This has nothing to do with Clinton vs. Warren vs. Sanders vs. liberal to be named later

[wyldwolf]

As we hurtle towards 2016, can we agree on this? Democrats/liberals/progressives have got to stop thinking that if their guy or gal becomes president, Republicans will magically see the error of their ways and start working with us.

In 2003-2004, people honestly believed Howard Dean was just the guy we need to break partisan bickering.

In 2007-2008, there were those on DU who honestly felt and defended the belief the President Obama would not be attacked anywhere close to the viciousness Bill Clinton suffered.

Now I'm reading Bernie Sanders could bridge the left-right divide and Republicans will fall in line

We're all guilty of 'falling in love' with our candidates. That's fine. It's a recognized character flaw of Democrats. But the reality is Republicans hate everything we stand for. There is no candidate with a 'D' next to their name who Republicans will cooperate with. Even if we co-op their policies, they fight us tooth and nail because it was a Democrat who made it work.

In fact, if any candidate WASN'T viciously attacked by the right, I'd think something was terribly wrong with that candidate. No one is immune.

[Rex]

1. Who thinks this way? Republicans don't want to work with us, we get it.

You kind of defeat your own argument. I personally don't see how Sanders can bridge any divide, since you yourself even admit that the GOP will refuse to work with anyone we pick.

[wyldwolf]

4. your words...

since we are going to keep the Senate and get back the House. I think he (Sanders) will have an easier time than Obama did. Despite two terms of Republican obstruction, the POTUS has done a lot of stuff even without their help.

1. There is no scenario in our wildest dreams where we win the house back anytime soon. \
2. Keeping the senate is very much in doubt.
3. Sanders having an easier time than Obama is ludicrous.

[Rex]

7. Still changes nothing about your OP.

So nobody is going to get the GOP to work with them and your argument was again?

[wyldwolf]

9. your argument is the GOP will work with Sanders. My argument is they will not.

You're taking this very personally.

[Rex]

10. Not at all I said no such thing, I agree with you that the GOP will not work with anyone

and to state what you are arguing about? If that is too confusing then NM.

[wyldwolf]

12. Explain to us how a President Sanders would have an easier time than President Obama.

[Rex]

13. Because we win back the House and keep the Senate?

Did you not read that part? Seriously, you don't seem to have much of an argument going here.

[wyldwolf]

14. there is no scenario in our wildest dreams where we win the house anytime soon

and keeping the senate is very much in doubt. But let's say all that happened in your alternate reality - how would that keep Republicans from attacking Sanders?

[Rex]

15. It won't, but with a majority of Dems in Congress it would be a better climate for Sanders.

Or do you want to argue that is not true? All I said was that YES you are RIGHT, the GOP will NOT work with anyone we pick...so your OP is kinda self-defeating.

[wyldwolf]

20. We had both houses first two years of Obama's first term & the attacks were vicious from the right

You're arguing from a fantasy viewpoint.

Or do you want to argue that is not true? All I said was that YES you are RIGHT, the GOP will NOT work with anyone we pick...so your OP is kinda self-defeating.

Bernie would have an easy time if the GOP dissolved. I won't consider that either. So your argument is kinda circular and not grounded in reality.

[Rex]

21. Sophism.

Carry on, you can miss my point all day about your OP. Seems you want to and that is your right.

[jwirr]

18. That is not my thoughts on Bernie. He will from day one know that the gop will not work with any

candidate we elect. He is also talking about carrying out the progressive agenda. That is something we have not seen in a long time. It is also something we desperately need. We are hoping for someone who will present things in a progressive manner and not lean toward the right in hopes of appeasing them or someone who is 3rd way.

This is what we want and we are not sure that Hillary will give it to us. President Obama was not allowed to move in that direction because of obstructionism. IMO he would have been better off recognizing this earlier and at least standing up for the progressive agenda.

[djean111]

2. If your implication is that the GOP WILL work with Hillary - that's what I am afraid of.

If your gist is that the GOP won't work with anybody at all - than your point is moot.

[Thinkingabout]

5. In your opinion with whom will the GOP work?

[wyldwolf]

6. I've made no implication. In fact I stressed multiple times the GOP won't work with any D

And my point is not to fantasize that the GOP will work with a 'D' - which some here have contended.

[L0oniX]

11. The key to having both parties work together is making corporations and the 1% priority no# 1.

[L0oniX]

8. LMFAO ...but then it's really not funny.

Maybe the problem can be solved by having 3 parties ...republicans, democrats ...and "centrists"

[woo me with science]

16. [phone]

We've observed the corporate Dem-GOP alliance for some time, and we barely have a middle class or a Constitution left to show for it.

Mass spying on Americans? Both parties support it.
Handing the internet to corporations? Both parties support it.
Austerity for the masses? Both parties support it.
Cutting social safety nets? Both parties support it.
Corporatists in the cabinet? Both parties support it.
Tolling our interstate highways? Both parties support it.
Corporate education policy? Both parties support it.
Bank bailouts? Both parties support it.
Ignoring the trillions stashed overseas? Both parties support it.
Trans-Pacific Job/Wage Killing Secret Agreement?
TISA corporate domination agreement? Both parties support it.
Drilling and fracking? Both parties support it.
Wars on medical marijuana instead of corrupt banks?
Deregulation of the food industry? Both parties support it.
GMO's? Both parties support it.
Militarized police and assaults on protesters? Both parties support it.
Indefinite detention? Both parties support it.
Drone wars and kill lists? Both parties support it.
Targeting of journalists and whistleblowers? Both parties support it.
Private prisons replacing public prisons? Both parties support it.
Unions? Both parties view them with contempt.

Perhaps the corporate-purchased parties themselves have something to do with this conclusion by the American people:

Poll: Half of Americans dont care which party controls Congress
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024988821

Time for a Democrat who will stand up for the 99 percent and lead the party *against* corporate and GOP policies that are driving this country into fascism.

[Thinkingabout]

3. K & R, oh how true.

Thank you for your post, yes, the Republicans preach hate at every corner, in fact they have been able to swing some votes their way with their hate. We need to get past crying and saying they are mean, they don't care but we can vote. I dislike the attacks we see here on DU and though many of the statements have been proven to be false apparently some did not get the message. I will be supporting Democrats in the elections, might not have been my first choice but I know what we are getting with the Republicans.

I am hoping in the future we will curb the appetite to respond as RW's do, let them have their say and prove them wrong. We need a majority in the Congress and a Democrat on the WH.

[Nay]

17. Of course no Pubs will work with any Dem. The difference is that Sanders will kick

their asses verbally, every day and in every medium, so that even the dumbest Fox watcher out in the hinterlands may get the idea that maybe, just maybe, jeebus, abortion, and gunz may not be the most important issues after all. That maybe the rich aren't looking after the country's best interests. Et cetera.

The major determining factor, IMO, is that Obama (and Clinton, too) both feel they have something to lose if they are President and don't go along with the flow -- their position AFTER their presidencies end. Whatever perks there are, they both want them. Bernie doesn't give a shit about that, and has shown it in his long public career. Bernie also has been an outspoken champion of average Americans; that is, he didn't start talking about the disappearance of the middle class yesterday.

To distill it, I'd say that Bernie Sanders has the one virtue needed -- courage. I don't see that anywhere else, except with maybe Warren. Courage may not win the war against the Pubs, but it beats rolling over for those bastards, which is what mainstream Dem politicians have been doing for too long. THAT'S what Dem/Indie voters are sick of -- voting someone in, and then seeing him/her vote "YAY!" on that whole list of stuff in Woo Me with Science's post above. It's infuriating.

[CakeGrrl]

19. Democrats have to be educated about how Congress works

The GOP could scream and yell all they wanted, so long as a Democratic President could get a House and Senate that would send legislation that they could sign.

The danger with Hillary is that she's all too comfortable with the GOP - a better 'friend' to them than President Obama could ever have been (and he isn't, despite accusations here). Why isn't she pushing to get a more Democratic congress so that she has an easier time?

She's a red flag, and the general ignorance of Dems is a red flag.

And to compound issues, the GOP monopolization of the media (to which her husband opened the door), is not going to lift a finger to educate and inform voters.