"Oh @#$&. That's The Truth."

[MannyGoldstein]

This seems to be the reaction to Bernie's words as Americans get to know him.

The Truth.

Democrats and Republicans alike. We may hold opposing positions on bull@#$&, but I think most all of us can recognize Truth when we hear it.

It remains to be seen if Americans will equate speaking The Truth with leading our country out of the crater that's been blasted out from under us Proles. But it sure as Hell is true that without speaking The Truth, the crater only grows deeper.

Let's work together and figure out how to win this. We deserve it.

[SoapBox]

1. ...

[Mira]

2. Yes

A shot of genuine honesty feels so good

[Spitfire of ATJ]

3. Come on Manny! Get real!

It took DECADES to build the lobbying machine in DC!

Bernie HAS to be accepted by that system.

Don't you know that "truth" thing of which you speak has to be approved first?

[Avalux]

23. Yep, that's the false truth we've been led to believe.

It's time we prove the lobbying machine and the political status quo that we don't buy their bullshit anymore.

[aspirant]

4. Truth, Justice and the American Way

that's our Superman Bernie.

Now all we need is a VP Superwoman.

[zeemike]

40. Yep and I guess you know who I think that should be.

And it would be a team that destroyed the GOP and took back congress.

[stage left]

72. and

a whole bunch of super people in the House and Senate. They don't have to be super really. I'd settle for people of conscience and integrity.

[BrotherIvan]

5. But but but...optics!

Because white people are concerned. And people of color don't know what they really need, so it's so damn assuring that there are people who are willing to educate us.

[sabrina 1]

6. Yesterday I signed up a non-voter, someone who had no interest in voting, or in politics because she

doesn't believe it matters.

I've been telling her about Bernie, she watched his Opening Speech with me, has listened to him speak online, I've also told her that he is NOT just talking that he has been consistent on every issue for his entire life.

She is excited about him but had said nothing about voting. So yesterday I asked her 'do you think you would be willing to register to vote just so you could vote for him'? Iow, was she THAT excited. She was, she asked me 'how do I register, I want to vote for this guy'.

Now I'm looking for my next non-voter. He is so easy to 'sell' to people. So I believe he will win, because look how far he's come in just a few months.

[Dragonfli]

15. Exactly what I have been running into!

I wrote anecdotaly about the same thing a little over a week ago. My neighbors are mostly by default apolitical (because they don't believe voting helps them in any way) - it is common among my peers (AKA the poor) and with good reason as politicians with the rare exceptions locally do absolutely nothing for them in their eyes (or in any objective sense IMO), they grow poorer, some become homeless, some of the younger ones escape via the military, but very few put any faith at all in politicians that don't appear to know or care that they exist.

These apolitical people are turning out to be more receptive to Bernie Sanders than any other politician I have ever canvased for. I have been asked for and given a total of 11 voter registration forms so far to people that do not vote, they actually want to vote for him in the primary, (Mostly because I explain to them how that is the important first step).

For many years politicians have completely ignored the poor and struggling working and non working people in America, they speak often and fondly of a middle class they would have us believe they love, they speak of them often, yet usually with vague platitudes and declarations of being "on their side".

I have been told by the self proclaimed poli sci gurus on this site that politicians don't seek the poor vote because the poor do not vote. I believe it is a self fulfilling prophecy, at least with our party that left the poor behind in a calculated shift regarding fiscal policies and a deliberate show of "toughness" on the useless eaters. the slackers, the undesirables starting with welfare reform that was meant more than anything to prove to the middle class Reagan lovers that they meant business, that they would be as tough on the little guy as Republicans, in effect they had to prove their street cred by starting to off some poor folks.

It worked all too well, they lost half of the voting population that easily one third used to vote reliably Democratic in pursuit of "the great greedy middle" that would rather a poor single mother lose her home and her child than they lose a dime of theirs to taxes.

The poor are not stupid, they know who their enemies are, they also know that for the first time in a long time (and the first time ever among the younger) there is a politician that speaks plainly rather than in vacuous riddles and half truths, and they hear him talk about them, they hear him talk about how he would like to help them. They finally have a champion, they finally are visible in Washington and the only thing thus far that has impeded my efforts to recruit voters via canvassing is the fact that I canvassed for Obama in '08 and I am remembered for the promises that he and I sold and he broke. I have found that with those I have lost credibility with because of a politician's broken promises, Bernie's consistent record can reverse the general distrust. So, Sabrina, make sure to keep all his past info handy for those that expect another bait and switch like last time, he is so consistent that it actually works in such cases.

[sabrina 1]

37. What a fantastic post. It would make a great OP, maybe in the Bernie Forum.

The poor are NOT stupid. And I think the powerful don't want them to vote, but then who could they vote for, until now?

Thank you for the good advice re keeping all his past info handy. THAT is the difference between him and any other candidate I remember, his decades long record of being RIGHT on the issues and his consistency, never sticking his finger in the wind to see how it is blowing. He made the right decisions even when it was politically risky to do so.

[KingCharlemagne]

41. This should be its own OP, imo (last paragraph should be your lead). My sincerest

compliments.

[hifiguy]

21. His no-bullshit, nothing-but-the-truth message

has the potential for genuine mass appeal. In a pre-CU world he would be facing no-higher than even odds to win the nomination. In six months he would probably be the favorite. Maybe, just maybe, the electorate is starting to be sickened by the corruption caused by money. I live in some small hope that it is.

[arcane1]

28. And that message doesn't change to appeal to each new audience n/t

[hifiguy]

29. That is a HUGE part of it.

Bernie Sanders is the same man no matter who he is speaking to, and he says the same things with the same conviction.

[arcane1]

30. No matter who, and no matter WHEN! This isn't just the 2016 market-tested "Sanders Brand"

[sabrina 1]

38. Right now he's the second favorite in a field full of obscenely well funded Corporate candidates.

And it hasn't even been a month yet.

So as of now, he has demonstrated that money won't trump HONESTY and INTEGRITY and a long record of fighting for the people.

Once people hear him, and that is up to us, there is no doubt in my mind he will be the people's choice.

[Dustlawyer]

45. Way to go! I have been doing the same thing!

My boss has a rock band on the side and they are going on tour again with Saliva, Saving Able, and Puddle of Mud. I talked to the singer and guitar player, both have never voted. Got them pumped up enough that they are giving Bernie a shout out at their Iowa date!

[JDPriestly]

48. Excellent.

[Fumesucker]

7. What remains to be seen is if Americans can handle the truth

Or will they prefer focus grouped comforting lies?

[Mnpaul]

16. History says no

time and time again we see that people would rather have someone tell them what they want to hear. People vote for the same type of politician every time and expect change.

[delrem]

8. It's happening, and I like it. nt

[KMOD]

9. Good Luck.

You have a long way to go.

Love his message, but I love HRC's, too. There really isn't much distance between their messages after all.

[delrem]

11. Ah. He doesn't have $2.5B at his command. That's a big difference.

What it will come down to is, how we read the different messages.

I'm hoping that at least two more Dems enter the race.

Not just Martin O'Malley, who is already on record as being a Hillary supporter.
I'd like to see someone else *on the left* enter the race.

Otherwise there'll be blood on the streets, I think.

[Divernan]

31. Martin O'Malley is NOT a Hillary supporter

During his announcement on Saturday, O'Malley drew several contrasts between himself and Clinton, painting his Democratic rival as someone rooted in the past and who was too cozy with Wall Street.

"Tell me how it is, that not a single Wall Street CEO was convicted of a crime related to the 2008 economic meltdown. Not a single one," O'Malley said. "Recently, the CEO of Goldman Sachs let his employees know that he’d be just fine with either Bush or Clinton. I bet he would. Well, I've got news for the bullies of Wall Street, the presidency is not a crown to be passed back and forth by you between two royal families."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/30/martin-omalley-2016_n_6557794.html

[world wide wally]

10. I hope Bernie wins the nomination just to watch him debate a Scott Walker or Donald Trump… LOL

[delrem]

14. Yes, of course you think that way, "ConservativeDemocrat".

You are a type, after all.

[L0oniX]

24. +1

[Autumn]

26. Just once I would like to see who these "hate-filled "fan club" of DU purity trolls" that

support Bernie Sanders actually are. I must have all the right people on ignore because I don't see them.

[arcane1]

27. They don't exist. It's just name-calling to paint over a weak defense.

Another example of the bullshit voters and non-voters are tired of.

[zeemike]

43. The use of the false dichotomy is perpetual.

If you don't love HRC you hate her...if you don't praise her you are attacking her.

Personally I think more and more people are seeing through that bullshit.

[sabrina 1]

32. 'reality based community' that brings back memories! Lol!

[Autumn]

34. Nothing say's I'm a Democrat like a

Karl Rove quote

[sabrina 1]

35. Lol!

I know!

[Recursion]

47. Err... Rove said he *wasn't* in the reality based community

Or, rather, whichever aide Suskind was quoting said that. Rove was opposing himself to the reality based community.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html?ex=1255665600&en=890a96189e162076&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

[delrem]

49. Yes, Rove did indeed use the mindf*ing phrase.

It's interesting that there are people posting to DU who play with it, as in this case a "conservative democrat", whatever that might mean beyond an opposition to liberal and progressive movements in the Democratic party. And I guess you play with it too.

What exactly did Rove say? I'm unsure and I'm not going to look it up, I'll paraphrase from memory that he said something in an awful and sneering attack, that his camp had control of "reality" because it controlled events, that by the time the liberal/progressive/left figured out what reality was, Rove and his power base had already changed it and had moved on.

Something like that, right?

But what does that make of the phrase "reality based community", when cited as a proud attainment by a self-described "conservative Dem", who disassociates from and attacks the liberal/progressive/left factions within the Dem party?

[Recursion]

50. He mockingly called progressives and moderates "the reality based community"

As opposed to people like him, who are not constrained by current reality.

But what does that make of the phrase "reality based community", when cited as a proud attainment by a self-described "conservative Dem", who disassociates from and attacks the liberal/progressive/left factions within the Dem party?

I wouldn't know; perhaps you should ask the person who used it. However, Rove denigrated the reality based community and conservative dem or whoever is claiming to be a member of it, meaning he's putting himself in opposition to Rove.

[delrem]

51. Actually, Rove *defined* a so-called "reality based community",

as some kind of reactionary body.

I don't agree with Rove's definition of "reality", and I think his phrase "reality based community", which he ties to the left, is nonsense.

Apparently you're unable to question Rove's political definitions.

[Recursion]

52. No, I even linked Suskind's article above. Rove said he *wasn't* in the reality based community

and that the reality based community was for liberals and journalists like Suskind.

Here's the quote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html?ex=1255665600&en=890a96189e162076&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

The aide* said that guys like me** were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''

Rove said he was not part of the "reality-based community" and ridiculed those who are.

* This aide is widely assumed to be Rove.
** ie, Suskind

[delrem]

53. OK. We're at a wall.

You don't understand the term 'define'.

[Recursion]

54. Read the ****ing quote. I posted it for you.

Rove said Suskind was in the "reality based community"

Rove said Rove was not in the "reality based community" because he creates his own reality

It's not that difficult.

Here are the surrounding two paragraphs:

In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''

Who besides guys like me are part of the reality-based community? Many of the other elected officials in Washington, it would seem. A group of Democratic and Republican members of Congress were called in to discuss Iraq sometime before the October 2002 vote authorizing Bush to move forward. A Republican senator recently told Time Magazine that the president walked in and said: ''Look, I want your vote. I'm not going to debate it with you.'' When one of the senators began to ask a question, Bush snapped, ''Look, I'm not going to debate it with you.''

[delrem]

57. However, you are no longer responding to what I've written.

You refuse to question Rove's definition.
You refuse to look at the matter in any depth.

I find that strange.

[Recursion]

58. I don't question Rove's definition because it's correct

Rove said the reality based community believes "solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." That sounds right to me.

Rove said he does not believe solutions emerge from judicious study of discernible reality, which is why he sneers at the reality-based community.

I do believe solutions emerge from the judicious study of discernible reality. Do you? Rove does not.

If you are saying you aren't part of the reality based community, you are saying you are like Karl Rove. Are you?

[delrem]

59. Well there you go. You accept Rove's definition of political reality.

What more can I say?

[Recursion]

60. You don't think solutions emerge from the observation of reality? You think Rove is right?

That's pretty surprising.

Why on earth would you not want to be in what Rove described as "the reality-based community", the very group Rove distanced himself from because it believes in studying things as they are as a basis for action?

[delrem]

62. Sorry. I don't accept Rove's definition. That's a fucking no-brainer. nt

[Recursion]

63. Umm... you don't believe in studying reality to come up with solutions? You're like Karl Rove?

Wow.

How do you come up with solutions, if you don't base them on looking at reality?

[delrem]

64. OK. You're WAY into Rove-speak. I've got that.

You don't know what the term "reactionary" means. I've got that.

So you accept Rove's arguments. You can't "out-think" his arguments.

So you think nothing of throwing out his catch-phrases, as being somehow a bedrock of common sense.

I don't accept the defining terms of Rove's arguments. I can "out-think" his arguments.

I question what Rove means when he throws out terms.
That includes the context within which he throws them - of course.

You can't or won't engage me on that level.

[Recursion]

65. OK, fine, how would you define "reality-based community"?

I'm happy to use a different definition

Personally, if Rove defines himself outside of a group, like he did here, I'm generally confident that I want to be in that group.

Just to be clear: do you understand as a question of fact (there I go again) that Rove was saying Rove is not in the reality-based community?

I get that you disagree with Rove's definition of the reality-based community. I just wanted to make clear that you understand that Rove said he himself is not in what he defined as the "reality based community".

I personally don't see what you could possibly object to about "studying reality as it exists to find solutions", but the world is a big place, and I'm sure Karl Rove will welcome you over with him in the non-reality based community.

[delrem]

69. I told you, I reject the phrase.

It is meaningless Rove-speak.

Can't you understand english?

And now you claim I've aligned myself with Rove, in a sub-thread?
Fuck this - whoeveryouare.

[delrem]

61. Look at how my conversation has gone.

I'm unsure about what I'm encountering, upthread.

[Recursion]

66. Well, when you ally yourself with Rove like you are on a Democratic board

things often get weird.

[delrem]

67. What you say about me is a lie, pure and simple.

The fuckers!

shhhdddddr.

[Recursion]

68. You're the one who doesn't want to be in what Rove called "the reality based community"

Which means that, like Rove admits in that quote, you don't want to look at reality as it exists to find solutions.

Rove mocked people who look at reality to find solutions. Why do you think it's a bad idea to look at reality to find solutions?

[Autumn]

70. All I know is the quote came from Rove. It sure wasn't an endearment.

I have found that it's a waste of time to have a discussion with the rrt. I know conservatives can't change my mind and I have no desire to change theirs.

[delrem]

73. I likewise don't like the idea that the object of a discussion is to "change the opponent's mind".

That isn't how discussion works in a forum like this as it expects instantaneous processing, at best, and it also expects a certain receptivity that should never be assumed in a forum-level discussion with thousands of anonymous strangers.

My mind has been "changed" the most by study of texts explaining things like basic techniques of rhetoric, the importance of establishing how terms are defined, if they're going to be considered "legitimate" to all parties of a discussion. Books on the nature of addiction. Stuff like that - general, not specific to e.g. an individual political campaign.

That's why I question Rove's vocabulary. To my mind "reality based community" is a meaningless phrase. What could it mean? In fact, being Rove's phrase, it can only mean what Rove says it means, and he denigrates a purely reactionary core of opponents as being continuous behind the times, trailing his spoor, as he's busy creating the reality they're caught up in analysing and being tiresome about.

I'm paraphrasing...

An image comes to me of unravelling one of those sticky-paper fly catcher strips, of Karl Rove comparing himself to such a strip, comparing "reality" to the gluey covering. Aptly named "turd blossom" by way of endearment by the most evil US President in history.

So that's what it means to Rove, and how I envision it - a meaningless phrase thrown out by a turd blossom.

http://assets.amuniversal.com/85829c20bf6c012d63f600163e41dd5b

What could it mean to a self-styled "conservative" DUer?
In the case of the DUer recursion, that I exchanged with last night, Rove's definition gives the only possible meaning, and it must be accepted - in fact no questions regarding the meaning of political terms being bandied about are granted.

I thought that was interesting, but the exchange was far too time consuming.

[neverforget]

39. Check out his journal.

Nothing but liberal bashing.

[delrem]

56. Yes. It isn't without merit, though.

Thought is put into the writings, even though the arguments are trite right-wing memes.

[treestar]

74. that was a really bad hide

Hidden because people disagree, not because it was rude or anything.

[delrem]

76. I agree.

It was totally unfair.

I don't want people to be hidden for their political opinions, like was done in this case.
Very bad hide.

Furthermore, it doesn't allow ConservativeDemocrat to come to his own defence, or anything else, if he chose to, after the rather large sub-thread created by me that focused on his usage of political terms.

I mean - really DU. Let's allow discussions to happen.

[delrem]

13. It'd be the greatest TV of a decade.

I think Bernie could take it to the Republicans like nobody else can.

[hifiguy]

20. There would be nothing left of his opponent but a pair of smoking shoes.

Like the cop who opens the trunk in Repo Man.

[sabrina 1]

33. Lol, I think you are correct. He's beating them already without anyone hardly

knowing who he is yet, and without even getting into it with them. Once he gets past the primary it will be no contest between Bernie and any Republican they can serve up, because his positions on the issues represent a majority of the people, and they are so off the wall, they cannot defend their positions on any of the issues.

[KingCharlemagne]

42. I'd love to see Bernie go up against Santorum just for that image. Or Cruz. Fuck - nt

[hifiguy]

44. Thermonuclear obliteration.

[Mnpaul]

17. It would look like the debate with Bachmann on CNN

Bernie has the amazing ability to make them look extreme.

[hootinholler]

18. People are so astonished at this

They are doubling the crowd estimates for town halls. Meeting after meeting are moving to larger venues or opening more space to accommodate the crowds.

Is it possible that the people are waking up?

[rhett o rick]

19. k & r. Thanks for posting. nm

[Avalux]

22. That's why I like Bernie so much.

As I've been spreading word about him to friends and family, they've had the same reaction you've penned. It seemed as if a Clinton/Bush race was inevitable, but now, we have another way. I hope all of us can recognize this chance, and work together, regardless of party, to elect a man of the people.

[BeanMusical]

25. And a Kick and an R.

[fadedrose]

36. Truth is so refreshing

I'd like to see Bernie run and get in for one term healthy, stay in for the second, and if he gets old/sick, O'Malley, his Vice President can finish the term and maybe run on his own, first choice of the party, the way Vice Presidents used to - before they were put last in line....

[Orsino]

46. Politics is in part the art of concealing the truth in order to get things done.

I wonder whether Sen. Sanders is able to lie enough? And at the right time?

[JEB]

55. Our country sorely needs to listen

to the truths that Bernie is speaking.

[99Forever]

71. The truth is powerful.

I'm going to hear some Bernie truth in just a couple of hours and perhaps meet him personally.

We do deserve this.

[treestar]

75. Let's call our opinions "the Truth"

because that's so convincing.

[JDPriestly]

77. K&R.