General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI just don't understand
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by GP6971 (a host of the General Discussion forum).
I'm not American and I'm very aware that the opinions of 'outsiders' are not very often welcome, especially when the subject is political. So even though I've been politically active for many decades, it takes a 'yooge' issue to prompt me to participate in discussions that are primarily located and taking place in the U.S.
The Iraq war was one issue. The numerous, grotesque crimes of Bush / Cheney was another.
The upcoming Presidential election is the latest issue that I feel is so important that I'm going to try, as civilly and as positively as I can, to contribute to the discussion.
When the electorate of the US chose George W Bush to be President twice (I know, the Supreme Court gave him the first but it was close enough for them to pull it off, and the second one was handed to him on a plate) I couldn't understand how a large segment of the American public could ignore the stench of corruption, moral perversion and gleeful ignorance that emanated from him and his cronies.
And I do not now understand why there's any argument about who is best candidate for the Democratic party for the upcoming presidential election.
Bernie Sanders is the most honest, straightforward, clear thinking Presidential candidate that America has produced in years. When you look up integrity in the dictionary the definition is a perfect description of Bernie.
If you watch this video...
....his honesty and integrity shine out like a beacon. His policies for change are clearly stated and outlined, his strategies for achieving it are exactly what's required to bring America back from the edge of an oligarchic cliff and his ongoing political theme cries out for the American people to be actively involved in their own political destiny.
And yet, even here, at one of the hubs of Democratic activism, people are arguing as to whether or not he could win.
Believe it or not, I've seen this before, when John Kerry ran for president. False issues (in Kerry's case, 'is he elitist, was he Skull & Bones?', in Bernie's case, 'is he strong enough on guns, is he racist?' ) are promulgated as reasons for doubt by the media and (I believe) covert operatives who infiltrate all websites to divide and separate whomever they wish to defeat. In Kerry's case they succeeded.
For goodness sake DUers, don't be misled, don't be intransigent, don't be frightened. Radical change is required in the U.S. to avoid an ongoing political, environmental and economic cataclysm. Bernie Sanders is the man to lead your country away from the looming maelstrom that people like Trump and Cruz and Huckabee and Bush (!!!!!) would create.
As Bernie has repeated so many times (and everyone at this site instinctively knows to be true) no President, not Billary, not Bernie, no President can take on the power on the media, the military industrial complex, Wall St and the billionaire class without the organized, proactive, undivided, ongoing and vociferous support of the electorate at large.
All of that starts here, at Democratic Underground.
SamKnause
(14,815 posts)I just don't understand it either.
Dustlawyer
(10,538 posts)unlike any that have come before.
We are in the fight of our times! Corporations control our government NOW! Anyone who doesn't recognize this undeniable fact have been brainwashed to think there are worse things such as Social Security, Welfare, "tree huggers" and the like.
We must not give up. We must use the tools available such as the Internet, phones, voter registration, door knocking....
world wide wally
(21,836 posts)As you have noticed.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)it is Bernie-positive ... 85% self-identify as Bernie supporters.
However, if your post had been HRC-positive ... your "outsider" status would be an opinion disqualifying issue.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)"your "outsider" status would be an opinion disqualifying issue."
Nonsense. That would only happen if he had championed some unestablished notion....like "she's the only one who can win" or "She is the most qualified candidate ever" (or even "However, if your post had been HRC-positive ... your "outsider" status would be an opinion disqualifying issue."
.... and then it would have been the bogus claim, not the outsider thing, that made it questionable.
For most DU-ers. A small minority might have gone "outsider" on you.
For instance.... see post #11. I wonder who they think should win....
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)own sphere of existence while simultaneously thinking, individually, that they're smart and hip to what's going on. Most will believe anything they're told because, even though they're carrying around the combined knowledge and wisdom of the greater human race right in their hand every moment, they are too goddamned lazy and they refuse to learn anything or investigate anything because it would get in the way of their own ideas and their ball games.
Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)And you're right: They don't seem to delve into anything deeper than the surface talking points, except sports; wherein they display remarkable critical thinking that was heretofore dormant.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Where exactly do you reside again
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)I agree with you. Where are you from? Just curious.
Gamecock Lefty
(708 posts)Non-Americans don't get to decide our elections!
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Rupert Murdoch does.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,315 posts)surrealAmerican
(11,790 posts)... and even among those who do, are seriously lacking in any information on which to base their votes.
People voted for Bush because he "seemed like someone you could drink a beer with". That's not even close to a good reason, and probably not true anyway.
We feel like we can't trust most of our citizens to make informed decisions, because they have failed to do so in the past.
jalan48
(14,914 posts)We have been playing 'defensive politics' for decades. That means acting and voting conservatively, trying to hang on to what we have. Because of this approach we have drifted more and more to the right. Change won't come until the vast majority of Americans have nothing to lose.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)So they vote for the person they've seen before and know their name. That seems to be Clinton's biggest asset.
jalan48
(14,914 posts)YabaDabaNoDinoNo
(460 posts)AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)LibDemAlways
(15,139 posts)keep people as uninformed and distracted as possible. They are masterful at it and it shows. The US has become, to a frightening extent, a nation of dumbasses.
MissDeeds
(7,499 posts)I agree completely.
K&R
glinda
(14,807 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)And I'm just as perplexed as you.
Though, I will say I believe the second Bush election was also stolen
EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)EndElectoral
(4,213 posts)frizzled
(509 posts)who to vote for.
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)We have priorities.
and when someone pronounces a qualified candidate "unelectable", I make a note that the person making said pronouncement is "questionable" as to their actual motives.
yardwork
(69,088 posts)This forum is for General Discussion of issues outside the primaries. Please restart your thread in GD-P.
SleeplessinSoCal
(10,378 posts)They are the voters who turn out in the midterms. They are conservative by-in-large. And Dems need their votes to win.
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)They overly identify with corrupt political parties and religious dogma....They become easy prey for shrewd politicians who are highly paid to act as if they'll govern with their best interests in mind while handing out favors to the corporations and Wall Street banks who pay for their campaigns and hire them as consultants when the "retire".
They never seem to notice that most of the people they elect become multi millionaires while they work longer hours for less money..
Blue_Adept
(6,499 posts)Which is why it's all pointless in the end without a working, functional congress. And we won't have that. Doesn't matter who's at the top, they won't be doing anything revolutionary.
A whole lot of the vibe this place gives off is the same as those that were seeing Obama as a transformational candidate/president. It didn't happen. It won't happen here with Bernie either.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)We should just throw a dart to decide for whom to vote for president?
Defeatist much? The President has only been immaterial since the GOP elected "PR" presidents....and the DNC followed suit. The prez does do other things besides work (or not) with Congress.
Blue_Adept
(6,499 posts)We need equal or more focus on state level offices, governorships and congress. This mentality of all or nothing with the presidential level is what keeps us being self-defeating. We don't look beyond it for the most part.
And yes, defeatist quite a lot to be honest. This place is an utter drag on morale in general and having watched 40 years of politics now and the way it's unfolded, I'm just quietly waiting for the real death gasps of the empire.
LannyDeVaney
(1,033 posts)"Radical change is required in the U.S. to avoid an ongoing political, environmental and economic cataclysm."
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)GOP her enemy and indicating that she will fight hard against them. What do folks really want...besides just not wanting Hillary to win?
If we can't pull together we will be pulled apart...and the GOP wins. We can be FOR either Bernie or Hillary without being AGAINST either.
GP6971
(37,773 posts)Please repost in GDP
