Why Sanders' praise of Trump over TPP is so dangerous

[BainsBane]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/01/23/sanders-praises-trump-for-nixing-tpp-delighted-to-work-with-him-on-pro-worker-policies/?utm_term=.5508e29a589a

Progressives oppose TPP because they see it as destructive to American jobs. Trump seized on that point during the campaign to make political leverage for himself. Opposition to TPP from Bernie Sanders and progressives was a principled stand in defense of the livelihood of American workers. But to assume Trump's opposition to TPP comes from the same place is badly mistaken. In the same speeches in which Trump denounced TPP, he talked about how the US had too many regulations on business, that corporations left the US to go to countries where taxes and regulations (including environmental and worker protections) were more favorable. Trump's opposition to TPP is not that it deprives American workers of good jobs but that it regulates too much.

Bernie's statement is dangerous because it assumes that opposition to TPP is in and of itself pro-worker. But different groups opposed TPP for different reasons, and Trump's opposition is that the treaty imposed regulations on business that he thinks are illegitimate. Now that Bernie has praised Trump's executive order ending negotiations on TPP, some of his supporters are convinced that Trump's actions are in the interest of workers. I saw responses to that effect in a thread in LBN.

Yet on the very day that Trump signed that executive order, he also announced to corporate America that he would undo 75% of regulations on them, and those regulations include worker and environmental protections.

Put your admiration (or dislike) for Bernie aside for the moment. Ask yourselves if you really believe that Trump is acting in the interest of American workers. Look at his cabinet appointments and his positions on taxes, abolishing the minimum wage, raising interest rates on FHA mortgages.

Don't let anyone lull you into complacency toward Trump and his unequivocally pro-Trump (which means pro-capital) agenda. He isn't in office to make US workers' lives better. He's there for himself and the Kremlin. There isn't a pro-worker bone in his body. Don't ever forget that.

[KPN]

1. Meh.

[BainsBane]

3. Ending the minimum wage

Meh. Ending rights to unionization. Meh. Whatever happened to principle?

[Eleanors38]

63. Saw a lotta Chuck Schumer "willing to cooperate with tRump" talk on PBS last night.

[BainsBane]

84. Are you comparing Bernie to Schumer?

As though that's a good thing?

[Eleanors38]

86. Just noting the similar "concilliatory" approach. Guess you missed it. Oh, are primaries over?

[emulatorloo]

88. Funny, WAPO article doesn't mention the primary

[Eleanors38]

89. Doesn't have to -- it never dies in DU!

[BainsBane]

108. I'm trying to figure out the standard

If you're conceding that Bernie is part of the establishment, so be it.

[Eleanors38]

110. Actually, the corporate Party structure is clumsily playing catch up...

to the reality of how the Party must overhaul itself, as Sanders suggested. Playing "I won't never deal with tRump on nothin'" won't play. And there is no political upside, either.

Since you seem up on it, how long have you been part of the establishment? Sounds like a very long time.

[BainsBane]

111. Let me understand

Being non-corporatist means supporting Trump? Whereas opposition to a billionaire and his cabinet of billionaires is somehow corporatist?

And what makes me establishment? Not being a billionaire? Or is it my refusal to value profits for the gun industry over human life? Or is it my audacity in not being born into the white male bourgoisie?

[Eleanors38]

123. In order: No, No, a question to you, therefore all other questions invalid. Understand?

Maybe a fourth coming forth?

[BainsBane]

125. Why did you ask the question?

You assumed that I was the establishment. Why would you make such a claim?

[MineralMan]

2. Sanders and Trump have very different reasons for opposing TPP.

In any case, it was already a dead duck, I think, whatever the reasons for opposing it.

[Phoenix61]

4. Why would he care about workers

He's never been one. His children have never been one.

[BainsBane]

12. Exactly.

[KittyWampus]

34. Thank You Furthermore, this ultimately strengthens China. To Putin's delight.

[Gothmog]

67. So Trump and Sanders want to make China stronger

I am amused that trump and Sanders agree that China needs to be stronger http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/23/politics/trump-tpp-things-to-know/index.html

But already, Chinese leaders are angling to take the United States' place and expand the country's influence in the region.

"We must remain committed to promoting free trade and investment through opening up and say no to protectionism," Chinese President Xi Jinping said in a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week.

Obama had pitched the TPP as a way to counter China's growing influence by imposing US-backed labor, environmental and patent protections. China is unlikely to seek or support such protections in its own trade negotiations -- allowing those countries to produce cheaper goods, but with fewer worker protections.

The 11 remaining TPP nations are now set to regroup. Trade ministers from those nations say they intend to press forward with the deal -- but the United States' withdrawal could mean a major rewrite, or an opening for another global superpower to pursue an alternative agreemen

Sanders and Trump agree that China needs to be stronger.

[appal_jack]

142. Nonsense. Bill Clinton strengthened China.

Remember granting China Most Favored Nation Status? Yeah, that sure showed them!

Too many on this thread have not read Bernie's statement in full (oddly absent from the linked article that ostensibly covers it). Here it is:

Millions of workers and their unions fought long and hard to defeat the TPP and I am glad that it is dead and gone. For the last 30 years, we have had a series of trade deals – including the North American Free Trade Agreement, permanent normal trade relations with China and others – which have cost us millions of decent-paying jobs and caused a "race to the bottom" which has lowered wages for American workers. If President Trump is seriously opposed to outsourcing, however, he must do more than sign an executive order ending our participation in the TPP. He can lead by example by shutting down his own sweatshops in Bangladesh, China, and Mexico and bring those jobs back to America. Then, he can work with Congress to write a trade policy that works for American workers, and not just the CEOs of large, multi-national corporations.

-Bernie Sanders

That's playing smart, and using Trump's own words to throw the gauntlet down against him.

-app

[bdamomma]

96. of course not

this regime is not worried about the American people, we should tell our senators that.
I

[JHan]

5. sigh.

That's all I've got - a tired sigh.

[Hoyt]

6. Either way, we'll be sorry we reneged on the TPP.

[Hekate]

35. Yes, we will. It was designed to rein in China, among other things. Obama will be proven right....

....people will suffer not knowing why they suffer, and Obama will be blamed.

Just another "if only" in Barack Obama's legacy.

[zipplewrath]

41. No, he won't

Your assertion is based upon the assumption that China can, and will, negotiate deals that will be effective. They aren't willing to have the kinds of allowances inside their markets that they will ask for in others. If they can find countries that are willing to be "bought", they'll do okay. But other markets will negotiate far more effectively. China is going to have to be willing to give the kinds of access to their economies that they have never shown a willingness to do, not to mention assure the kinds of protections that investors and IP holders will demand.

We already trade with the countries involved, as well as China. There is nothing to prevent us in the future from negotiating more individual deals with them to gain the critical features we are looking for. Obama tried to go big and over reached. It doesn't mean that a future president (probably not this one) can't and won't try to negotiate more compact deals which will achieve much of the same outcome.

[etherealtruth]

39. Agreed :-(

[DanTex]

47. That's arguable. There were some legitimately bad things about TPP.

Problem is, the actual problems with TPP weren't what Trump was attacking it for, and for that matter, neither was Bernie. The big lie, from both, is that TPP was going to be a "job killer".

The main benefit of TPP was expansion of US economic and geopolitical influence in Asia. This is good not just for the US, but also for Asia, because the other alternative is is that the region comes to be dominated by China, which has much less regard for labor and human rights than we do.

But there were downsides. The excessive corporate power in ISDS was a legitimate concern, though overblown by a lot of commentators. Another issue was the IP provisions, but from the "only America matters" perspective that a lot of anti-trade people adopt, this wouldn't actually be relevant, because the victims would be poor people in foreign countries that would have to pay higher prices for prescription drugs.

I think both the pro- and anti- sides of TPP can be credibly argued. The question is whether the geopolitical effects and the economic benefits from trade barrier reductions (which weren't very big, since tariffs with most TPP countries are already low) outweigh the downsides.

It's a close call IMO.

[elmac]

51. well, those who voted for sniffles will be sorry

as for me, an economic collapse under a con administration is worth the pain. Watching Rome burn, just stock up on the popcorn and a good wine.

[Hoyt]

52. Yeah, like an economic collapse would get us healthcare, welfare, jobs, etc. I don't think we'd

come out well in that event, and the poor would be hurt worse than anyone.

[BainsBane]

58. No, it is not worth it

Not for the people who can't afford wine and popcorn.

[brer cat]

65. You would be ok so screw everyone else?

Is that what I just read? The folks who can't afford popcorn or good wine feel differently.

[Hekate]

72. That's abhorrent

[hollowdweller]

128. Absolutely. Look how much it helped us win in 2016

[George II]

8. I think many have.

[BainsBane]

9. That won't help the party's electoral prospects

in future elections.

[NurseJackie]

11. I wonder if that's actually the objective.

[BainsBane]

15. It is mine

I don't want the GOP to control everything, and I want Trump gone.

[Gothmog]

68. We need to oppose Trump as much as possible

[hollowdweller]

129. Nope

We need to get out ahead of him on pro worker policies and show him to be a hypocrite. Not oppose him on things that he SAYS he will do that are popular to the working class.

[Cary]

17. I'd like to see some objective studies on that.

I would not be the least bit surprised if we wouldn't ultimately be better off without erstwhile allies like Susan Sarandon. I don't think their vote amounts to squat. I don't have numbers for that, but I just don't believe it.

Old Susan found a way to get attention by glomming onto "conservative" lies and smears and I think she helped sow discord and discontent. I'd love to see her work her magic for "conservatives."

[BainsBane]

19. Sarandon's a lost cause

but that doesn't apply to all of them.

[Cary]

21. I think we're arguing semantics

I'm talking about the people we can trash here, without fear of getting hidden. Let them go to Trump.

I don't think any sane, reasonable human being would follow.

[BainsBane]

22. The problem is

Last edited Tue Jan 24, 2017, 01:00 PM - Edit history (1)

Bernie's statement has influence beyond that small group. Perhaps he's trying to rope-a-dope Trump, but at least some of his supporters are taking the comments seriously.

[Cary]

27. Clearly Sanders didn't help

However the GOP stole this election with voter suppression, including crosscheck. So I'm not real concerned, personally, about people who are going to cut off their nose to spite their face. Anyone who is impervious to reason is not a good investment.

[Gothmog]

154. I agree with that analysis

[Gothmog]

73. Sarandon also supported Nader who gave us Bush

She is a lost cause

[TexasBushwhacker]

71. I really don't think Sarandon has much influence

The peak of her career was over 20 years ago.

[BainsBane]

75. I think that's probably true

She did manage to ruin one of my favorite movies, "Thelma and Louise", for me though.

[TexasBushwhacker]

76. How did she ruin it?

Just curious.

[BainsBane]

78. Her comments

about Trump being preferable to Clinton and then in the primary her insult about "vagina voters." Her rudeness to Dolores Huerta didn't help either.

[TexasBushwhacker]

130. My bad. I thought she done something in the movie. N/t

[Gothmog]

155. She is treated like a goddess on JPR

[KPN]

13. Radical left?

Who do you refer to?

[Eleanors38]

64. For Beltway Dems, anyone to the left of DDE.

Last edited Tue Jan 24, 2017, 05:45 PM - Edit history (1)

Good to see the primary elections are continuing.

[Cha]

10. It was already dead.. there was no reason to "praise trump" and

normalize him.. no reason that I can tell. why praise that lying "America First", taking pages from the Nazis, asshole?

[zipplewrath]

46. Yes there was

I'd hardly call it "praise", but I agree with Fairwinds that we don't want to concede this and related issues to Trump. The democrats have been working this issue for years, and are largely responsible for the TPP's demise, and they should continue to fight to own this issue.

[BainsBane]

60. How does this constitute not conceding the issue to Trump?

It gives him credit. That's the opposite of what you claim.

[zipplewrath]

146. No, it agrees with him

It means a broken clock is right twice a day, that's hardly praising him or giving him credit.

[Cha]

143. No there wasn't.

[Gothmog]

156. Sanders thinks that he can get on trump's good side

After all trump quoted sanders extensively

[Cha]

158. So clueless..

They can't deal in reality and they're not fit to run a country.. and, tweety is normalizing kac. Gac!

Link to tweet

[bigtree]

14. completely agree

...very well said.

k&r

[Blue_Tires]

20. thanks for this...

I had said as much yesterday...

[BainsBane]

23. I missed that

Glad you agree.

[Cryptoad]

24. Sorry to say but,,,

when u get as old as he is, u starting losing ur capacity for complex thoughts.... it happens to all of us.

[BainsBane]

26. I can definitely feel that my brain operates less quickly

and I'm about 20 years younger than he is.

[Cryptoad]

36. Im a 6 yrs younger than him,,,,,

Me and all my old geezer friends can testify, too. They told me it would be like "this" but you really can't understand "this" until u are there.

[FairWinds]

25. Resectfully disagree Mr. BainsBane . .

First, why would we want to take Dem Party advice from the
Bezos owned WaPo?

Second, it was Dem Third Way globalism that cost them the
election and put Trump in the White House.

Bernie gets that trade deals are fine, but only if they respect
labor rights and the environment, do not use ISDS, are not
drafted in secret, and do not enrich big pharma or copyright
holders.

[BainsBane]

28. Please read my post

because you missed the point. It is not about whether TPP is bad but whether Trump is pro-worker.

[FairWinds]

31. Of course Trump is not pro-worker . .

but my point, not very clearly articulated, is that it
would be really bad strategy for the Dems to cede the
trade issue to Trump.

And note that Bernie said quite clearly that he would
work with Trump ONLY IF the deals were pro-worker: "If
President Trump is serious about a new policy to help American
workers, then I would be delighted to work with him.”

And why focus just on Sanders? He was joined by Senators
Baldwin, Casey and others.

Thanks for keeping this civil . .

[pnwmom]

56. Bernie used the term "pro-worker," saying that he'd be

"delighted" to work with DT on "pro-worker" policies. That gives DT the benefit of the doubt, which is completely unrealistic and feeds into normalizing DT. Nothing he will do will be pro-worker.

[BainsBane]

62. Exactly.

And some of his supporters took it at face value.

[scipan]

133. No. Just no. Your reading of Bernie's words is wrong.

n/t

[pnwmom]

139. No, it is the only correct one. This is what he said:

"If President Trump is serious about a new policy to help American workers, then I would be delighted to work with him.”

It is wrong to suggest there is even a possibility that DT will support new policies to help American workers. Bernie gives DT far too much credit.

The policies DT intends to put into place will be far worse than the TPP he has just cancelled. Eventually all progressives will understand this, even Bernie.

[Gothmog]

70. Sanders is helping to normalize and promote Trump

[Cary]

32. "...it was Dem Third Way globalism that cost them the election..."

Really?

3.5 million ballots were stricken by crosscheck, and you're trotting out this tired bromide?

3.5 million ballots were stricken and probably more than that were stolen by Republican voter suppression. I bet there's not more than a million people who even know what you're talking about.

[FairWinds]

147. Here is a very good discussion of why trade was . .

an important issue in 2016 (from 538) - I do not agree with all of it,

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-consequences-how-trade-became-a-major-issue-in-2016/

And jeez dude, why do you think Obama campaigned against NAFTA in 2008?

[Cary]

148. You didn't respond to my post.

Dude.

[FairWinds]

159. Your post was a deflection from the topic . .

which is trade.

Dude.

[Cary]

160. You admit that you didn't respond to my post

Dude.

[BainsBane]

48. Because the headline is about Sanders

and people here hang on his every word in a way they don't for other senators. Your own initial response was to go into an off-topic rant about the Washington Post and the Third Way, when the point was to not be fooled by Trump's bullshit just because Bernie spoke out in support of the executive order.

[pnwmom]

59. The WA Post had much of the best investigative reporting during the election.

And this piece contains useful analysis. DT's reasons for opposing the TPP and Bernie's are not in alignment and Bernie should be careful of statements appearing to claim that they are. It normalizes DT and helps to disguise the real purpose behind his canceling the TPP. He doesn't want something better -- he wants something WORSE.

[Uponthegears]

79. I don't normally compliment posters instead of just their ideas

But please allow me to compliment the constructive nature of this post.

[pnwmom]

81. Thank you, Uponthegears.

It's a difficult discussion and I appreciate your kind words.

[retrowire]

29. Bernie supporter here.

Trump does not have me fooled. No worries.

[BainsBane]

30. Great!

[Hekate]

33. KnR. I hope the majority of Dems can come together on the issue of understanding Trump

In my mind, we have enough information to say the essentials are:

The man is insane, probably certifiably. Everything he says and does flows from his disordered brain's craving for constant attention to him and him alone. He will sign anything put in front of him by his handlers, who are counting on being able to control him just long enough to do major damage to our country.

And he lies. He lies with every breath. Every Dem and Dem ally should understand that, and that he will do nothing that will help the workers, ever. No Dem should help him, ever.

How could Bernie have done this to us? It makes no sense to me.

[NewJeffCT]

49. One of those few times I've agreed with Charles Krauthammer

but, he summed up Trump perfectly here:

"This is beyond narcissism. I used to think Trump was an 11-year-old, an undeveloped schoolyard bully. I was off by about 10 years. His needs are more primitive, an infantile hunger for approval and praise, a craving that can never be satisfied. He lives in a cocoon of solipsism where the world outside himself has value — indeed exists — only insofar as it sustains and inflates him."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-and-the-fitness-threshold/2016/08/04/b06bae34-5a69-11e6-831d-0324760ca856_story.html?utm_term=.7755dfdf7d98

Oh, Trump responded by calling Krauthammer a loser that nobody reads, or something like that.

[Hekate]

74. Krauthammer said it perfectly, didn't he? The Conservative intelligentsia jumped ship....

....even before election day, as did thoughtful patriots like Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace, but they are outnumbered by H.L. Mencken's utter morons who want a big bully they can get behind because they think he will beat up on all the people they ever resented.

[Raster]

37. Get over Bernie Sanders...

...there is a small minority here on DU that is still butt hurt over the primaries. It used to be mildly amusing watching said persons twist and contort to crap Senator Sanders way whenever they saw the slightest, smallest opening. Like I said, USED TO BE MILDLY AMUSING.

Let's take a look at really what Senators Sanders said:

“I am glad the Trans-Pacific Partnership is dead and gone,” Sanders said. “For the last 30 years, we have had a series of trade deals — including the North American Free Trade Agreement, permanent normal trade relations with China and others — which have cost us millions of decent-paying jobs and caused a ‘race to the bottom’ which has lowered wages for American workers. Now is the time to develop a new trade policy that helps working families, not just multinational corporations. If President Trump is serious about a new policy to help American workers, then I would be delighted to work with him.”

And that's it. And he wasn't the only Democrat or Democrat ally to express that opinion. I see your post doesn't mention Casey, Baldwin or others who echoed the same sentiments. Of course it doesn't. No anti-Bernie mileage out of that.

AND OF COURSE tRump is NOT acting in the interests of the American worker. OF COURSE NOT. None of us are fooled. We didn't vote for the Orange Cretin, WE DON'T SUPPORT THE ORANGE CRETIN or his policies or his appointees, OR ANYTHING TRUMP.

[Mr. Evil]

38. My sentiments exactly.

Continuing to bash Bernie is not going to solve any of our present problems. Republicans were only against the TPP (publicly) simply because President Obama was for it.

[BainsBane]

44. Can we get past the point

Where any disagreement is condemned as bashing? This is about the issue, but unfortunately the determination that anything Bernie says or does must be right is keeping people from seeing the problem.

[kcr]

85. Not only that, but this is discussion of current events.

Any criticism of Bernie's current actions having nothing to do with the past campaign and you get The primaries are over! How does that work? The primaries somehow inoculated him from criticism indefinitely?

[BainsBane]

94. It is precisely that reaction

Which highlights why Sanders statement is so problematic. If his words were taken like those of any other politician, it wouldn't matter as much that he made a favorable statement about Trump. But many of his supporters take everything he says uncritically. Their inability to criticize him or tolerate any criticism means he carries a greater responsibility when he speaks. It is they who have imposed that burden on Sanders by treating him as infallible.

[LisaM]

132. Exactly!

The primaries are long over, and this is clearly a discussion on current events.

[dgauss]

40. Thank you.

[BainsBane]

42. Sadly some are fooled

Some of the responses in the LBN thread show as much.

I also have trouble understanding how he could even imagine Trump might promote pro-worker policies. I think the problem is confusing opposition to TPP with pro-worker, as though they were the same. It is of course possible to oppose TPP from a pro-worker position, but it is also possible to oppose it from a pro-capital position. Trump does the latter.

[JCanete]

120. really? fooled about what exactly? Can you go into detail here, as in specific posts? nt

[BainsBane]

124. Go to the locked thread in LBN

The last response was at 9:14 AM. Read the responses there about Trump's actions as pro-worker.

[mcar]

43. K&R

Bernie made a big mistake here.

[SidDithers]

45. I'm delighted to rec this post...nt

Sid

[Snotcicles]

50. I don't read any praise of Trump in this statement.

“I am glad the Trans-Pacific Partnership is dead and gone,” Sanders said. “For the last 30 years, we have had a series of trade deals — including the North American Free Trade Agreement, permanent normal trade relations with China and others — which have cost us millions of decent-paying jobs and caused a ‘race to the bottom’ which has lowered wages for American workers. Now is the time to develop a new trade policy that helps working families, not just multinational corporations. If President Trump is serious about a new policy to help American workers, then I would be delighted to work with him.”

[BainsBane]

55. The problem is how some of his supporters are interpreting the statement

And you're right that it may not qualify as praise for Trump, but it is supportive of his EO. I think Bernie is mistaken to make any statement in support of Trump's actions, particularly when Bernie's supporters take his words uncritically. Some were in LBN insisting Trump's position was pro-worker, that to be critical was to oppose workers rights.

The problem with the statement above is that it presents Trump as potentially acting in the interests of workers.

"Now is the time to develop a new trade policy that helps working families, not just multinational corporations. If President Trump is serious about a new policy to help American workers, then I would be delighted to work with him.”

Trump has never shown an inclination to do anything of the sort. Now is not the time to build a policy that helps working families because the GOP controls the presidency and congress. Neither they nor Trump have ever supported pro-worker policies. The EO on TPP doesn't change that. To assume opposition to TPP is in and of itself pro-worker is a grave mistake too many are making.

[rwsanders]

54. I think the idea is to play to Trump's need for approval...

I think Sanders sees that our best hope of getting through the next 4 years is for Trump to view popular approval and his "legacy" as more important than the words of the sycophants he surrounds himself with. Trying to guide a temperamental child.
I don't think Sanders is fooled for a minute, but hopes that popular appeal will moderate the worst of the abuses.

[BainsBane]

57. It may be an effort at rope-a-dope

My concern is that some of his supporters have taken it literally.

[R B Garr]

61. I've always wondered why Bernie was never forthcoming

about the spirit of the trade deals and the good faith ideas that Democrats put into them instead of his myopic demonizing. Now it's becoming apparent he really doesn't understand it in depth enough, but he exploits it anyway as a hot button issue. His context free demonizing has cost us all. His most current statement shows this again. That was a very damaging thing to legitimize Trump.

[JHan]

69. what frustrates me , and I am very pro-trade, is that it lets corporations off the hook..

He doesn't realise it, but blaming NAFTA and TPP and the trade deals ignores the fact that we squandered much of the growth globalisation afforded us - The problem was never globalisation, or the trade deals themselves, but us not taking the opportunity to reinvest those profits in communities that were suffering by investing in people and "the commons". So binary thinking makes him believe that opposition to TPP is, by default, a good thing even though Trump's policies are regressive and Dickensian.

EDIT: - He doesn't need to "wait and see" if Trump is serious about workers, we already know Trump doesn't care - his cabinet picks and "policy" positions tell us that already.

[Gothmog]

66. Great article

[Goblinmonger]

77. So Sanders should support the TPP

because Trump is against it for the wrong reasons?

That is, frankly, fucking insane.

[BainsBane]

82. If you want to know my point

read my OP, not just the subject heading.

[dgauss]

80. Sanders is pragmatic. He believes in getting things done.

That used to be a positive thing.

[BainsBane]

83. Interesting

Since pragmatism was roundly denounced just a few months ago.

[dgauss]

87. True, but the range of options was a little different at that time.

I think going into it further would be post mortem territory so I'll drop it.

But what Sanders is doing now is pragmatism and the other option is rejecting something most people here want.

The argument, I think, is not so much that he is willing work with Trump towards something Democrats want, but how he said it, that he is "normalizing" Trump and that just seems like nonsense. It seems like personal resentment against Sanders and that is counter productive.

What if Sanders had said:

"If President Trump is serious about a new policy to help American workers, then I would work with him."

Instead of

"If President Trump is serious about a new policy to help American workers, then I would be delighted to work with him."

Would the first be ok but the second is "normalizing" him? The first pragmatic but the second is dangerously fooling people into thinking Trump is a good guy?

Sorry but it's nonsense.

[BainsBane]

91. Why posit the question at all?

When it's obvious Trump is not remotely concerned with pro-worker policy? If he were, why would he propose abolishing the minimum wage and appoint the cabinet he has? His Secretary of Labor is a fast food tycoon who has repeatedly violated labor law.

Why give his supporters the impression that a pro-worker policy would even be possible from Trump?

[emulatorloo]

93. Basically it is a "gaffe." Bernie's human. He makes mistakes like all of us do.

It isn't the first gaffe he's made, won't be the last. He should have said it differently.

You did a good job explaining what he should have said. I think the Senator should hire you!

[mcar]

119. Hmmm. When HRC proposed a $12 min wage

as a pragmatic starting point, she and her supporters were roundly criticized by some on this board.

[Omaha Steve]

90. What about the other D US Senators that agree with Bernie on this?

He is not alone.

[BainsBane]

92. The other Senators don't lead the headlines

and their words aren't met uncritically as Sanders are. That is the problem. We already have people insisting Trump's actions were pro-worker because of Bernie's statement.

[Omaha Steve]

97. DU 12-1-16 by kpete: Bernie Sanders: Trump Got Duped On Carrier Deal

Kpete's OP: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028321647


Sanders didn't praise Trump. Need I say more?

From your link: Most Democrats in Congress opposed the TPP, putting them at odds with the Obama administration.

And on Monday, Democrats who, like Sanders, had campaigned against Trump, joined him in saluting the executive order.

“I support President Trump’s issuing of an executive orders that will pull the U.S. out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and his recent steps to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA),” Sen. Robert P. Casey Jr. (D-Pa.) said in a statement. “NAFTA has adversely impacted middle class families in Pennsylvania and the TPP would have cost jobs and hurt income growth, which is why I voted against fast tracking the deal in 2015.”

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) shared a similar reaction on Twitter:

Withdrawing from #TPP & moving to renegotiate #NAFTA are good 1st steps from @POTUS, but more must be done to keep his word to WI workers.

Other forces on the left have gone further, asking that they, not Trump, get the credit for the turn against the TPP — and pointing out that by the end, it was Republicans in Congress who wanted it passed. In a statement Monday, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said that “a powerful coalition of labor, environmental, consumer, public health and allied groups came together to stop the TPP,” giving little credit to Trump.

[R B Garr]

99. lol, the concern for who gets the credit for going

against the TPP looks to be the goal, as it says right there in the article. Sanders was concerned about who would get the credit.

[Omaha Steve]

100. LOL

It is the WP!

[BainsBane]

102. A highly respected newspaper

If that wasn't the concern, why did Sanders say anything? What purpose did his remarks serve?

[Omaha Steve]

103. The same as the other US Senators against TPP that commented

[BainsBane]

112. Which is?

[R B Garr]

104. Quotes from Bernie also in the article. Lots of praise

for Donald. Looks like some praising Donald are wanting to make sure they get credit.

And we have to reference current news so as not to be accused of fighting the primaries. So the article was referenced, along with Bernie praising Donald -- on an issue that was already dead months ago. I. e., taking credit.

[Omaha Steve]

105. Bernie was against TPP from day one

A lot of D's can't say that.

[R B Garr]

106. So he's praising Donald as a way to draw attention

to himself. He wants the credit and is praising Trump as a way to put his name out there. The end result is that it legitimized Trump.

[Omaha Steve]

107. Move On

Again from the OP link: And on Monday, Democrats who, like Sanders, had campaigned against Trump, joined him in saluting the executive order.

[BainsBane]

113. The difference is

The statements of those other politicians are not treated as infallible. It is the inability of people like you to concede, or even contemplate the possibility, that Bernie may have made a mistake that makes his words more consequential. If his supporters thought critically about his statements rather than insisting Bernie was always right, then he could be treated as any other politician, sometimes right and sometimes wrong. As it stands now, he's convinced some that Trump is acting in the interests of workers, and that is dangerous.

[Omaha Steve]

121. Just who did he convince?

Inquiring minds and all....

[BainsBane]

127. Go to the locked thread in LBN

With the last post at 9:14 am. Read the responses to that OP.

[R B Garr]

134. You should take your own advice.

How ridiculous to insist Sanders is exempt from criticism when his actions legitimize a mad man, all so he can claim credit for an already dead issue.

And if only Bernie gave as much accurate info on Clinton's true positions as he does in claiming credit for himself, but that doesn't seem to be in the cards.

[Omaha Steve]

136. "actions legitimize a mad man"

Actions speak louder than words!

Last Friday: Trump shakes hands with Clinton at inaugural luncheon

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/315302-trump-shakes-hands-with-clinton-at-inaugural-luncheon

BY PAULINA FIROZI - 01/20/17 01:50 PM EST

President Trump shook hands with Hillary Clinton, his former presidential rival, at the inaugural luncheon at the Capitol shortly after Trump's inauguration Friday.

Video from the luncheon shows Trump taking Clinton's hand and whispering "thank you for being here, thank you" to Clinton, as first lady Melania Trump and former president Bill Clinton stand nearby.

Trump did not mention Hillary Clinton, who was at the Capitol for the inauguration ceremonies, during his inaugural address.

He did mention former President Bill Clinton to open his speech, as he thanked a list of former presidents in attendance at his swearing-in.

[R B Garr]

141. Bernie was there, too! LOL,

For a so-called anti- establishment fellow, that sure is a lot of Establishment for Bernie to associate with. Looks like his decades-long career as an elected politician makes him quite the insider after all.

And how typical to throw some unrelated and meaningless Clinton sighting in to avert attention, lol! Bernie is the politician being discussed, and he is the one who was praising Donald so he can claim credit about the TPP. Corporations!

[BainsBane]

101. He spoke to the possibility of Trump implementing

Pro-worker policies, which is never going to happen.

[Omaha Steve]

109. Like the union men & women that will now build some pipelines or infrastructure?

http://www.liuna.org/Keystone-XL-Pipeline


Spotlight on the Keystone XL Pipeline

The TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline is a major pipeline project that will run from Canada to Texas bringing oil to the US. Construction of the pipeline will help reduce our dependence on Mideast oil and create good union construction jobs. LIUNA members and other skilled building trades workers have already been enlisted to complete the project.

However, the project is currently in limbo pending the results of administrative reviews. Pipelines like Keystone have operated successfully for decades and are the safest, most reliable way to transport crude oil. The proposed TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline would be a secure energy lifeline for America.

It will unlock good, family-supporting jobs for America at a time when families are losing their homes and desperately need good jobs.

The reasonable thing is to build the pipeline, create jobs here and reduce our dependence on oil from hostile regimes, instead of caving to fringe extremists and seeing that oil go to China.

[BainsBane]

115. So now you're suddenly pro-pipeline?

When did that happen?

[Omaha Steve]

118. I'm not, I'm pointing out 2 sides to a story (labor is split on it)

You seem 1 sided and stuck on taking shots a new leader in the party while ignoring others doing the same thing.

[BainsBane]

126. "New leader"?

How is he new? He's been in congress for thirty years.

I've explained why him multiple times now. Rather than engaging with my point, you continue to provide evidence supporting it.

[Omaha Steve]

137. New as of 11-16-16

It was in the WP you support: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/11/16/schumer-elected-senate-democratic-leader/

Schumer is next top Senate Democrat, adds Sanders to leadership ranks

By Ed O'Keefe and Mike DeBonis November 16, 2016

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) was elected as the next leader of Senate Democrats on Wednesday, establishing him as one of his party’s most senior officials in Washington and Democrats’ primary partisan counterweight to a Trump administration.

Schumer promised a “bigger, bolder, sharper-edged economic message” in his first remarks after his election and said Democrats would remain focused on the middle class “and those struggling to join it.”

“We heard the American people loud and clear,” he said. “They felt that the government wasn’t working for them. They felt that the economy was rigged against them in many places and that the government was too beholden to big money and special interests.”

In a gesture to his party’s progressive wing, Schumer added Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to a junior role in his newly expanded leadership team.


I can't play anymore. I'm enjoying my retirement headed to a movie.

OS

[emulatorloo]

95. He's the new head of Democratic Outreach. So he's very visible.

IMHO it is just what we call a "gaffe".

He didn't articulate what he meant very well.

[Omaha Steve]

98. See below

[frankieallen]

114. TPP sucked, I don't care what his fuckin reason is, I agree with Bernie on this.

[BainsBane]

116. Is it too much?

To read an OP before responding?

[Jamaal510]

122. K&R

[HassleCat]

131. So Sanders should have told Trump to support TPP.

Last edited Tue Jan 24, 2017, 07:59 PM - Edit history (1)

Can't have it both ways.

[BainsBane]

135. ?

Why did he need to say anything about it?

[uponit7771]

140. No, just no praised him ... its that simple ... Benedict Donald doesn't get any praise for anything

[Cha]

144. Thank you for stopping the deflection.

[betsuni]

138. K&R

[Cha]

145. Christianne Amanpour..

Link to tweet

[aikoaiko]

149. This is not dangerous. Its consistency. Its integrity.

"If President Trump is serious about a new policy to help American workers, then I would be delighted to work with him.”

He didn't call Trump pro-worker.

[BainsBane]

150. Integrity

If only Democrats had integity, they would spend their days praising Trump rather than opposing him. Certainly the GOP and the alt right feel that way. I do not.

There is nothing pro-worker about Trump. It's absurd to even suggest the possibility. It's like offering to work with David Duke on Civil Rights. It's ludicrous. Trump appointed a fast food mogul with multiple labor law violations as Sec of Labor. No one who thinks about the well-being of workers makes the cabinet appointments Trunp has.

Trump is a fascist. Integrity means standing up for the people that Trump is currently working to strip of their rights, the people Trump is working to deprive of the right to vote, control over their bodies, and equal protection under the law.

[aikoaiko]

152. I didn't say/suggest that Ds didn't have integrity or should spend their days praising Trump

I'm not sure why you say so sarcastically.

Bernie is standing up to Trump on many issues, but Bernie was also very clear about his position on TPP and why. It was consistent and integrous of him.

Sometimes even fascists do good things. Hitler gave us the Volkswagen Bug, for example. We can love the bug and despise him for everything else.

[Disruption]

151. grandstanding

Trump's grandstanding and preening requires some semblance of "presidential behavior" hence his posturing to look like a "people's president." The only thing to remember is Trump and the truth are never in the same room

[6000eliot]

157. He's promising shit jobs with no protection.

NO true progressive should be in favor of this.

[Rex]

161. lulz

That is not the title of the article. Nice try.