, Home
and Foreign. The total quantity of labour in the two countries is shown by the distance OhOf.
Before a fully free migration is allowed the distribution of labor is OhL in Home and OfL in
Foreign. The marginal product of labour is higher in Home than in foreign because the
capital/labor ratio is higher in Home. This is shown in the figure by the higher position of the
MPLh curve compared to the MPLf curve. Because of this the wage is higher in Home, at Wh
compared with the wage in Foreign at Wf. In short: Home symbolizes a developed country with
high automatization and high wages and Foreign a less developed country with abundant supply
of labour, low automatization and low wages. If migration is fully free between the two
countries and the workers are identical workers will migrate from Foreign to Home in pursuit of
higher wages. The migration will finally result in an equalized capital/labor ratio in the two
countries and thus equal marginal products of labor and equal wages, illustrated in the figure by
the wage level W' which could be seen as the world market price of labor as the world only
consists of the two countries Home and Foreign. The migration is illustrated in the figure by the
distance LL' which is the amount of workers that will move from Foreign to Home so that the
new distribution of labour becomes OhL' in Home and L'Of in Foreign.
Wages will thus decrease in Home and increase in Foreign resulting in a loss for the indigenous
workers in Home illustrated in the figure by the area a but a gain for the capital owners of the
areas a+b. In Foreign the workers get an increased income of areas c+d+e while the capital
owners lose areas d+e. The result in total is a net gain for the two countries by areas b+c which
is a gain resulting from higher efficiency in the use of the total resources of the two countries.
This simplified model of reality shows not only that there is a net gain but also that the
migration has clear redistributional effects, something that will be discussed below
------
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.405.5725
http://www.eua.be/Libraries/higher-education/GATS_en.pdf
http://www.citizen.org/documents/Threats_to_Health_Care_Policy.pdf
http://www.iatp.org/files/GATS_and_Public_Service_Systems.htm
senz
(11,945 posts)I said she'd be totally for it, completely behind it, making it happen.
I'm not "deceived" about Hillary.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)maybe a million Americans over 20 years while these negotiations went on, prolonging the dysfunction so it could be milked as a fake crisis to justify an attack on the middle class professional workers.. everybody who makes a decent wage basically. ..
You know what its comparable to.. in some ways, structurally. this
http://www.reachdc.net/book2/KimJongIlHiddenWar.pdf
Kim Jong Il deliberately starved maybe to to four million North Koreans who he had exiled to remote parts of the country, he deliberately starved millions of people to death.
- I am not kidding- this is similar in terms of its evilness- considering that it would have been cheaper to just give people quality health care for free, we're already paying for it - something they go to great lengths to obfuscate-
djean111
(14,255 posts)As a former IT worker, this is very relevant. Hillary wanting to increase H-1B visas? Relevant.
Grandson asking if I knew Trump was against the TPP and globalization? Relevant.
No, I am not advocating for Trump, alerters, I am saying that to those who are new to the system, and look at policy and how policy affects them and how it has affected them - Hillary does not look that good.
Also, so much time was spent banging on that raddled old drum of "A GOP Congress won't let Bernie do anything!!!" - that will bite some right in the ass - because they figure that also applies to Hillary, except for stuff the GOP wants to do, and they figure that Congress will keep Trump from doing crazy stuff. I don't really talk about this stuff with him any more, he gets it from the internet. And he knows about the paid trolls, and thinks that is disgusting.
Reap what you sow, will be the tale, I think, but gotta watch out for mutations and fertilizer. Crop may not be what was smugly expected.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Those are trade deal related - they are entitlements of trade deals- its a completely different ball game.
Google MFN WTO GATS "Mode four" "movement of natural persons" etc.
Google "Disciplines on domestic regulation".
Got that? What did i say?
djean111
(14,255 posts)Baobab
(4,667 posts)They are very different. H1-B relatively speaking has minimal protections, L-1 has none- and is likely I think to be much worse. And everything is legal so dont expect Mr. Trump to be against it Quite the opposite, he uses them.
No necessity tests- None..
No necessity tests, no economic means tests, no wage parity requirements, it may not even be necessary to pay foreign professionals US minimum wages.
Wage parity (as in paying foreign "professionals" minimum wage is actually controversial - some other countries dont want that because they see "high" US minimum wages as being erected as a trade barrier in anticipation of the pending deal and likely erected intentionally to keep their firms out. Rich countries such as the US are supposed to (in the ideological system that we ourselves set up- during the Clinton years, especially) Subsidies of all kinds, price controls, and even minimum wage like things, I suspect minimum wages are framed as a crutch that only the poorest countries need, since we are rich we dont need them, what we are framed as needing is more workers, since we're doing so well,
Similarly with public health care and education, they are framed as a crutch that only he poor nations need. If those nations want to be prosperous like us they need to ditch them, privatize and join the club, which excludes nations that have non-market economy provisions like state owned enterrises in education health care etc. In the US's ideology, they are evil. We blame everything on them.
Google "progressive liberalisation" "economic integration" AND GATS ...
Go to web sites for groups like CUTS-Geneva and South Centre and read the stuff there on trade in services.
The thing is, their wages should rise, our should not be the ones that fall.
This is why I am making a fool of myself here. Its not some little thing. Our election is relatively little. Compared to these huge lies which are being perpetuated in our names with BIG LIES.
Response to djean111 (Reply #1)
cyberpj This message was self-deleted by its author.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)randr
(12,412 posts)and adopt Bernies' campaign funding strategy.
Other wise she will be the only candidate in the race to have accepted money the old fashioned way, under the table.
LiberalArkie
(15,719 posts)GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Plenty of people have made deals with the Clintons and gotten something they wanted.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Forget it! Hillary has nothing but contempt for us and for Bernie.
We just have to let her fail.
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)ViseGrip
(3,133 posts)Last edited Wed Apr 27, 2016, 06:31 PM - Edit history (2)
And, I want her to promise, she will not do what Bill did. He had a deal in his lame duck session with Newt Gingrich, to PRIVATIZE SOC. SEC. No different than evil Paul Ryan today.
Why did you never hear of this? MONICA. When the affair came to light, it had only barely been reported on and just dropped. Monica was more damning....so people and the media think.
So, I want a clear outline from Hillary on soc sec. She would not even answer Bernie in NY's debate, on raising the damn cap. She won't say anything. I don't trust her AT ALL.
So, this is what I want from her. And NO FUCKING TTP OR TTIP. NO FRACKING - TOTAL BAN. Don't tell me about solar, I live in a monopoly electric state, and cannot get solar like 46 other states, unless I pay through the nose. I can't get a free panel and sign my rights to the excess back to the solar panel company, so they can sell it on the market and get their panel money back and more. That's contracting with 'third party' utilities, and it's not allowed in the states that are stuck with this monster electric company, DUKE. NC, OK, KY, and FLA. Fla is in the top three potential for solar in the U.S. Did you know NJ is number 3 in the US for solar???
Did you know that Germany up on the same latitude line, has had solar on ALL GOVERNMENT bldgs. for over 30 years? Did you know Germany reached 65% households with solar panels two years ago, and are now pushing for 70 percent. The world is using solar, but only the New England states and out west are going gangbusters with these contracting opportunities with the panel companies. We have been lied to folks. No fracking and A FEDERAL BAN ON STATE ELECTRIC MONOPOLIES. Bernie was working on a federal solar bill in the senate. Did you hear about that? Of course you didn't. But that's my bucket list.
#1 - BREAK UP THE BIG BANKS
and UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE!!
ViseGrip
(3,133 posts)dr60omg
(283 posts)I do not want to see a deal made with her at all, ever. If, he does that does not mean that people will vote for her because as far as I am concerned with the spins, lies, triangulations and games nothing she says is ever true or valid.
I am going to vote down ballot and probably vote for Stein if Sanders does not go third party or if we cannot write him in
ViseGrip
(3,133 posts)CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)--Hillary and Bernie are like night and day. Hillary is Republican-lite and establishment. Bernie is progressive and anti-establishment.
--A deal requires trust. Hillary Clinton cannot be trusted.
--Many of Clinton's actions as Secretary of State violated the trust that she had between herself and Obama. He didn't even know about her private email server. When Obama announced that his foreign-policy mantra would be, "Don't do stupid shit" Hillary took to the media to criticize Obama. She did an interview with The Atlantic and excoriated Obama as being weak. In short, I have absolutely no faith in Hillary's ability to serve anyone but herself. She seems pretty loyal to the neocon mindset, and that's the only consistent loyalty I can find. How in the hell would anyone EVER think that she would be loyal to Bernie after how she treated Obama?
--The way that Hillary has run her campign--from the voter suppression to probable outright stealing of some primaries--to the bullhorns to the personal insults that have been lobbed at Sanders ("He's sexist", "he's racist" , I don't think Clinton has any desire to forge a deal. Brock said on January 27, "Black lives don't matter much to Bernie Sanders" in an effort to smear him with lies just to secure the black vote for Hillary. "That's not Bernie in the picture" was an organized Swiftboatting against Bernie that they thought they could get away with, timed before Bernie even hit any "non-white" state beyond Iowa and NH. Bill Clinton has called Sander's supporters "Bernie Bros" and accused us of being sexist. In the middle of the Clinton camp's own ongoing fight with Elizabeth Warren, over her not endorsing Hillary, the Hillary camp attacked Warren's FB page which they blamed on Sander's supporters. I don't think there is anything left from which to build a foundation.
I don't see how any deal would be meaningful. Sanders saying that he'll have to see how Hillary stands on Medicaid for all, fracking and breaking up the big banks is his leverage. He knows that she will NEVER capitulate on those points, which sets up a scenario for him to justify not supporting her or endorsing her. Which is exactly how it should go down.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)There is really no possible deal with her because everything in her campaign is about her. She does not understand the concept of valuing other people's ideas and needs.
Bernie, on the other hand, is mostly about the needs and ideas of others. Read his book, and you will be amazed at who he is and how he has survived politically pretty much on his own.
I have no hope for a Hillary candidacy much less presidency.
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)For her, this election is not for the betterment of the People and this Nation. It is about her and I resent the hell out of that attitude.
TM99
(8,352 posts)And narcissists can only be trusted to do one thing -- look after themselves.
She is incapable of making deals that benefit others. All these dumbass surrogates are in for a rude awakening when she reneges on all of her 'deals' with them.
You swim with a shark, you become the chum.
OwlinAZ
(410 posts)They are much alike.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Vice President of Love and Kindness.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Bernie needs to take the energy built from his campaign and continue the Revolution.
disillusioned73
(2,872 posts)a strong commitment to overturning Citizens United...
Also - Bernies strong influence going forward in the parties platform.. not sure how that would work, be it a position or other( I'll let them figure that out).. but his voice needs to be amplified not shut down like the DNC wishes to do..
Bernin4U
(812 posts)As much as she probably can't stand him, as much as she's already got a thousand others loyals in waiting to receive their share of the bargain, she hardly seems above making deals with anybody. For anything. Personal integrity matters naught.
Bernie, otoh...
Joob
(1,065 posts)Jennylynn
(696 posts)Or another well respected Progressive Dem. Bernie is too valuable in the Senate. So is Warren too though so Idk really. If she wants to win, it's gotta be a Prog. Dem. VP.
thereismore
(13,326 posts)Jennylynn
(696 posts)Would serve with Hillary.
thereismore
(13,326 posts)condoleeza
(814 posts)Chezboo
(230 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)But she would have to offer it.
Bernie as VP would protect Hillary from an impeachment and Republican takeover.
Bernie as VP would have a bully pulpit. He is a more effective speaker than Hillary.
The VP should always be a person that scares the president's enemies more than the president does. Bernie scares Republicans. So from Hillary's viewpoint, she would be wise to offer the job to him. But then Bernie should insist on a lot of freedom to speak his mind in that position.
Jennylynn
(696 posts)If she offers the VP, freedom to speak his mind, etc. A lot of walk he would speak out against would be a policy/s she has endorsed.
Republicans will convince people he's a communist and be done with him. I don't think he scares them that much, imo.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)really agree with Bernie on the issues more than they do with Hillary. There are polls showing that Americans agree with Bernie on many, many of his issues.
Republican rank and file voters are, I suspect, voting for Trump because of his opposition to the trade agreements.
That is the one and only issue as far as I know on which I agree with Trump.
I would never, ever vote for Trump, but I trust Trump more on trade than I do Hillary. And that is a big issue for me and for many Americans. I suspect that his views on trade are what are drawing a lot of Republicans to vote for him.
Jennylynn
(696 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Which leaves out Sanders, Warren, and Biden, all of whom are pretty powerful politicians and better liked by voters on a personal level. OTOH, if she chooses someone unlikeable, she'll really be in the shit, so I'm thinking it has to be someone personable who isn't too powerful. That, plus her campaign's fixation on identity politics, says one of the Castro brothers, IMO.
eridani
(51,907 posts)emulatorloo
(44,131 posts)Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)Any deal made would marginalize Bernie and protect the 1% from him.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,168 posts)No deal with Hillary. Sorry.
thereismore
(13,326 posts)money to start a new party, or at the very least an autonomous sub-party or a "caucus," something like The People's Caucus, if he really wants to stay a Democrat after all this.
Hillary wants nothing from us anyway. She has a "mandate" and she is the winner, so what is there to discuss.
in_cog_ni_to
(41,600 posts)People who have no integrity. She would say ANYTHING to get him to concede.
PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE
CharlotteVale
(2,717 posts)SoapBox
(18,791 posts)No deal with any of the Clinton Clan.
shireen
(8,333 posts)IF Hillary wins, Bernie does his own thing ... keep the revolution going by mentoring and leading a new generation of voters that will change the system. I'm glad to redirect my modest monthly contribution from his campaign to the new organization. I'm too old to see another such profoundly good human being like Bernie run for president in my lifetime, perhaps with the exception of Elizabeth Warren. But I hope the young people who supported him with all their hearts this election season will be able to cultivate more leaders like him among their ranks.
OwlinAZ
(410 posts)oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)GardeningGal
(2,211 posts)Hillary and her antics have cost her my vote. I will never vote for her regardless of what she promises or Sanders says. Hillary has proven OVER and OVER AGAIN that she cannot be trusted so she will not get my vote if she is the nominee.
And I think she will have a lot of problems in swing states with the Independent voters (which is what I am in Colorado).
Response to GardeningGal (Reply #22)
potisok This message was self-deleted by its author.
GardeningGal
(2,211 posts)I really would like to move to Glenwood/Carbondale area but it has become too expensive for me. I'm in Denver and the influx of people is getting to me.
(Should have said western slope.)
Response to GardeningGal (Reply #42)
potisok This message was self-deleted by its author.
wendylaroux
(2,925 posts)Faux pas
(14,681 posts)The thought of that makes me wanna
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)miserable for Hillary.
She is a cruel joke on thinking, feeling Democrats.
No deal. Just embarrass the heck out of her.
Sounds mean, but wait till Hillary gets into the general election. She is not a kind person.
I agree with others here. Hillary is not trustworthy. She would not keep a promise to Bernie even if she made one.
I would like to see the $15 minimum wage, campaign finance reform, mandatory climate change legislation, maintaining net neutrality, universal, single-payer healthcare (even the homeless should have a general practitioner to go to), increased and secured Social Security and Medicare funded by raising the cap on payroll taxes, NO TO TPP AND REVISION OF OTHER TRADE AGREEMENTS TO ABOLISH THE TRADE COURTS THAT ARE ANTITHETICAL TO DEMOCRACY, automatic voter registration for all Americans at the age of 18, free tuition at state colleges and universities AND MANDATORY ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS THAT ARE REALLY TOUGH AND CAN SAVE OUR PLANET.
Hillary is against most of that or so dishonest that she will never carry through on a promise to do any of it.
As you can see, those of us who like Bernie (and I am a life-long, active Democrat) really do not trust Hillary. A lot of Bernie supporters will not be able to vote for Hillary.
She is fundamentally dishonest and self-centered. A narcissist in my book.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)But he's a better man than I.
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)I'd rather the revolution were not coopted into the democratic (tm) party.
farleftlib
(2,125 posts)it wouldn't be worth the crumbs she would deign to throw our way. When you make
a deal with the devil, you lose everything sacred down the line, for a pittance today.
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)Do not give clinton my name and email! No No No sharing of data.
I want Senator Sanders to mentor young progressive democrats. I want the campaign structure to become an on-going organization for nurturing young progressive democrats to move into the political system. Sanders has done a phenomenal job of bringing his issues to the general public. We need to continue this. I want to push DNC into reality about people and their needs.
I want a new democratic party, a people's party.
happynewyear
(1,724 posts)KPN
(15,646 posts)I frankly don't think she will respect anything less than deference to her now. Deference and a highly visible and sincere effort to convince his supporters to vote for Hillary in the GE might get Bernie a cabinet post, or a couple of key people appointed to key economic positions. But it strikes me that, with Hillary being Hillary, that's only a might.
So here's what I want in that light: a commitment to making a $15 minimum wage a year one priority; a pledge that she will not sign the TPP or other trade agreements that the people (the population at large) don't support; a pledge to significantly reduce (10-20% minimally) in Defense spending; a pledge that eliminating further risks of global warming will be her No. 1 priority including lots of details re: sustainable energy infrastructure, fracking, oil subsidies, etc., and the list goes on. But I don't think she will meet these anyway.
I await. Till then ... BERNIE OR BUST !!!
Gore1FL
(21,132 posts)It's clear the GOP is going to have to remake itself without the extreme right. That pretty much puts it where the DWS Democratic party is at present. That leaves room on the left for a legitimate progressive party.
No deals necessary.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)mak3cats
(1,573 posts)shanti
(21,675 posts)LongTomH
(8,636 posts)..."Losers don't get to pick the platform." Actually that's a direct quote from one of the Hillary supporters in GD-P; I think that's typical of Hillary and her supporters: arrogance and an inability to compromise.
Change in this country will have to come from the bottom up.
David__77
(23,421 posts)I would prefer that the candidates be themselves and have personal integrity.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)Jester Messiah
(4,711 posts)I don't trust her to keep her word on anything. There would have to be a legal mechanism such that she got immediately impeached if she didn't keep some base percentage of the agreed-upon items.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)Blue Meany
(1,947 posts)distribute all of her wealth to the poorest 10% of the population, if she doesn't keep all of these committments by the end of her first term:
a) Prevent another banking crisis
b) Increase median wages in this country by at least 10%
c) Enact policies that will allow students to graduate from college debt-free without having to work more than 10 hours a week.
d) Initiate a transition program for those imprisoned by the drug war, providing training for jobs, housing, and compensation for any work done for companies employing prisoners as slave labor for profit. Offer the prisoners jobs as guard at the prisons that will be housing the heads of for-profit prison corporations and companies that used prison labor.
e) Auction off her speech transcripts on ebay with proceeds going to the Children's Defense Fund.
f) Agree to serve on the front lines of any armed conflict she chooses to start.
Ino
(3,366 posts)would give her an aura of integrity she does not deserve and will not honor.
Once she gets what she wants from Sanders and his supporters (GE votes & money), she'd never hold up her end.
Talk is cheap.
Autumn
(45,107 posts)mak3cats
(1,573 posts)Response to mak3cats (Reply #65)
DUbeornot2be This message was self-deleted by its author.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)hmmm, that's exactly what he suggested yesterday.
She can go after my vote by promising to represent my interests. If she does, I'll consider how that works in the context of everything in play.
If she doesn't want to do that, it's her choice. I'm not hostage to her.
AuntPatsy
(9,904 posts)bjo59
(1,166 posts)I would not want to see any deal between Bernie and Hillary. A losing proposition.
xloadiex
(628 posts)that would make me want to vote for her.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)If she wins we make it uncomfortable for her to practice her 3rd way politics. She gets primaried in 2020. If she hasn't been impeached, caused another scandal that the FBI has to investigate or whatever. I just don't see her in the WH for more than 4 years if she gets that far.
So as far as I am concerned the revolution is not over even if Hillary wins the GE or even if she doesn't. It's not over if Bernie gets to the WH the only difference is we have someone on our side. That someone will never be Hillary.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)ESPECIALLY THE 1995 GATS WHICH IS WHY HEALTH CARE IS SO SCREWED UP AND ALSO PARTIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE 2008 MESS BECAUSE IT FORCED THE REPEAL OF GLASS_STEAGALL.
OVER 20 YEARS THEY CREATED FAKE CRISES IN HEALTHCARE, EDUCATION AND IT TO JUSTIFY SELLING OUT U.S. WORKERS USING A JOBS FOR MARKETS SWAP CALLED GATS MODE FOUR. ALL THAT TIME GATS NEGOTIATIONS HAVE BEEN GOING ON AND HAVE COLLAPSED REPEATEDLY.
THIS HUGE SCHEME HAS TO BE EXPOSED TO UNDERSTAND THE DEPTH OF THE PROBLEM. ITS AS BAD AS ONE COULD POSSIBLY IMAGINE.
ALL THIS TIME IT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHEAPER TO SIMPLY GIVE AMERICANS HEALTH CARE FOR FREE, BUT THEN NO CRISES FOR THEIR BITTER MEDICINE TO SOLVE.
THE DENIAL OF HEALTH CARE TO FORCE THEIR EXTREMIST IDEOLOGY ON THE COUNTRY AND WORLD - I AM NOT JOKING- IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY.
2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)I guess nothing.
That Guy 888
(1,214 posts)But, like others have pointed out, she can't be trusted to not interfere with anything she appoints Sanders(or anyone else on her Nixonian enemies list)to. I'm sure having the unmitigated gall to run against her has put Sanders on her enemies list.
EdwardBernays
(3,343 posts)Hillary retiring from politics...
Oh wait.
jillan
(39,451 posts)Bernie needs to continue with the movement. It would just be a lot easier if he had the power of the Presidency to get things accomplished. And if that does not happen, it doesn't matter.
If he does not win the nomination, we need to prepare for the midterms to get Bernie Democrats elected to vote no on Hillary's wars and trade deals & keep her from going further to the right.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)After eight years in a modern social democratic country, she'll have a better idea of the direction the United States should go. Her 2024 campaign will be much better for that experience.
Response to GreatGazoo (Original post)
DUbeornot2be This message was self-deleted by its author.
TBF
(32,067 posts)Depaysement
(1,835 posts)Resignation.
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)lostnfound
(16,184 posts)Donkees
(31,418 posts)snot
(10,530 posts)adopt every recommendation by Liz Warren relating to financial regulation and put William K. Black in charge of implementing it, and to put Richard Clark back in charge of "terrorism."
And NO former Wall St. execs in financial regulatory positions!
Veto any legislation attempting to privatize or cut Social Security.
Veto any legislation that would weaken the ACA (it desperately needs strengthening).
If she ends up nominating any S. Ct. justices, pick people more progressive than Merrick Garland.
For starters.
There are a lot of other things I'd like to ask for, but off the top of my head, these are a few she can do with or without Congressional cooperation.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Because a) She can't be trusted and b) Sanders needs to stay in the Senate if he isn't the nominee.
The question could also be taken as what deal in the platform will Sanders be able to get? Again, nothing. She won't give anything up in her neocon platform and neither will the corrupt DNC.
nc4bo
(17,651 posts)greymouse
(872 posts)either on the Dem ticket or the Green ticket or completely independently.