Sanders: 'Despair is not an option'

[struggle4progress]

by Ed Pilkington in Washington
Friday 10 March 2017 07.00 EST

... Bernie Sanders was growing more aghast with every sentence. Then, when Trump began to talk about the environment, the 75-year-old independent senator from Vermont nearly laughed out loud. Earlier that day, the president signed an executive order that gutted federal controls against the pollution of rivers and waterways. Now he was standing before US legislators pledging to “promote clean air and clear water”.

“The hypocrisy was beyond belief!” says Sanders, still scarcely able to contain himself. “To talk about protecting clean air and water on the same day that you issue an order that will increase pollution of air and water!” ...

“These are very scary times for the people of the United States, and … for the whole world. We have a president who is a pathological liar. Trump lies all of the time.” And Sanders believes the lying is not accidental: “He lies in order to undermine the foundations of American democracy.” Take his “wild attacks against the media, that virtually everything the mainstream media says is a lie.” Or Trump’s denigration of one of George W Bush’s judicial appointees as a “so-called judge”, and his false claims that up to 5 million people voted illegally in the election. Such statements, which Sanders calls “delusional”, are meant to lead to only one conclusion, he says: “that the only person in America who stands for the American people, who is telling the truth, the only person who gets it right, is the president of the United States, Donald Trump. That is unprecedented in American history.”

He travels even deeper into dystopian territory when I ask what, in his view, Trump’s endgame might be. “What he wants is to end up as leader of a nation that has moved a significant degree towards authoritarianism; where the president of the United States has extraordinary powers, far more than our constitution has provided for” ...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/10/bernie-sanders-interview-trump-democratic-party-resistance

[dogman]

2. Nonsense, Hillary is responsible for Hillary.

He said Trump was not qualified and it did not stop him.

[Eliot Rosewater]

3. Ridiculous comment. Trump voters werent considering voting for Hillary.

These 3rd party folks are gonna cement the end of America in 2018, when they dont vote for democrats.

[dogman]

5. And many Bernie supporters voted for Hillary.

Many voters did not vote, whose fault was that?

[Eliot Rosewater]

6. Some did, some didnt. Most of them though bad mouthed her non stop

all over social media and so on.

Non voters are equally guilty, but here is the simple fact.

If you do not vote, always, in every election (not primary) for whoever the D is listed on the ballot, you are contributing to the end of the human race.

Period.

[dogman]

8. But you are here bashing Bernie and his supporters, not non-voters.

You may need to rethink that approach if you want to defeat the other side. Every candidate faces opposition, it is their job to overcome that and to involve the non-involved.

[Cha]

38. You may need to rethink your approach if you want to beat the other side.

[dogman]

42. I voted for the Democratic Candidate for President.

What should I rethink about that? Since that is all past, I now think we need more voters, I think we need a stronger Party, I think the leadership needs to have a winning strategy that they actually enact. Ultimately it takes voters. Ignoring and rejecting them leads to minority status and, as we can see, the minority has few rights.

[Cha]

37. Oh yes.. and she was our Candidate against trump.. our firewall.

[LanternWaste]

7. It was the fault of the many voters who did not vote.

"Many voters did not vote, whose fault was that?"

It was the direct fault only of the many voters who willingly chose not to vote. Anything else is a rationalization.

[dogman]

10. So only Bernie voters are to blame? n/t

[Occulus]

22. Completely wrong. When I build a website and people don't visit

I don't blame them.

I look at my site and ask myself what I could do to make it better and more appealing to them.

And yes, I'm a web designer. Blaming the consumer for not coming to my site is how I lose future clients. If my marketing fails, I don't have anyone to blame but myself.

Political campaigns and web design have a whole, whole lot in common.The vast majority of the critical elements of both activities concerns itself with marketing.

The fact the voters did not vote is the fault of the campaigns for not inspiring them to vote- in other words, bad marketing. Period.

It's all about perception vs. reality, and about managing a consumer's- or a voter's- perception of the reality.

[Cha]

40. Those who didn't own a chunk of trump.. that's on them.. they cared

more about stomping their feet than our Planet.

[ProfessorPlum]

27. Good lord. I have never seen a politician(s supporters) so butt hurt over a primary race

Have you ever seen a presidential primary before? It gets rough. Clinton and Sanders were very genteel with each other compared to some of the (sometimes very bruising) primary fights of the past. Maybe you'd better not follow presidential politics - it seems to be too much for your delicate soul.

I supported Sanders vigorously in the primary and Clinton vigorously in the general. Each time picking the candidate who I thought aligned best with my political policies and would be the best for the country.

The hatred and distrust of Hillary Clinton certainly didn't start with Sanders primary race. It goes back years, to the lies and smears routinely created by the "elves" in Arkansas, digging up lie after lie about the Clintons.

Sanders barely mussed her hair.

[George II]

45. Two points, to specifically address what you said above (so this isn't alerted...

...for fighting the primary):

1. Yes, primaries get rough, but one big thing that was argued against Clinton last year was she was "rough" in 2008. But Obama and Clinton and her supporters basically "forgave and forgot" once Obama sewed up the nomination, to the extent that Clinton conceded BEFORE the Convention and called for Obama's nomination by acclimation - she didn't egg her supporters on to opposed Obama through out the convention.

2. You're correct, the "hatred and distrust of Hillary Clinton didn't start with Sanders primary race", but it was intensified and didn't end with the Convention and nomination, nor throughout the entire general election campaign, nor even today.

I honestly don't know what is to be accomplished by some (many?) who persist in bashing Clinton or the Democratic Party - that will not accomplish anything.

[tonedevil]

41. Are you going to...

outlaw third parties? Seriously, if we Democrats can't figure out how to deal with the fact that there are third parties in the race how do you propose we don't become obsolete?

[jrthin]

14. I bet you believe that Nader

had no part in the fiasco in Florida, which helped Bush.

[dogman]

20. No, votes belong to voters, no one else.

The fiasco in Florida that helped Bush was the Supreme Court that stepped on the process.

[Blue_true]

29. I supported Hillary the wholeway.

But she didn't spend enough time on the campaign trail and visit small towns and cities at all. I think that hurt her and down ticket Democrats.

[jrthin]

9. His supporters will

believe what they want to, but I agree with you. The moment Bernie made his announcement, I said to my husband, this is not going to go well for the dems. Further, it's what Bernie has always done, throw bombs form the back of the room. An example, he wanted to primary Obama, fortunately no one bought the bait, otherwise we'd have Romney.

[Eliot Rosewater]

11. Somebody needs to sit in the back of the room and throw good ideas at the bad ones

and Bernie is good at that.

But once it became clear the amount of damage he was doing to her and the rising popularity of the fascist, he should have reversed course.

[jrthin]

19. Exactly. n/t

[dogman]

23. Or she should have seen the damage she had done to her campaign and dropped out.

Why is the burden on Bernie? It is ridiculous to find one person to blame for another person's failure.

[Cha]

44. No, she shouldn't have.

[dogman]

47. Of course not.

Unless you apply the standards the poster wants to demand of Bernie.

[Blue_true]

31. Be careful, your post could be hidden.

For "Recontesting the primary", or something like that? Even mild criticism of Bernie could get you in trouble if the right eyes see it. I am glad that Bernie is taking the fight to Trump, calling Trump a liar to Trump's face. I am also glad to see Bernie going to rural, red areas of the country, although, if he succeeds in changing minds there, we will have more Joe Manchin type bluedogs in Washington and that could be an issue for some.

[Cha]

39. Oh, but that wasn't an option.

[Tom Rinaldo]

13. Danger: Don't. Go. There.

There was plenty of negative propaganda spread about Hillary, all true. And, as Bernie always said, she would have been "light years" better as president than Trump. But every candidate, and by extension those who help nominate him or her, have to take responsibility for any weaknesses of that candidate. That is what the realm of competition known as politics centers around. Who can win enough support to win an election?

There were things that Hillary herself did that contributed to some of the negative feelings some had about her. She herself admitted that she didn't initially handle the private email server controversy as well as she should have. She ran knowing full well that she was under investigation by the FBI which is always problematic for any candidate for any office and she was in the public eye for months while underneath that cloud. While Hillary was initially cleared from any prosecution before she won the nomination, her conduct still received scathing criticism from the FBI Director and that was on public record before Democrats nominated Hillary. She also spent much of her time after she left the State Department, before she declared for President, courting Wall Street for money, millions upon millions of it. There is nothing illegal about it and it did not in any way establish that she might have become beholden to them as a result of that. But it did little to exactly polish her image as a fierce defender of the little guy and gal against powerful corporate special interests, free from divided loyalties in that regard. And this was an election year when perceptions about being part of or apart from the status quo mattered.

I supported Hillary in public and voted for her in the privacy of my polling booth, but blaming her soft degree of widespread popularity - which was apparent from low approval numbers dating back from a year before the election, on Bernie Sanders who went out and campaigned for her is counter productive now. Which is the only reason why I am writing this. Bernie is fighting on our team. This OP reflects that. Hilary is starting to speak out more again now, which is also good.

[Eliot Rosewater]

15. Bullshit.

[Tom Rinaldo]

16. I feel no need to comment on your incisive analysis n/t

[Eliot Rosewater]

18. Bookmarking for 2018 when we lose more seats.

[dogman]

21. Which is more likely as you belittle more voters.

[jrthin]

17. All of what you say may be

true, but Bernie's run did not help and was dangerous this time. Reasonable people can agree on that.

[Tom Rinaldo]

24. Reasonable people can disagree on that. I grant you that

I would say that those who disagree with me are blaming the messenger. Those who disagree with me might say that refusing to help hide that message heightened the problem. I say this sincerely, it can be argued both ways. What I do think is fairly clear though is that Bernie was in tune with sensing the growing public unease with business/politics as usual. And he, along with others like Michael Moore (who also supported Hillary after she had the nomination) gave fair warning to all about what was in store for Democrats last year if it wasn't dealt with. And still the Clinton campaign made false assumptions about the strength of their "blue fire wall" in the rust belt to the point that they did not spend the time and resources needed to win there. Consider an alternate past where the Clinton campaign fully heeded the warnings of "the messengers" and campaigned hard inside the rust belt. 125,000 more votes there and Clinton would be president today.

[ProfessorPlum]

28. I disagree

Sanders helped Clinton shape her replies and arguments that she would use when the GOP nominee accused her of being too close to corporations. You don't think that practice helped her? It honed and sharpened her responses for when accusations were hurled by a much less polite opponent. And, it helped to make her platform more progressive, which helped her win the majority of votes.

It's one of the reasons we have primaries, and not coronations.

[Blue_true]

32. Hillary made her share of mistakes.

She should have spent more time finding out what State Department Protocol on email was by going to the State Department Technology Director and working through that group to get a home based system that allowed her to stay connected to embassies around the world. Hillary should have made all of her speech transcripts public the day she announced her run, there was nothing in them that was damaging, the allusion that she feared releasing them was far more damaging. Hillary could have spent more time on the campaign trail, going to small towns and cities and staying in supporter's homes along the way, as Obama did regularly - it hurts to say it, but Trump simply out worked Hillary when it came to campaign stops.

Lastly, and this is a touchy issue, Hillary should have been ready and willing to explain why she chose to stay with Bill after his infidelities. Unfortunately, the reality is female candidates, especially Democratic female candidates, get smudged by affairs their husbands have, not being willing to talk about that and explain why Bill is valued by her allowed Trump and his Nazis to make an issue of Hillary's marriage. There were attacks on Hillary via Bill's infidelities during the primary and general.

[Tatiana]

46. Completely agree with this insight.

It is the job of the candidate to earn the vote.

She made a lot of mistakes. But we nominated her knowing the (enormous) baggage, so we shouldn't be surprised something like this happened.

Anyone who had common sense voted for Hillary. But, common sense isn't all that common.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

25. I was just thinking the same thing ! Wonder if he feels any guilt - think he should - and I voted

for him. But, these are catastrophic times and it sheds light on how every vote she didn't get counted (thinking Susan Sarandon for example)

[PatsFan87]

26. At the end of the day, the buck stops with the candidate.

Hillary is responsible for Hillary. While she wasn't prosecuted for the whole email thing, it was careless and horrible optics for her. The Wall Street speeches were horrible optics. Having DWS be an "honorary chair" for her campaign after the DNC debacle was tone-deaf and horrible optics. Voters in the primary voted for her in spite of her baggage and horrible likability/trustworthiness polling numbers and now they're dealing with the consequences unfortunately. And yes, Russian interference also played a part but it's a bit old and laughable when people point the fingers at everyone other than the candidate who made their fair share of mistakes.

[Blue_true]

33. Hillary made some mistakes.

She could have set up a home server under the auspices of the State Department IT Office, I am sure they would have bent over backward to help the boss set up a system that followed all protocol. Hillary should have released ALL transcripts of all her paid speeches on Day 1 of her campaign. Over her political career, Hillary's penchant for privacy seems to have been her biggest enemy - for example, if she had just released the legal papers related to her real estate work for the Rose Law Firm in Arkansas, there may have never been a full blown Whitewater investigation, which morphed into a witchhunt. But some of the sustained often virulent attacks on Hillary by some that say they are on our side also hurt her chances, that should not be denied and people need to resolve to not do stuff like that during the future.

[Blue_Tires]

4. It's important to remain vigilant

Cynicism and indifference (almost always spread my the traitors in our midst) are fertile grounds for fascism to grow unchecked...

[ProudLib72]

30. Despair is not an option

But evidently infighting is an option, the only option going by the posts in this thread.

[Blue_true]

34. What I think is happening is people can't admit some mistakes.

I am getting a sense that DU has lurkers that are attacking some posts through the jury system. Even a mild criticism can be alerted for refighting the primary. I supported Hillary the whole way, but even I clinched my jaw with some of her missteps like the email response, not releasing her speech transcripts and a number of other things she seemed to do wrong. But people that are jumping to alert on other DU members that point out that Hillary was unfairly attacked, in some cases by those claiming to be progressive was also detrimental and contributed to the current state of political affairs.

[ProudLib72]

35. But it should be a moot point

Sanders is fighting the good fight in congress. HRC is doing her part. They aren't concerned about what could have been, and they aren't casting aspersions. They are focused on the immediate threat. I wish DUers were of the same mindset.

[gratuitous]

36. No, it isn't an option

I hope Sen. Sanders and many of his colleagues in the Senate and in the House are working on their Republicans brothers, hoping they can find some on that side of the aisle who will put country above party. Republicans in Congress are seeing the exact same events unfolding, but they've all been afflicted with lockjaw when it comes to calling out or opposing the rising fascist tide.

We're in for a long two years, but Democrats should be concentrating a lot of effort on voter registration and education. A lot of people have been disenfranchised, and many more have been intimidated into thinking they will be arrested or fined heavily if they cast a ballot and any irregularities pop up later (those "educational" billboards bought in the month before every election listing the maximum penalties for casting a "fraudulent" ballot always seem to be purchased in certain communities, if you know what I mean). It's up to us to get people registered, and convince them that they won't be going to jail for a year or getting fined $5,000 for voting.

If Republicans spent one-tenth the money and imagination they spend disenfranchising people on actual governance, the country would be a hell of a lot better off. Instead, they invest a significant portion of their time and energy dicking over people who don't vote for them.

[Cha]

43. We have Democrats Tom Perez and Keith Ellison working for us.. Of course I'm

not in "despair'.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

So Many Dems are there working their hearts out for us.. Mahalo Dems!