!!!
So Bernie, how you doing?
Wed, 2016-11-09 21:30
#1
So Bernie, how you doing?
Wed, 2016-11-09 21:30
#2
Sanders Statement on Trump
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-statement-...
Wed, 2016-11-09 21:32
#3
Bernie Sanders offers warning to Donald Trump in first statement after presidential election
Bernie Sanders warned Donald Trump that progressives will work to block “racist, sexist, xenophobic and anti-environment policies” in his first statement after Trump’s victory.
The Vermont senator, who lost his bid for the presidency to Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries, offered an explanation for Tuesday’s election alongside cautionary words for the President-elect.
“Donald Trump tapped into the anger of a declining middle class that is sick and tired of establishment economics, establishment politics and the establishment media,” Sanders said.
“To the degree that Mr. Trump is serious about pursuing policies that improve the lives of working families in this country, I and other progressives are prepared to work with him.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/bernie-sanders-offers-warning-t...
Wed, 2016-11-09 21:36
#4
Is this what they mean by karma?
Progressives know in their hearts it's true: Bernie Sanders would have won
If democrats hadn't screwed over Bernie Sanders we'd probably be talking about President-elect Sanders right now. #ElectionNight
— The Catch Fence ™ (@TheCatchFence) November 9, 2016
Picking a Neoliberal over a Progressive. What were you thinking @TheDemocrats #DontBlameMeIVotedForBernie
— Jimmy Jimenez (@SomeGuyNM) November 9, 2016
The truth is, we just don't know what would have happened if the general election had pitted Sanders against Trump. Polls back in the spring insisted Sanders would have won by double-digits, but surveys that far before Election Day are not reliable. At the time, most Democratic Party insiders and opinion-makers, rightly or wrongly, believed Sanders was "unelectable."
Still, this was a change election, and so it was an election that favored a candidate who inspired passion. Britain's The Independent reminded us this morning that "at rallies for the 74-year-old [Sanders] across the country, there was a sense of euphoria and excitement that simply did not exist at those for Ms. Clinton. Ms. Clinton's supporters said they had made a calculation to vote for her as they believed she would be the best candidate to lead the country, but there was no sense of the passion witnessed at her rivals' events, or those of Barack Obama eight years earlier."
Sanders, now 75, isn't likely to run for president again in 2020 to keep Trump from a second term. But if grass-roots progressives get behind a new candidate -- a Sanders II -- you can bet the party establishment will think twice before concluding he or she is not electable.
-- Douglas Perry
http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2016/11/progressives_know_in_t...
Wed, 2016-11-09 21:51
#5
Sanders, now 75, isn't likely to run for president again in 2020 to keep Trump from a second term. But if grass-roots progressives get behind a new candidate -- a Sanders II -- you can bet the party establishment will think twice before concluding he or she is not electable.
-- Douglas Perry
http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2016/11/progressives_know_in_t...
Doubtful. They knew he was electable they didn't want him because he isn't neoliberal. They figured they could get Hilary elected because the Republicans were in such disarray and had Trump to contend with.
For the establishment, including the Democratic establishment, a Sanders presidency would have been a disaster.
Thu, 2016-11-10 05:38
#6
I still don't think Sanders would have been elected. Although he would have gotten a lot of those Obama-Trump voters in the Midwest. He would have been red baited to the hilt, and Wall Street and its media which was not wild about Trump, would have backed him to keep the "socialist" out.
Thu, 2016-11-10 13:55
#7
Thu, 2016-11-10 14:18
#8
..according to greenwald. he also claims that the democrates knew going into the election their candidate wasn't in a strong position. maybe saunders would have won maybe not but the streets would have been in a better position/organized than they are today. according to one report 10,000 folks demonstrated against trump last night in new york.
The indisputable fact is that prevailing institutions of authority in the West, for decades, have relentlessly and with complete indifference stomped on the economic welfare and social security of hundreds of millions of people. While elite circles gorged themselves on globalism, free trade, Wall Street casino gambling, and endless wars (wars that enriched the perpetrators and sent the poorest and most marginalized to bear all their burdens), they completely ignored the victims of their gluttony, except when those victims piped up a bit too much — when they caused a ruckus — and were then scornfully condemned as troglodytes who were the deserved losers in the glorious, global game of meritocracy.
That message was heard loud and clear. The institutions and elite factions that have spent years mocking, maligning, and pillaging large portions of the population — all while compiling their own long record of failure and corruption and destruction — are now shocked that their dictates and decrees go unheeded. But human beings are not going to follow and obey the exact people they most blame for their suffering. They’re going to do exactly the opposite: purposely defy them and try to impose punishment in retaliation. Their instruments for retaliation are Brexit and Trump. Those are their agents, dispatched on a mission of destruction: aimed at a system and culture they regard — not without reason — as rife with corruption and, above all else, contempt for them and their welfare.
Thu, 2016-11-10 17:02
#9
I can see this becoming a trope over the next four years... or eight.
Bernie could win!
Bernie could have won!
Bernie would have won!!
Bernie should have won!!!
Doubtful. They knew he was electable they didn't want him because he isn't neoliberal.
Of course. He would speak truth to power and make the comfortable uncomfortable, so he had to be shut down.
This won't "become" a trope... it's been one for years.
Here's my theory on why Sanders didn't become President: he didn't win enough votes in the primaries.
Thu, 2016-11-10 23:17
#10
Here is a question for those backed clinton over bernie. Could have bernie down worst than clinton, clearly no. She lost.
The only upside is that those that hold sway over the democractics today are finished. We have lot shell shocked, angry, and frankly confused democratcis who were told that hillary is the saviour. All the left of the party has to do is tell people that the centrist were responsible for clinton being chosen. Harnass the anger of the dmeocratcic party members and(all those crying people)and tell them it was the centrist corporate democratics did this.
Somebody has to be thrown the under bus for this disaster its not going be the left of the party that is certain.
Thu, 2016-11-10 23:18
#11
dp
Fri, 2016-11-11 08:40
#12
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/howard-dean-im-running-for-dnc-cha...
Dean represent the past.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/bernie-sanders-support-keith-ellis...
Ellison is the future. He has been annointed by Bernie.
http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/playbook/2016/11/scoop-schumer-backs-e...
Fri, 2016-11-11 18:59
#13
Here is a question for those backed clinton over bernie. Could have bernie down worst than clinton, clearly no. She lost.
Here's another question: do you think that Clinton, Clinton supporters, or the DNC were planning on losing (in which case any loser is indistinguishable from any other)?
What you're saying is true, that if Sanders had been picked and lost then it would really be no worse, but that's not a logical reason to have chosen Sanders, is it?
Fri, 2016-11-11 19:55
#14
Here is a question for those backed clinton over bernie. Could have bernie down worst than clinton, clearly no. She lost.Here's another question: do you think that Clinton, Clinton supporters, or the DNC were planning on losing (in which case any loser is indistinguishable from any other)?
What you're saying is true, that if Sanders had been picked and lost then it would really be no worse, but that's not a logical reason to have chosen Sanders, is it?
Maybe he would have won, we speculate on that. But there is one truth hillary lost. I can not speak for DNC but I want point out that on that some people know that hillary lose. I was one of them here a blast from the past.
February 21, 2016 - 5:15pm #3
I am a Bernie supporter but I think he is finished. If he won Nevada and SC it would mean that he made signficant inroads into the minority voters. At that point I would see Bernie winning the nomination even with the superdelegate problem. But with his momentum stopped which was critical for the campaign. Hillarys machine and democratic party establishment wil grind him down. And deathbow will be superdelegates which will vote 20 to 1 for Hillary. I believe I Bernie heard say that he winning the nomination will be the biggest comeback story in American history. I agree with the scale of challenge but I question the outcome.
After Nevada Democratic leaders will clapping themsevles on the back because they have pacified the revolt agaisnt the party leadership and structures of power in the party. But their celebration will prove to be hollow because Hillary will lose to Rubio and even Trump. At this point she should stop attacking Bernie let the attacks come from sorrugates that are only loosly tied to her. Bill and her daughter should start talking about her strengths and totally ignore Bernie. Bernie has brought alot of new voters in the party and she needs their help win agaisnt the Republicans. Insulting Bernie and making his supporters angry is only counter productive. Unfourtunely for the Democractic party a significant numbers of new comers came for Bernie and his character/ideas rather than the democratic party. If Hillary gets half of those votes she will be very lucky. Without the support she will lose. As things stand either Trump(will win the R nomination I think) or Rubio will win.
I am good:) I am waiting for my invitation from CNN:) to speak to the issue. Being abused as a so called "Trump supporter" in rabble was diificult when people got emontital about clintion but it worth because I knew I was right. This is my victory lap, well earned.
Fri, 2016-11-11 20:10
#15
Being abused as a so called "Trump supporter" in rabble was diificult
This is my victory lap, well earned.
I see. You don't support Trump, but when he won, you won.
I think you might need to keep "earning" your victory lap by considered a Trump supporter. No shame in it. Enjoy your historical moment!
Fri, 2016-11-11 20:15
#16
I still don't think Sanders would have been elected. Although he would have gotten a lot of those Obama-Trump voters in the Midwest. He would have been red baited to the hilt, and Wall Street and its media which was not wild about Trump, would have backed him to keep the "socialist" out.
This is the truth that many cannot accept. The bourgoisie is perfectly happy with a right-wing populist demagogue. They would not be happy with a 'socialist', even one as mild as Bernie Sanders.
However, rather than red-baiting, I think they would more likely identify Sanders with the leadership of the Democratic party. That would not have been difficult because Sanders voted with the Democrats more or less throughout his career.
Fri, 2016-11-11 20:30
#17
Being abused as a so called "Trump supporter" in rabble was diificultThis is my victory lap, well earned.I see. You don't support Trump, but when he won, you won.
I think you might need to keep "earning" your victory lap by considered a Trump supporter. No shame in it. Enjoy your historical moment!
Pointing out the obvious is not crime, demonizing me will not change the fact clinton was going to lose.
Sat, 2016-11-12 19:58
#18
Good on ya Bernie - get rid of all the the losers, the crooks, the hangers-on who are just there for their jobs or their resumes! 
Bernie's empire strikes back
In state after state, supporters of the Vermont senator's presidential bid are challenging the Democratic establishment for party control.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/bernie-sanders-empire-strikes-back...
Sat, 2016-11-12 19:58
#19
Good on ya Bernie - get rid of all the the losers, the crooks, the hangers-on who are just there for their jobs or their resumes!
Bernie's empire strikes back
In state after state, supporters of the Vermont senator's presidential bid are challenging the Democratic establishment for party control.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/bernie-sanders-empire-strikes-back...
Sat, 2016-11-12 20:16
#20
Time for younger visible minorities to be somewhat in charge now and guess what they could not have done a worse possible job than the Clintons and their hangers-on.
It's also time for Tulsi Gabbard to take more of a leadership role
Fight erupts among Democrats for control of party in crisis
Battle to lead the DNC begins as progressives and centrists throw names into the ring.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/scramble-for-control-of-the-democr...
Sun, 2016-11-13 03:14
#21
The Democrats need to look forward.
I do not indulge in the fiction that the polls are any kind of real reflection on what Sanders would have been able to do in a general election. He would not have lost to the type of campaign that sank Clinton. That is fairly certain. He also would not have faced such a campaign. He would have faced a campaign that would have been designed to beat him rather than Clinton.
Instead of focusiing on paranoia about Clinton's misdeeds it would have been about a communist taking over the US. And don't think for a moment his self-proclaimed label as a socialist woudl have been seen as a distinction. We would have seen McCarthy reborn. We likely would have seen greater unity among Republicans as the right wing of their party freaked out about a "communist."
The very things that made Sanders exciting and authentic were likely to hurt. But so too woudl have been the attacks on him calling him racist etc. The veracity of the attacks woudl not ahve been any more relavent than him being a communist. It woudl ahve been whatever the market might find believable.
Except in this case instead of the establishment losing it would have been split mostly going to Trump. Trump woudl ahve collected both the establishment support along with a good half of the anti-establishment.
Thinking Sanders would ahve won becuase he led polls that were not infomred by the kind of campaign he would have faced is irrational. He could not, despite being unencumbered by all that weighed Clinton down actually beat her in the Democratic party. He had no chance in the general election. The right did not even both attacking him very much probably becuase they knew they could sink him in the general election. Clinton, they were worried about. Correctly as well. She came close -- won the popular vote and would ahve taken the election without a massive effort to slander her for the period of a year. As flawed as she was -- she was the real threat and they knew it. Ask a Republican if they would have been worried about Sanders and they will laugh at you. Sanders could have fired up nearly half the population for him but he also would have fired up as many against him and that group would have gotten out and voted.
What the Demnocrats needed was a hopeful candidate, speaking of the future but not one who called himself a socialist -- that may work in the North East but not across the country. They needed a candidate who may have believed much of what Sanders did but been a little more careful about what he said.
Essentially both parties faced similar problems: the type of people able to win their parties were not the best to win a general election. Faced with a good opposing candidate neither Clinton nor Trump stood a chance. Neither party seemed capable of putting a great canddiate forward: the Republicans woudl never have accepted anyone who did not sound like a Tea Party nut. The Democrats put up flawed Clinton, so damaged that she nearly got beaten by a socialist canddiate the democrats might have liked but thay knew would have had little chance.
Obama is likely as progressive as could be elected there right now. Anyone more would never get there.
Sanders might even done well but he was not going to win. Sometimes it matters not just to vote for someone good and real but someone who can win.
For a candidate as left as Sanders to win he would need a relationship with the Hispanic and African Amercian communties that would get them to come out and vote like they rarely do. Sanders did not have that. He may have stunned the US in a general election as a socialist gettign 40% of the vote. But to get 48% and a win he would need to mobilize more than he personally could. I think people knew that.
The US is about identiy politics. This is their situation and it will be for a while. I am not saying the candidate has to be Black or Hispanic but the candidate who is going to win from the left either has to tack close enough to the centre (of US politics) to get independents who are there or have a relationship with the communities who do not vote in high numbers (youth, Black, Hispanic) to get them out to vote. Sanders motivated the youth and I think he would have brought them out but there is no indication taht he would have brought out Hispanic or Black voters or been able to withstand among Independents the kind of red-under-the-bed attack he would have faced. The media liked him in the primaries but they would ahve turned on him in the election -- theya re more right wing than left.
The Democrats need someone either able to take the US centre (like Bill Clinton) or to fire up the left -- all of it -- and not just some of it in the way Sanders could have.
Obama brought out more of the left than Clinton and appealed more to the Centre than Sanders.As scary as Trump was to Hispanic people, it seemes fewer of them voted than when they had Obama to vote for.
Sanders might have made the election intersting but he was not going to win it. He had some of the characteristics but not all that are needed -- and it is that relationship. Not coming from the NE would be part of it.
Some celebrities would have an advantage in bringing people out -- for example -- If Oprah Winfrey wanted it, many think she would have had it. She did not want it.
Kendrick Meek from Florida might be an interesting candidate... There are others.
Sun, 2016-11-13 06:48
#22
All this ink is speculation at this point, personally I think he have won. Win or lose is what ifs now. Clearly Bernie will not run in 2020 but bernie's faction has the opportunity shape the party in a big way. To that end is very useful political for the left to build a narrative to fundmental change the focus from corparate based party to more a grass root party.
1>Now is the time turn hillary into giant loser in the eyes of the public, honestly this should be no big problem. Hillary is the main proxy for the current leadership of the Democracts. By underming hillary now you are undermine the leaderdhip of the party. The current leadership has to decide how much support to give hillary at this point. Will hillary be thrown under the bus and political capitial that the leadership will spend to keep from being thrown under the bus. What ever happens hillary will go under the bus and i hope the leadership of the party spends a lot a lot political power in the defence of hillary. This is step one.
2>
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/2016-election-poll-bernie-sanders-tr...
This was poll not released because bernie will run 2020. But its very useful undermine Hillary supports and people that run the democratic party. Very important to about who ifs for the left, "we told you so" this pointed less at the the leadership more at hillary voters. Seeds of doubt are planted among those who voted in the primary for hillary. This very important because if they accept the we told you so narrative they open to rejection of the current leadership of the party.
3>
Right now the leadership is floundering looking to blame someone for this diaster. Very important the blame is directed on the centrist in the party,
4>
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/12/opinion/bernie-sanders-where-the-democ...
The first 3 desinged to tear down the leadership and decisions made by the party. Now its time to provide a positive alternative.
Sun, 2016-11-13 06:52
#23
He hasn't ruled out running. Of course it will depend on events, who else is running and his health. There are two others willing to pick up his mantle, in large part, Elizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown.
Sun, 2016-11-13 07:22
#24
I thought heard the his wife pooh pooh the idea but looking at video it was no ruled out. I dont want be accused of ageism but I like a new some new faces that can work with sanders, they are the future. I dont have the power to vote in the US and but if bernie ran again i support him again.
Mon, 2016-11-14 09:53
#25
Where the Democrats Go From Here (commondreams.org)
Mon, 2016-11-14 11:48
#26
wonder why Hillary didn't use the social media and tracking program Obama used and was allegedly used by the Liberals.
you know the one touted here by someone and who bashed the NDP for not using it.......
Wed, 2016-11-16 11:20
#27
..can't see how bernie would not have made this pipeline a part of the campaign had he won the nomination.
Bernie Sanders' Surprise Speech Outside the White House on Rejecting Dakota Pipeline & Trump
Wed, 2016-11-16 17:43
#28
if sanders was beating trump during an onslaught from the media, the entire democratic party machine working to bury him
just think what would have happened if he was the nominee...the media would be forced to air his platform, he could debate and slaughter trump and if he had the entire democratic party machine backing and pushing him..
of course he would have won.
Wed, 2016-11-16 21:12
#29
swallow
I doubt he would have won, but makes an awesome leader of the opposition.
Wed, 2016-11-16 22:44
#30
I doubt he would have won, but makes an awesome leader of the opposition.
This is what I think. And the threat of him could have led to changes. He would have been adored in the states the Democrats had votes to spare but I do not see him getting those closer contests.
Now if the US had a 80-90% voting rate I would say different. The problem is the people most likely to support him are the people least likely to vote. They are also the ones facing suppression tactics and lower weighted vote in larger states.
It is not rigged to allow someone like him through and I don't think he woudl have won the popular vote either.
That said I would have prefered to see a losing Sanders campaign than what we just saw.
Mon, 2016-11-21 09:54
#31
In a speech Sunday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) urged attendees to move away from "identity politics" and towards policies aimed at helping the working class.
Sanders spoke to a crowd of more than 1,000 mostly young people at the Berklee Performance Center in Boston, according to a report from WBUR.
"The working class of this country is being decimated — that's why Donald Trump won," Sanders said, according to the same report. "And what we need now are candidates who stand with those working people, who understand that real median family income has gone down."
Sanders also urged the crowd to move the party away from what he called "identity politics."
Mon, 2016-11-21 11:18
#32
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/11/21/trump-meets-...
Politically I would suggest she reject the any offer. She has bright future ahead in the Democractic party no point touching trump with a ten foot pole. With sanders in ascent, and political stand on the issues she took her star is in ascent and trump would love use her shield agaisnt the left. She has little to gain and much to lose. There was talk she would been running on Sanders ticket if bernie won.
Mon, 2016-11-21 15:10
#33
http://www.politico.com/blogs/donald-trump-administration/2016/11/tulsi-...
Her statement Beware of the NeoCon.
Wed, 2016-11-23 17:36
#34
Robert Reich's 8-Point Plan for a New Democratic Party
Former labor secretary says the party must be rebuilt from the ground up, and has some ideas on how it should be done
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/robert-reichs-8-point-plan...
Wed, 2016-11-23 19:21
#35
But are the New Democratic Party power brokers listening as it appears the working class have already shifted to Trump?
Politics makes for strange goings on. Not long ago some were talking 'bout the demise of the GOP. But now that Obama, Clinton & Co were totally routed in the election and will lose the Supreme Court for at least the next 25 years, maybe we should be paying a lot more attention to the Democrat's future, eh!
Bernie Sanders, In Boston: Democratic Party Needs To Focus On Working Class
http://www.wbur.org/politicker/2016/11/21/bernie-sanders-berklee
Wed, 2016-11-23 19:27
#36
Totally routed? Interesting description since Clinton got 2 million more votes, and counting, than Trump.
Thu, 2017-03-09 17:35
#37
I just tried to create header topic but seemed to fail. Sad to say bernie supporters have been defeated at the major levers of power in the DNC. But fear not the party is a renewal, corporate style.
A renewal process for the democratic patry in the US.
1.More corporate money not less
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/25/dnc-shoots-down-resoluti...
How refreshing, more corporate money will no doubt make the democratic accept more grassroots ideas. Or just maybe maybe this will curtail grassroots power to change policy.
2. No policy except to be attack trump. Perhaps voters would like a 15 dollar miniuim, now we are really reaching "single payer healthcare". Will a political party that is dependent on corporate donations ever advance union rights? Here a short clip from the jimmy dore show.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rnwa_VwCR8
Thu, 2017-03-16 09:19
#38
..interesting conversation
Campaign Calls on Bernie Sanders to Lead a New Party
Nick Brana, former Sanders staffer, says it's time to give up expecting progressive change from the Democratic Party and that Sanders should lead his base in creating a new party
quote:
PAUL JAY: Okay. Well, we'll follow this along, and we'll come back to you in a few months and see how it's going. Your big target, I think, is the one-year anniversary, is that right?
NICK BRANA: Right.
PAUL JAY: One year anniversary of the DNC convention, you hope to have how many signatures?
NICK BRANA: That's right. We'd like to have at least 100,000 signatures. I think that's very doable. There are people who are joining us every day, because they say that this is something that has reawakened the inspiration that they felt on the campaign.
Thu, 2017-03-16 12:05
#39
Not happening, and totally counterproductive at this point. Meanwhile, a Fox poll out yesterday showed Sanders to be the most popular politician among those polled. He may well run for president again. As a Democrat.
Thu, 2017-03-16 12:51
#40
Oprah should consider running.
Thu, 2017-03-16 13:52
#41
josh wrote:
Not happening, and totally counterproductive at this point. Meanwhile, a Fox poll out yesterday showed Sanders to be the most popular politician among those polled. He may well run for president again. As a Democrat.
..i disagree with your certainty. if a new party is to begin as stated by brana it needs to begin now. and counter productive is a value based judgment on what you believe the reality is.
..there is real and distinct possibility that the democratic party will see trump get into office rather than have sanders take over the party. just like what is happening with the labour party and corbyn. years of internal struggle might ensue ending with the party elite back in the drivers seat.
..it may very well be smarter and easier to begin a new party with new policies like brana points out. in any case we will see in a few months if folks support the idea.
Thu, 2017-03-16 14:02
#42
alan smithee
Bernie in Trump country having a town hall. They loved what he had to say. I saw the whole event but unfortunately it's been removed from Youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whxM34M94SE
Bernie would have decimated the Orange fuckwad. The DNC needs to be stripped and gutted and turned into a new progressive party and they'll win the next 10 elections.
Thu, 2017-03-16 14:14
#43
I think it is more likely that the Justice Democrats, a group founded by several Sanders organizers and others including Cenk Uygur, will make an impact on U.S. politics than some new 3rd party. They plan to run progressive candidates against dozens or hundreds of Democratic establishment nominees in primaries throughout the country. About a month after their creation, they have 217,651 members and have raised $1,024,387 from 41,793 small donors. Their members have nominated 8,387 candidates for various offices, of which 30 have been fully vetted and trained as candidates. Are there comparable figures for this 3rd party startup?
Thu, 2017-03-16 14:20
#44
..txs mm i'll have a look.
Thu, 2017-03-16 14:24
#45
If they have any chance at all in defeating Trump, Trumpcare, Ryancare, etc, it will have to come from within the Democratic party. Sanders is on the right track!
Thu, 2017-03-16 14:30
#46
Sorry Josh,
The leadership of DNC has no room for bernie, he can run for the democractics again he will lose again. The DNC will sabotage bernie again some neo-liberal nub will lose to trump again. I believe that earlier in the year suffock poll showed 25 % indentifed them as democractics, 28 republicans, 44 independent. DNC has no ideas, they are still looking to russia as boggieman that cased them to lose. There is no inward inflection as how lost, they have no ideas but rather attack trump. They ran campaign once and they lost, trump is bad man is not good enough a reason to vote DNC.
Let democratics sink into sewer of corrupation and let them do what they do well which is to collect corporate money. This the perfect time to abondon the democractics you got 4 years to build a movement and party. I just feel a sadness when i hear bernie making statements the democratics should change and its clear they will not change. They just voted to accept more corporate money not less!!! The corporate donors will not allow bernie to be the top democratic, its just that simple..
Thu, 2017-03-16 14:40
#47
mm,
Thats certainly good news but my main critism while the bottomup stragety sounds goods but i wonder if things turn perfectly, time is limiting factor. How long will it take change the DNC. But I will look into the justice democrats.
Thu, 2017-03-16 15:19
#48
"""You’re asking a good question, and I can’t give you a definitive answer. Certainly there are some people in the Democratic Party who want to maintain the status quo. They would rather go down with the Titanic so long as they have first-class seats. """
Thats a quote from bernie, perfect. Asked what does the democrat party stand for.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/03/15/bernie-sanders...
more goodness from jimmy dore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ArbwhF0M_I
Thu, 2017-03-16 15:19
#49
No, they won't. There's no prohibitive front runner like Clinton to block him. Unless Biden decides to run. If Sanders does a little bit better than last time, especially in the big states, he'll win the nomination. If he runs.
Thu, 2017-03-16 15:40
#50
I think the above bernie quote gives a general idea of bernie thoughts on the DNC. Bernie wants something but the DNC has nothing to give. Clinton would not even give bernie a minor cabinet position when she got into power. Thats a slap in the face.
Fri, 2017-03-17 12:33
#51
Bernie is already 75. I don't believe he will run for President again. I hope that the Justice Democrats can win some mid-term nominations and elections to build on in a lead up to the next Presidential primaries. Then they might be able to succesfully run a younger version of Bernie against the establishment nominees.