General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat if Bernie Sanders became President of the United States of America?
What if it really happened?
Would it be good?
Would certain states secede? Would certain oligarchs secede?
Would the 14,000* registered lobbying groups in Washington be reduced to a number so small we could drown 'em in a bathtub?
Would Wall Street have to play by the same set of rules as everyone else?
Would the world become more peaceful? Would some of the zillions now spent on military adventures-for-oil be diverted to making our country better for Americans?
Would fewer children sleep in cars each night?
Would Republicans fight to stop Bernie? The Third Way? Would We the People stop the stoppers?
Would we have real change, or a blazing 50-car pile-up?
Do you want this? Will you work for this?
*14,000's the real number.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)It simply will never happen.
End of discussion.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)
morningfog
(18,115 posts)yet the discussion goes on.
-none
(1,884 posts)He has just started.
Just wait till he become a household name.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I @#$%ed up again.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)nt
ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)That's what they said about our current President, and look at what happened.
Bernie has one thing that President Obama did not have and that is a long standing and consistent record of fighting for WE THE PEOPLE.
Just as they said that Obama couldn't win, DO NOT say that Bernie cannot win!
babylonsister
(172,759 posts)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)He blew up the internet yesterday. His supporters are the most enthusiastic and hard working I've ever seen. They by-passed the Corporate Media and reached 6,000,000 people in ONE HOUR!
HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)surprised at the power of the people. It will be hard to overcome the Oligarch wealth and their media and the complicity of the DNC, but don't rule out the power of the people.
Those that wish for the status quo to continue apparently don't care about the rising poverty rate. Certainly Goldman-Sachs-O-Gold doesn't care. "Let them eat cake" is what we will here.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)
C Moon
(13,643 posts)I've seen so many unnecessarily mean posts by DU'rs with Hillary Clinton's logo by their name in regards to Bernie Sanders, that I've begun to equate the H with hate whenever I see it. Many of you seem hell bent on screaming at others who don't agree with voting for Hillary.
Your energy would be better spent on positive actions.
I suggest cooling off. It's certainly not doing Hillary Clinton any good. What do you think she would say if she saw some of those remarks?
I never had anything against Hillary before (look me up). But I sure am starting to dislike reading posts with an "H."
bvar22
(39,909 posts)I wouldn't invite them over to our house.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Since you've never been right about a single thing while posting in DU!
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)so many female doctors and lawyers? Unthinkable when I was a child. Gay marriage and voted in in Catholic Ireland?
Even with regard to civil rights, as slow as progress sometimes seems, we have come a long way since Brown v. Board of Education. We have a long way to go on many issues, and that is why I support Bernie Sanders. He is in my view the most experienced politician in the presidential race and appeals to very liberal as well as very conservative voters among the population that is not extremely wealthy. He has proven that in Vermont. He knows how to appeal to a surprisingly brad cross-section of voters.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)If you volunteer for Hillary,
do NOT work the phone banks or canvas neighborhoods.
You do Hillary more harm than good.
Stick to licking envelopes or other jobs that keep you away from the voters.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)Bernie as president will alter the course we are presently set on.
He will order the situation at Fukushima to be fixed asap.
He will make sure all other nuke plants and weapons are properly decommissioned.
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)"He will order the situation at Fukushima to be fixed asap"
Who is he going to order, and what consequences will they suffer if they say "No!"?
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)We have many troops there.
And the pollution from Fukushima is being found on the west coast of the US.
I get that many are quite unaware of the facts and the science. That's why we need Bernie.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)A right wing hellhole?
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)responding the same way I am now, 'just watch what happens'.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)The Populist Movement around the world is rising up to take away power from the 1%. Maybe you choose the wrong side.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)expect him to do, exactly?
djean111
(14,255 posts)be in tune with them? The GOP does not love Hillary.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)the power of Wall Street. Electing someone that is a friend of Wall Street would be worse. They may be able to get things passed by a Republicon Congress but that isn't what we want.
The President has a lot more power than the current President has shown.
kenfrequed
(7,865 posts)Actually, that has always been the weakest argument that I have seen Hillary supporters use. "But... congress..." Yeah, cause capitulation has worked so amazingly and these peoe are so down for compromise. Make the GOP actually vote against working families and for corporations and then watch Bernie go on tv and explain why he is vetoing their bills in detail.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)conservadems would help them.
Bernie is great, but even if he got in I wouldn't expect much to change, sadly.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)I disagree, on both claims.
eloydude
(376 posts)because Bernie knows the history because of Vermont Yankee.
He can easily create millions of jobs improving on alternate energy and less dependence on dangerous and finite materials.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)The President of the US can command that a world threatening event be fixed asap. If it takes sending our troops in, what would Japan say? Not a damn thing.
The dreamers are those that deny the problem. It is getting worse by the hour. Japan is pinching pennies and not getting it fixed. The science s clear: it will kill a multitude of life of allowed to continue. It has already killed lots of life.
okasha
(11,573 posts)for unlawful aggression against a major trading and defense partner.
Treaties, in case you've forgotten your high school civics are the law of the land, along with acts of Congress and SCOTUS rulings.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)nt
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)You do know that the Japanese people are fighting the nuke power industry to keep ALL of the 50 now closed down nuke plants closed down?
Japan knows the shit-hit-the-fan. Only because the US is mealy-mouthed about the situation is there no MSM coverage.
Why is the US mealy-mouthed about nukes? Because we have huge nuke problems right here. Bernie will change that and speak the truth.
okasha
(11,573 posts)If Japan wanted us to fix Fukushima, they would have asked for our help a long time ago.
I prefer another candidate, but not because I think Senator Sanders is batshit insane. He isn't.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)The people of Japan know all about what it is doing to their island. The government there has even gone so far as to make it illegal to report what the radiation is doing.
You can throw out any words you wish, but those would just be denial words. 100 years ago cancer was rare. Now 1 in 3 die of cancer.
The problem with Fukushima and Japan and the US is that when the truth is known, billions of dollars go down the drain.
Batshit insane is thinking that somehow nukes are safe.
okasha
(11,573 posts)It has nothing, however, to do with the magical powers you and some others are attributing to Sanders-- or anyone elected to the presidency.
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)100 years ago, my hometown was covered in smoke and soot from the horseless carriage factories burning thousands, if not millions, of tons of coal a year with nary a thought to pollution controls.
And we didn't pack our lunches in the those cute little plastic containers which leech BPA...
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Support the 1% or they might get mad and take all our resources.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)do what we tell Them to do.
okasha
(11,573 posts)Both declared candidates are applying for a job as President of a constitutional democracy, not Dictator of Earth.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Odd that some can't understand that.
Ahh creative speculation in the morning, nothing quite like it...
okasha
(11,573 posts)Don't invest your candidate with magical powers. If you do, he won't meet your inflated idea of him, and you'll wind up turning on him, just as many have done with Obama.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)No one said that anywhere here...
sheshe2
(97,626 posts)
To what hold them a gunpoint until the fix the damn mess? Oh, that will work well.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)dionysus
(26,467 posts)
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Now there's a winning campaign slogan.
LOL
dionysus
(26,467 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)We have troops in Japan, now. All a president has to do is tell them to go clean up the mess.
This "Invade" bs is just that.
But then if one is in denial of the facts and the science, then one will fabricate anything to obfuscate.
Japan would like nothing more than for the US to clean up Fukushima, except that then the truth will come out and the nuke industry loses billions upon billions of dollars. That's what this is about, this mess continuing, it's about money and profits.
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)
just in case...cwydro
(51,308 posts)Nor are we going to invade Japan.
questionseverything
(11,840 posts)i appreciate your dedication to the nuclear problem in japan but there is no technology to fix it...at least not yet...so please don't say bernie could fix it
now hopefully he could be influential about reducing the chances of the next accident
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)But damn, something has to be done. Something to at least stop polluting the ocean. What we have now are a bunch of chickenshits beholden to the nuke industry, afraid to upset the nukers. Bernie would not be afraid to upset that powerful group of liars.
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)Allow me to preface by saying I am a HUGE supporter of alternative energy. I would love it if 100% of the world's electricity came from non-polluting sources.
But Sen. Sanders would not have the unlimited power to just create and fund millions of alternative energy jobs. And if he could - it would be great, but after the infrastructure is built, what happens to all those jobs? Maintenance would only require a fraction of all those people.
So you would have millions of TEMPORARY jobs, followed by massive layoffs.
Which sux too, but I still support alternative energy. Warts and all.
RichVRichV
(885 posts)Sure creating those automobiles will create jobs, but it will kill the horse and buggy business, as well as locomotives. What happens once all those automobiles are made? what happens to all those jobs? Maintenance would only require a fraction of all those people.
It's simple, equipment for alternative energy doesn't last forever. New solar panels, wind mills, turbines will have to be built eventually to replace the old ones. That doesn't even get into batteries and other storage mediums that have to be built and periodically replaced. Industries will spring up to support all the new systems. New homes will still need wired for them, not to mention all the retrofitting for the new equipment on old homes (such as structural improvements to support the weight of solar panels). That doesn't even take into account new industries we can't predict as a result of the changes.
Technology doesn't destroy jobs, it displaces them. People are resistant to change because of the uncertainty it brings, not because it's inherently harmful.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)dionysus
(26,467 posts)person... Bernie, the last person who would bully a foreign country...
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)He has no control.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)you'll be changing your tune, buddy!
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Highly entertaining to say the least.
treestar
(82,383 posts)that's what you wish he was running for?
onenote
(46,142 posts)because he won't be able to do much without a Democratic majority -- and a big one.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)We should elect a republican so they and congress can get things done?
Bernie will have long coat tails and in the midterms the republicans will lose badly.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)Fantasies do no good. Pretending a president can miraculously transform the country is counter productive. It keeps people placated and ensures they never do anything to interefer with the status quo because they are waiting for the next political messiah to work miracles. There is nothing noble by deliberately refusing to understand the constitutional limitations of the presidency and the composition of congress.
Changing the nature of government and society doesn't happen at the presidential level. People have to work on local elections that determine redistricting. They have to support progressives at all levels of government, and they have to change their red state shit holes to progressive blue districts, like those of us you and your friends regularly insult. It is that refusal to understand the level of commitment required to make the changes you all claim to want that leaves me wondering if what people really want is the status quo because they certainly don't propose acting in any ways to change that. Either that, or people are badly informed about the workings of their own government.
Beartracks
(14,591 posts)... EVEN IF they are not the perfect, progressive, support-my-favorite-issue, voted-against-Iraq-war (D)s.
It always seems that too many Democratic voters prefer to think of the mid-term elections as a time to chastise and "teach a lesson" to Democratic candidates and incumbents who don't pass some sort of litmus test. Or we think a single champion can do everything her/himself from the Oval Office, so we don't bother with the off-years. And the result is that Congress gets more (R)s in it as all of these passionate voters stay home. And how does that provide a proper support system for the progressives who are left in Washington??
At the end of the day, the truly progressive liberals like Warren and Sanders -- whether they're in the Senate, the House, or the White House -- need to be surrounded by a majority of (D)s in order to be able to hold committee chairs, influence legislation, and effectively push agendas and make a difference. If we reward their dedication by being too busy, too distracted, or too spiteful to give them every (D) we can, then we do a serious disservice not just to them, but to ourselves and our country as well.
Yes, push for progressives. But always vote for the (D).
========================
-none
(1,884 posts)Running for anything local, for dog catcher to school board to city commission. Build up that resume. It took them 30 years, but they got their own President. They are now firmly intrenched in our political system. From the insane tea party, to the 3rd way Republicans with a (D) by their names. To unseat them, we have to do as they did. Start at the local level and build name recondition, the move up to the next level, building a solid foundation.
That is how the 1% took over. It may take another 30, 40 or 50 years to undo the damage, but voting for 'Democrats', back by the big banks and Wall Street, is not the way.
eloydude
(376 posts)and we'll just make waves, a REVOLUTION!
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)And an end to defeatism. That's what we get from Bernie.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Recovering from the massive losses of 2010 (census year) and 2014 will take Democrats a long time, especially if they can't grab back the House by 2020, which is not that far away. The advantages of House incumbency are very hard to overcome. As the saying goes, everyone hates Congress, but loves his or her representative.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)in the mid terms, voters worked for and won seats and helped retain seats for Progressives both on State, Local and National levels.
It's equally important to pay attention to what seats will be up for reelection in 2016 and work on those races while helping Bernie get to the WH.
Martin Eden
(15,628 posts)If Bernie Sanders wins the general election, it will be due to a massive voter turnout -- and those voters will overwhelmingly check the D box in other races on the ballot.
onenote
(46,142 posts)Gerrymandering in the House makes it all but impossible for the Democrats to gain a substantial majority and there will be a sizable number of moderate to conservative Democrats among those elected. And its highly unlikely that Repubs won't have at least 40 members after the 2016 elections.
Its nice to dream, but the reality is that Sanders would do well to capture all of the states that Obama captured in 2012 and most likely won't get all of them.
Martin Eden
(15,628 posts)A major change in the minds of voters and in the turnout will have taken place when Bernie wins. It's a different calculation altogether.
procon
(15,805 posts)Better not tell you now.
Starry Messenger
(32,381 posts)Sadly. True for anyone at this point.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)If he does good things would happen.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)He can't be quoted as having that as a stated tax plan, unless he said it since a recent interview he had, which I can probably find.
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Your graphics read more like 'Not Hillary.'
Oh, and I would be thrilled with Bernie Sanders as President, FYI.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)zappaman
(20,627 posts)You didn't know that?
polichick
(37,626 posts)Together, they could beat HRC in the primary.
Together, they could beat any Republican corporate tool.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)First Speaker
(4,858 posts)...not likely, or probable...but *possible*. Look how the Right has responded to a moderate Dem--and yes, black--President. Imagine an avowed Social Democrat who is also a religiously-sceptical Jew. It would make the opposition to Obama look like The Era of Good Feelings. There would, I think, be widespread *de facto* nullification out in the country--and this is from the Red State legislatures and governors. The actual right wing-Tea Party "base" would be even worse. Could it end up in a coup? Or anarchy? I dunno. But we'd be closer to it than at any time since the Civil War. This of course is no argument against Sanders for President. You can't give in to threats and extortion from these people. And maybe we need to see the worst, before things can begin to get better. But a Sanders Presidency would be an immensely fluid situation, and ideologically extreme in ways we haven't seen since the Civil War era.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)fascism. Bernie's positions were pretty middle of the road Democratic positions back in the forties and fifties. Most Democrats of the time were for national health care, free education, well paid labor and all the other positions that people wring their hands over as being too socialist and extreme today.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)...they oppose an imaginary construct of Bernie created by propagandists.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)Coattails
P.S. Sorry Manny. I looked really hard for a shot of Harpo chopping off Louis Calhern's coattails in Duck Soup but couldn't find one.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)But I'm surprised it's hard to find!
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I know how that turns out.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)It's just the goal that needs to change. It takes time, not conflict.
My biggest fear is that things stay the same. Is there anyone who doesn't want health care as a civil right. Yes, but that can change. Like I have the slightest clue what would have to change. And there's foreign relationships and policies. Yikes why am I posting? I could be watching a good movie.
babylonsister
(172,759 posts)RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)I bet you can.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)He is one person. I am sure he would try his damndest toward the beliefs he's held all his life. But, I don't expect miracles.
Not in his first term, anyway. 
If message boards show anything, they show the human tendency (compulsion?) to want to be right and to refuse to admit error. Will even Democrats be able to admit they followed the wrong pied piper?
beaglelover
(4,466 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)
frazzled
(18,402 posts)and imperfect legislation.
Let's take a look at another long-time progressive/liberal who was recently elected to high office: Bill De Blasio, mayor of the most populous city in the US (and more populous than most states: you could fit more than 13 Vermonts in the five boroughs of Manhattan). We were thrilled (and I probably still am). But apparently his approval, especially among the most "liberal" of his supporters, is sinking like a stone post-election. Some of the complaints ring oddly familiar, and others would fit Bernie like a glove.
Among those who disapprove, there are certainly those who do so with greater intensity — preservationists who believe Mr. de Blasio’s affordable-housing initiative will lead to overdevelopment; neighborhood people who believe there has been inadequate planning to support all the proposed construction; black civic leaders concerned that Mr. de Blasio’s interest in criminal-justice reform is waning; rich people who feel offended that he doesn’t involve himself in rich-people things.
More at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/24/nyregion/the-cause-of-a-mayors-problem-is-his-affect.html
Why do I predict this? Because this is what (we) liberals do: we envision shining knights (even if the politicians in question never claimed to be one) and then we knock them off their horses because they "disappoint" us when they can't accomplish everything they claimed to believe in. They can't fix problems decades or even generations in the making in a year, or four, or even six. And then we abandon them or even call them effing used car salesmen and go looking for another knight who will promise to .
So that's what I think would happen to Bernie if he were elected. And I'd be sorry about it.
RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)It has no basis in reality.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)What an evil, ignorant insult to someone you don't even know. You clearly don't even understand what I wrote or what the editorial was saying.
I can't even ...
treestar
(82,383 posts)We've seen it happen with Obama.
It's funny that the same people that call us "adorers" for supporting Obama are doing the same thing re Bernie without the least self awareness.
Marr
(20,317 posts)No one would fault Obama for failing to achieve Single Payer (or even the ridiculously modest 'Public Option' he claimed he would insist upon)-- if he'd even tried to do so. He didn't.
People who are angry about things like that (and there have been many such issues) are not faulting him for not being perfect. And if you really can't grasp that, then the 'adorer' label is perfectly apt.
treestar
(82,383 posts)He would just have looked stupid. And that's what would have been said about him.
Bernie could "try" for 2 minutes with his likely Congress, I guess. And if he kept repeating he wanted single payer every day rather than work out a deal for some progress, like public option, with that Congress, he'd get nowhere.
But his adorers, no better off as to health care payments, would be going on about how great he is for talking. Then, it wouldn't just be "hot air." It'd be "using the bully pulpit."
Some people believe that a POTUS saying something over and over again will convince Congress. Gee I guess that's what Boner thinks when he and Congress repeal the ACA over and over again. I guess he thinks that eventually that will convince Obama. Maybe the 100000th time will do it.
Marr
(20,317 posts)No Democratic president would ever convince a Republican Congress to pass something like Single Payer, no. But it's an incredibly popular idea, so pushing for it, making them repeatedly say NO to it, over and over again, as you sell the public on the idea even more, will get that Republican Congress voted out.
But that's a big, brass ring item. I notice you completely ignored the fact that Obama never even tried for a "Public Option"-- an item he'd previously insisted would be mandatory in any bill he signed.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Did they not look at themselves in the mirror these past 6 years?
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)
napi21
(45,806 posts)If Bernie, Hillary, or ANY DEM gets elected, and still has to try to deal with a Repug controlled Congress, Bernie wouldn't be able to any of his ideas any more than Obama.
Tommy2Tone
(1,307 posts)His fans never address that.
RichVRichV
(885 posts)It's not like he's never failed before (or any one of us for that matter). And we start over again to drive out the control of the oligarchy and take our country back. I'm a stubborn individual and don't give up easily. Eventually we will reach a critical mass where people are fed up with the pathetic scraps were being told is all we're allowed to have.
Succeed or fail, I'm proud to support Bernie because he stands with us. And I'm going to do everything within my limited power to make sure he succeeds.
chillfactor
(7,694 posts)physically and mentally....at his age Bernie would not live through his first term...
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)Being President, having the weight of the world on your shoulders, will age you quick.
And the more dedicated you are to the job, the more stress you will suffer.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)I had a lot less gray six years ago as well...
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)
pnwmom
(110,261 posts)Because he would have to compromise his positions to get anything through Congress.
polichick
(37,626 posts)pnwmom
(110,261 posts)in order to get anything done.
Compromise is the essence of politics.
polichick
(37,626 posts)Compromise is made between the two starting points - when he starts by first positioning himself toward the other side, the people get screwed.
In this age, conning the people is the essence of politics.
treestar
(82,383 posts)They refuse to abandon their dream of President as benign dictator.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Vice President, Secretaries of State, Treasury, Justice, Defense, etc.?
There's a real danger we could run out of Liberals to fill those positions.
(Just to let him know I'm available)
Historic NY
(40,037 posts)just who will pay is unknown....
nikto
(3,284 posts)Much of America will have to be there behind him, backing him up in every way possible (in polls,
emails, petitions, phone calls and peaceful, but LARGE demonstrations at specified times and places,
etc etc etc etc
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Electing Hillary would be kicking the can down the road...again.
olddots
(10,237 posts)NT
dionysus
(26,467 posts)good at, along with a few blue dogs.
and that's sad.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)Which means that he has to be able to successfully work with congress or rely on executive order alone. A Sanders presidency would not be a monarchy. People here are focused exclusively on one office, the presidency. They show absolutely no concern for the rest of elected offices or any desire to change restricting or campaign financing. In light of the constitutional restrictions, absolutely nothing would change. And even if by some improbably miracle the Democrats won control of both houses with a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, much of what you describe is outside the purview of government.
This sort of fantasy promotes conformity with the status quo. It promotes the idea that people don't need to do anything but project on to a single man all their hopes and dreams. It also ensures they will turn on him in a heartbeat just as they have Obama when Sanders proves he is mortal and not able to magically transform society.
I don't know how anyone can think this sort of post is worthwhile or responsible. You don't want to participate in making government better. You want fantasies, so that as soon as Sanders is elected you can turn on him with contempt similar to the current president.
People learn civics in grade school for a reason. I do not think it too much to expect adults to have a grade school command of th workings of our government, yet that does not appear to be the case.
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)Remember folks - he's not a Hamas supporter. He's NOT going to disengage from the Middle East. He will NOT quit bombing ISIL, and may have to put ground troops somewhere at sometime not of his choosing.
Many of his most devoted supporters will throw him under the bus in months, if not weeks.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)I shortened your post up for you, no extra charge.
Back in grade school, I learned that extra words only hurt our message. And since your extra words were totally uncorrelated to what's actually written in the OP, they were superfluous.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Gawd, we've been saying that for 6 years and all we hear to that narration of basic US law and civics is "third way!" "bully pulpit!"
Cleita
(75,480 posts)twenty five years he's served in Congress without compromising his principles. Sure, like other members of Congress, he's lost some, but he has also won many victories. To say otherwise is disingenuous. Better than that he knows how Congress operates very well. I believe he will bring functionality back to this branch of government because he knows where the bodies are buried like LBJ did.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)Thanks in advance.
I don't believe I said anything about his being ineffective. I said he would face the same constitutional limitations the current president does. That will be true for whomever ends up being elected.
Your comparison to LBJ doesn't hold. LBJ was the Senate Majority Leader, who had engaged in all kinds of compromises and relationships to get legislation passed. Bernie hasn't held any leadership positions in the Democratic party because he isn't in the Democratic party. He stands for many strong progressive causes, but he is not like LBJ, whom by the way was viewed as a conservative Democrat for his time, what you all would dismiss as "Third Way."
Cleita
(75,480 posts)I can't put up links on a mobile device but I'm sure you know how to google. For one thing he is the leading "Democrat" on the Senate Budget Committee because he caucases as a Democrat but you should know that hanging around DU and all.
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)and found he succeeded in getting two post offices named. I thought perhaps you would know of something else.
You equated him to LBJ, with absolutely no evidence to do so. Caucusing with Democrats is not equivalent to a Senate Majority Leader, particularly someone whose legislative ability is routinely heralded as among the best is US history.
Now I understand you like his positions on issues. So do I. But inventing claims with no evidentiary basis to support them does not help your case. If you are going to get angry anytime anyone asks a simple question, you do more harm than good for his campaign. I understand on DU people become angry when anyone wants to know specific information about their chosen candidate, but that is not how people react who want to inform themselves. You choose to respond to me, to take exception with my post that Sanders would be subject to the constitution. You insisted that was unfounded. I made no accusation about him, but merely pointed out that the OP imagines a magical world unencumbered by law, either constitutional or of nature. You then proceeded to make absurd claims that anyone could see were false, and now you cannot point to a single success and turn to profanity as a result. You are making a case to an undecided voter, and your response is to insult. With supporters like you, who needs detractors?
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Why do I subject myself to them?
BainsBane
(57,757 posts)Certainly not I.
Hugin
(37,848 posts)
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Conservatives will flip their shit.
It would be good, even if the only thing that happens is Republicans flip their shit.
I predict their will be more lobbying groups not less, but that will happen no matter who gets elected, it's the nature of the beast.
Wall Street will have to try to look like they are being a have, but I doubt they are really going to stop trying to get away with paying slave wages and screwing over everyone they can for a buck.
He might be able to slash the MIC budget by a significant amount, but not enough to actually fix the economy here.
I believe a lot few children will be sleeping in cars and watching their mothers starve so they can eat.
Republicans will fight Bernie of course, the Third Way will say things like lets be reasonable while stabbing him in the back, We the people will be taking a nap.
Change will happen and we might have a blazing 50 car pile up depending on how far Republicans want to go to sabotage the economy and shred the safety net.
I will do what I can.
djean111
(14,255 posts)Bernie will invade Japan! The instant ooze to a simplistic and incorrect slogan has actually gotten predictable. Marginalize and conflate and jeer.
As if a GOP Congress would work with Hillary because she is so historical and all. They would only work with Hillary if she wants the same thing they want, which is what some of us are afraid of.
Autumn
(48,962 posts)the poor and the working class as Obama has for the TPP. That's what I'm gonna work for.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)Finally.
This is our chance.
I know what will happen if we elect another third-way candidate. 4-8 more years of sinking, further, into a pit of destruction.
Marr
(20,317 posts)Blue Dogs, Third Wayers... Conservative Democrats of all stripes would officially join the opposition to the White House. I expect Sanders' first two years in office would be non-stop Congressional obstruction, and very likely some manufactured economic crises from Wall Street as well.
But I think the left would have some serious momentum going into the next Congressional elections as a result, after the country has a front row seat to the extended spectacle of corporate America openly obstructing very popular ideas.
Bucky
(55,334 posts)cascadiance
(19,537 posts)I base that with a conversation I had last year with another senator that works with her, where I think she's avoiding running while Hillary Clinton is a viable candidate, but when the question was posed if Hillary had to pull out or something else got in the way of her being viable in the race, his eyes lit up making it sound like she could run then. If Bernie's won the nomination, I think she definitely would take the VP slot if asked.
In my book, a Bernie/Warren combination would be unbeatable against the Republicans.
Bucky
(55,334 posts)too much face, not enough palm
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)Only "New England" voters? Especially those women that might have been in Hillary's camp if he were to get the nomination. And by the way, this senator I spoke to was from the west coast, not New England. He himself might make a good VP candidate.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)So, if that is a goal of Sanders, I just found the first issue of his I disagree with.
yuiyoshida
(45,415 posts)
Martin Eden
(15,628 posts)A Sanders victory would reflect the will of the electorate, and that cannot be totally ignored by Democratic politicians who shifted to the right towards a "middle" ground that has been a slippery slope into neolberal plutocracy.
Without a doubt, the corporate overlords would shift into high gear to discredit/destroy the Sanders presidency. The battle to see who really controls the Democratic Party would be the thing to watch. A Sanders victory would also usher in significant gains if not outright Democratic control of the House & Senate.
Bernie needs the D Party to do the job he's elected to do.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)Go back in time and review JFK's platform and he was considered a middle of the road Democrat and you will see how far right our party has turned.
Martin Eden
(15,628 posts)Hell, Eisenhower is a Socialist compared to the "middle" that has been falsely constructed since Reagan.
Conduct a poll of eligible voters on specific issues (without mentioning candidate names or party affiliation) and there would be broad support for the policies Bernie Sanders stands for. Ask those same voters if they're aligned with Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders, and the majority will respond negatively.
Aside from fraud, voter suppression, and gerrymandering, Republican electoral success is the result of decades of manipulating public perception to move the "middle" further and further to the right.
That, and the failure of Democratic politicians to stand on principles clearly and forcefully communicated.
BootinUp
(51,323 posts)all these years.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Any Democrat who "steals" the White House from its rightful Republican occupants will be hated. It really got going with Bill Clinton, because he snuck in there and stole the "Reagan Revolution" from the GOP. They thought they had the presidency locked up for the next 100 years, and they hated Clinton for robbing them of their legacy. With Obama, it's a little more complicated, but we can see how Republicans feel about Democratic presidents, in general, and we know they will find any excuse to impeach. I don't know if the Republicans would bring more hate down on Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton. I think they're simply committed to hatingany Democratic president, and will make up the reasons as they go along.