General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsStunning polls show Sanders soaring while 'TrumpCare' crashes
The Hill:
In the latest example of Sanders's soaring popularity, a recent poll from Fox News found that Sanders remains by far the most popular political leader in America. Sanders's favorable rating is 61 percent, while his unfavorable rating is only 32 percent; compare that to Trump, whose favorable rating is 44 percent while his unfavorable rating is 53 percent.
Several other polls have shown Trump's numbers to be even worse, with his unfavorable ratings rising above 55 percent at times.
The huge popularity of Sanders in the Fox poll tracks virtually all other polling that shows Sanders to be, by a large margin, the most popular political leader in America, and far ahead of Trump, the most unpopular new president in the history of presidential polling.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/325647-stunning-polls-show-sanders-soaring-while-trumpcare
Sure glad Sanders is on 'our side'....
Blue_Adept
(6,384 posts)Really wish we'd hear more about other folks. I've been enjoying reading more about Schiff the last week or two and would like to think there are others as well.
I'm just completely burned out on Bernie after everything throughout the primaries and election. While he'll help in some ways overall, he is not nor will be the face of the party over the next two to four years. Or of the movement, no matter how much some want to make it so.
OnDoutside
(19,905 posts)Maru Kitteh
(28,303 posts)out Trump for the same.
We need fresh, new, younger faces for 2020.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)"lapses" and attacks on the rights of party voters by one of the campaigns--but not the other; repeated lies about election tampering by the party that never happened--by one, not the other; phony lawsuits against state parties, both actually filed and only threatened but all abandoned as soon as the cameras moved on--by one but never the other; the attempt to have the Democrats' popular vote set aside by superdelegates--by one but not the other; electronic files stolen from one of the campaigns (and lawsuit filed against the party when caught)--by one but not the other; and others.
We really need to destroy the billionaire class, not "reform" the Democratic Party by tearing it apart and transferring power to new leaders who have proven willingness to misuse it in ruthless pursuit of goals. I agree entirely with him on two things: That he is not one of what he likes to consider us corrupt corporatist Democrats, or any kind of Democrat except temporary, and that we really need to do better.
We're the party protecting our democratic republic and the rights and wellbeing of the people, currently the ONLY one. We are the one, blessedly good choice American voters have these days, but to be good we and our leaders have to be good, to be honorable and true to our avowed principles. As we have been to a really impressive and reassuring degree, as demonstrated by all the stolen files from the DNC and the Clinton campaign, and above all from Clinton herself.
I've already considered myself independent at heart and I was was never really proud of being a registered Democrat until this year, when our party's and our candidate's generally scrupulous integrity and pursuit of a wonderful and potentially achievable agenda was proven over and over again.
synergie
(1,901 posts)Bernie and his campaign were different before they brought on a new campaign manager, and then things changed.
The divisiveness and the attacks on the Democratic Party seem to be about weakening it, and this is an external force. Whatever Bernie's feelings toward the party (and his quotes are on record, even if some refuse to accept that), he wasn't actively sowing dissension before Devine got on board.
This was the actual Russian game plan, to divide the Dems, attack Hillary constantly. That's how terrified he was of her. The entire propaganda network was about attacking Hillary. They didn't actually expect anyone to be stupid enough to vote for Trump, nor did they know about the GOP's well oiled vote suppression machine. They were hoping to have Hillary fighting both the right and the left, and Bernie being the figurehead of the disaffected people who believed every lie they pushed about Hillary, and they had quite a few to choose from, since that's a favorite hobby of the CONS.
They succeeded beyond their wildest imagination, they got Trump, who's dismantling the country for them, and they have created a small group of people who are busy attacking the Dems, while they're literally the only check on their creation, Trump.
The problem is that the Dems are not that stupid. There are a few who fell victim to the fake news, and clicked on and still believe every ridiculous lie that Albanians and Macedonians fed them, but you don't seem much of them IRL, just online where they cling to sites that keep that echo chamber going.
Independents and Dems actually do their homework, and we are not caught up in the cult of personality or the cult like behavior of the Right. It's why we're out in the streets, and so effective. We don't need Dem leaders to do our fighting for us, we're mobilized on our own, and we're working with the elected officials. It leaves people like Schiff, Franken and Swalwell to do their jobs on the House and Senate floors.
Our party isn't weak, we're effective, and we're strong enough to withstand the attempts at division by external forces, and deal with those who lack the education to stand up to the lies they've been fed about the system and how it works. We have a lot of work to do, but the majority stand firm against this nonsense, and we're active, we're energized and we don't need people making speeches at us to realize that we actually do have the power.
We are the Resistance, and we are Indivisible, despite the best attempts of the divisive forces deployed against us.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)to lead us in future. It's hugely important that we do not give that power to people who demonstrate serious deficiencies in character and judgement. Only look how terribly the right has gone wrong in exactly that way.
A nation with an electorate of over 160 million has many, many wonderful possibilities to offer. We ourselves have to insist on candidates who combine great political competence with understanding of and commitment to the principles that makes the Democratic Party so vital to continuation of our democratic republic.
synergie
(1,901 posts)define what those might be. We need to make sure that we teach the younger generation, who fell for these lies so easily due to a deficiency is basic education, how to think critically.
We live in a time when it's more important for us to question things, to do our homework and to guard against such easily obtained and sweetly tailored propaganda.
We need to actually learn facts about these people, not just the lies told about them, we know now that the more effective someone is, the more that is deployed to take them down, and the lengths and depths to which they will go.
I absolutely agree with you! Due to the efforts of the Resistance and Indivisible, we have many more people who are active and engaged and so many to choose from, so that we can mount a fight in EVERY election at EVERY level. The one silver lining from this mess is that we've renewed those commitments and we will be holding candidates to the standards that were violated in this election.
Their actual voting history, their actual comments, their actual history and their adherence to norms we expect from all of our candidates not just some of them, like tax returns etc.
We know what happens when we ignore these things because their catch phrases sound good for a moment, and when it becomes clear that there is no actual plan to deal with problems or implement policies.
I have faith in us We do need to get started on that education though, and continue calling out the divisive forces that are still at their task, despite being exposed.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)need the humility to realize that we are not inventing anything here, just providing more of a critical element we desperately need--increased citizen involvement in the electoral process.
Our "external forces" include thousands of Democratic Party power centers around the nation, people and organizations whose years of successful involvement give them real political expertise, circles of connections, understanding, and power. They come from various backgrounds, most-well-to do white, but also many divisions of every identity group in the party. When Hillary was considering running for U.S. senator from NY, she first visited and consulted a short list of power-node people around the state to see if they would be interested in backing her. A first step long before she planned her first appearance before regular voters.
That's just reality. And these people aren't going away. They shouldn't. They're not all bad or stupid, or all good either of course, but they provide a competence and stability that our nation desperately needs right now.
What I'm saying is, the education we speak of needs to be based in reality. It needs to start with educating ourselves individually about what we will accept and what we have to accept, recognizing that we will need to cooperate and compromise with all the other interests in our party and what they will accept.
Understanding and acceptance of reality when others don't get out of our way is critical because only an increase of 5% in Democratic voters across the nation would sweep the nation in our favor. We can't afford that 5% to fail in understanding and commitment and instead become angry and discouraged and not show up on election day. Like in 2016.
synergie
(1,901 posts)I wholehearted agree with you on what need to do at the level you describe. The most disturbing part of the last election cycle was the utter failure of the basics. People who literally had no clue how the parts worked, how primaries are run and by whom. How the Supreme Court works, how to do their own research about voting records and history.
Basic understanding of civics seems to be lacking, and how to evaluate information critically and engage in critical thought. I think a lot of that failure in understanding happened due to people literally not knowing how government works in the US. We cannot afford for people to be this willfully ignorant of the basics, on all sides, the pouting about not getting their way is a whole other story. And it happened across the political spectrum.
brer cat
(24,401 posts)Getting a rally crowd cheering and clapping doesn't make a stable wing of a party, especially when many haven't even registered to vote or bothered to find out how the system works. Just showing up on television shows or at town halls is personal publicity, not building party infrastructure. It requires very hard work and is done mostly out of the limelight.
I think real education is going to happen in small groups which is where Resistance and Indivisible are leading. I'm also sure that Perez and Ellison have rolled up their sleeves and are drilling down into the nitty gritty. It's not glamorous nor does it lead to swooning fans, but it's how we strengthen our party, not destroy it.
synergie
(1,901 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)There were also some questionable payments (from Russia?) to the campaign coffers that the FEC asked about. Those issues have not been resolved and probably never will be, because once a candidate suspends their campaign they lose interest.
Sanders' staff confirm Russian meddling in their GOTV/social media efforts, too.
History: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/04/paul_manafort_isn_t_a_gop_retread_he_s_made_a_career_of_reinventing_tyrants.html
To be fair, Manafort was hardly the only American in Yanukovychs orbit. Bernie Sanders consultant Tad Devine went to work for him in 2009. Ukrainians spent heavily in Washington, hiring a small army of top-drawer Republican lobbyists, including former congressmen Vin Weber and Billy Tauzin, to bolster Yanukovychs image in Washington and ultimately stave off American support for Ukrainian democracy. But Manafort set up the largest shop in Kiev, housed in a well-guarded office just off Independence Square. During elections, his operation swelled to six American consultants, in addition to Ukrainian translators and drivers. He procured a special role in the Yanukovych camp. Anders Aslund told me, Manafort became Yanukovychs closest political advisor.
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/03/sanders-staffers-confirm-that-russian-trolls-were-pushing-anti-hillary-memes-on-social-networks-and-comment-threads/
The shocking series of interviews revealed large Facebook groups supporting Sanders were inundated with content from people with no ties to the regions in which the pages were located. Former reporter John Mattes explained that his San Diego page became overwhelmed with anti-Clinton memes with messages hed never heard coming out of the Sanders campaign. Instead, they were memes alleging Clinton used body doubles and murdered political opponents.
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/03/21/liberals-fight-america-rachel-maddow-exposes-fake-russian-bernie-sanders-page.html
Maddow explained that the Russians are using information warfare to confuse, divide, distract, demoralize and ultimately defeat their rival.
The MSNBC host said, When The Huffington Post did their dive on how Bernie supporters online got targeted in this Russia attack in part on a Bernie Sanders Facebook page called Bernie Sanders Lovers which says it is based in Burlington, Vermont. It is not based in Burlington, Vermont. Its based in Albania, and nobody whos not from Albania appears to have anything to do with that site. The important thing here is that Bernie Sanders page run out of Albania. Its still there. Its still running. Its still churning this stuff out. Now. This is not part of American politics. This is not partisan warfare between Republicans and Democrats. This is international warfare.
demmiblue
(36,742 posts)1) Trash thread
2) Auto-trash by keyword
George II
(67,782 posts)One wonders why this appeared today.
demmiblue
(36,742 posts)murielm99
(30,655 posts)I am taking your advice.
Let's promote our true-blue Democrats who are out there fighting the good fight right this minute.
George II
(67,782 posts)lapucelle
(18,037 posts)has been cited as the source. And there's always the same problem in analysis You can't use data about favorability to reach conclusions about popularity.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/125210575
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8811325
George II
(67,782 posts)The thing is when one cherry picks only eight politicians of the hundreds in Washington and thousands across the country, how can one get an accurate assessment of "popularity", or "favorability", or anything? One simply can't.
But at least it keeps certain names in the forefront, regardless of the overall opinion of the "audience".
lapucelle
(18,037 posts)Popularity is a comparative rank on a continuum.
lapucelle
(18,037 posts)an opinion piece in the NYDN opens. The story about the unpopularity of the Democratic party is illustrated with a huge photo of the Democratic nominee who just won the popular vote for the presidency by a margin of millions.
It's an agenda-driven narrative.
synergie
(1,901 posts)"Fox News"?
Can you do two words?
Also, if you chose to trash this, then how will we as a community be able to keep a look out for the propaganda minded trolls and bots who enjoy coming here to violate the TOS that frowns on posting RW talking points and using RW sources?
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)We can still give credit when someone articulates our core principles and connects with the public. Not everything has to be about "the bench" and the next (or for some, the previous) election.
Dustlawyer
(10,493 posts)This plaintiff's attorney agrees 100%!
mountain grammy
(26,568 posts)Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)They are divisive and unneccesary. I don't doubt Bernie Sanders is popular. However, he will not be the candidate in 2020. I believe it will be someone like Joe Kennedy.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)This is not a 'candidate' thread. My thread was about the popularity of Senator Sanders and how trumpcare sucks..
It is not divisive or unnecessary.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)As long as it has the word sanders in it..
Put on your body armour.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)This thread is a good thread showing that an ally is on our side and popular!
synergie
(1,901 posts)threads that discussed this poll.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)And many threads end up being repetitive.
This was an article from today's The Hill.
synergie
(1,901 posts)had already discussed it before, so in what way is this necessary? Did you add something new here? Did the Hill? What was it, what's the point?
I don't see much stating your need to post this yet again, why so much focus of Fox News sources, which we don't really bother which on this site so much. If you have something new to add, great, do that, but that doesn't seem to be the goal here, which makes one wonder ...
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)And, feel free to ignore posts like these - no use raising your blood pressure on something you don;t
want to talk about...
synergie
(1,901 posts)And my blood pressure is fine, I didn't take those grains you recommended. I can't help wondering why you won't explain in your own words why this poll means so much to you. I mean if you don't want to tell us, and your grain ingestion is taking its toll on your own BP, then please, feel free not to reply, but it's weird when you do just to insert oblique insults and fail to answer simple questions.
You know it's an old poll, you've already discussed it, but you sought it out in an obscure corner of the Hill's opinion pages, and brought it back here, and seem to be unwilling to answer simple questions.
What is your point other than divisiveness? It's okay if you don't have one, you need not be rude when asked what it is, or so defensive when the aim is so poorly concealed.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)opposite of unity. It's why I'm wondering what the point of it is. I'm so glad you understand, JudyM, perhaps you could explain to the OP that this sort of nonsense is only divisive and unnecessary, and not at all contributing to unity.
Since you see so clearly what's being attempted here with this OP, perhaps you could try explaining it to him? He seems ever so confused as to why his post might be construed as divisive and not even remotely unifying.
You might have better luck.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)Please consider that you may be still triggered about him and unable to see that he is actually busting his ass to help our party. Check the number of his weekly events, including red state town halls, even - he was in West Virginia holding a health care town hall there last week, numerous events every week. When people spew vomit every time someone posts something positive about him, that creates even more distance from people who are good Dems and yet somehow still appreciate the positive that he brings. He is strengthening our party, you just can't see it. You want to fight against him? Sad.
George II
(67,782 posts)...and discussed to death.
Is there a sensible reason why this has to be rerun again this week?
See: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8811325
synergie
(1,901 posts)But I believe you just made my case about where the divisiveness is coming from.
It's usually RWers who reflexively accuse them of being "triggered", I'm sorry that you choose to attack me in this manner, "spewing vomit"? Really?
Also the projection, ever the projection. That is the hallmark of a CON, it's sad that by relying so much on RW polls and opinions, that it bleeds into members of this site.
You might want to re-read what you wrote and then examine honestly who is spewing the venom, and whose perspective seems rather tainted.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)Especially when defending stuff Fox News produces. I agree such behavior is indeed ridiculous, but some people seem to find joy in being divisive in the rudest manner possible, as they imagine themselves to be attacked in ways that no one in possession of basic reading comprehension perceives.
It's that perception problem, that I've often noticed with Right wingers, not just Republicans, it's why it's pathognomonic to them. Until this election cycle anyway, when so many imbibed so much of that RW nonsense that they absorbed other qualities from the people who served this up to them.
I'd suggest that you take a close look and evaluate where the perspective is challenged, it's not mine that's at fault here.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)seek some comfort in whatever place makes you feel safe and protected.
Hope you feel better, and you have a good night.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... in my opinion. A divided party is a weakened party. Personally, I don't see anything "positive" about publicly stating that the Democratic Party is intellectually "bankrupt". How is that positive? Is he even aware that people think LESS of the Democratic party when he gets out there and talks about how "corrupt" we are and how there's no difference between Democrats and Republicans? How does that strengthen the party? How does that help us to fight the GOP?
Things like that end up weakening our party, you just can't see it. "Sad."
JudyM
(29,122 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)BainsBane
(53,001 posts)but I don't understand how that equates to "busting his ass for the party" or "strengthening our party." Does he carry a positive message about the Democratic Party? He strengthens his own popularity, but that's not the same as promoting the party.
George II
(67,782 posts)...has been posted. The poll is 10 days old, yet its posted as though it is "current". Interestingly the link (blog) in the OP doesn't even include the poll itself, just a discussion of it.
To see the actual poll, go here:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2017/03/15/fox-news-poll-315/
On top of that, it is highly limited in that only 12 cherry picked and subjective choices are given, some totally unrelated to the others, and only 8 politicians:
Bernie Sanders
Planned Parenthood
The 2010 health carelaw, also known asObamacare
Donald Trump
Elizabeth Warren
Paul Ryan
Nancy Pelosi
Sanctuary cities
WikiLeaks
Chuck Schumer
Mitch McConnell
The Freedom Caucus
Where's Adam Schiff, Barack Obama, Elijah Cummings, Devon Nunes, Hillary Clinton, etc.? Looking at this rag-tag group of choices, they might as well have included the Montreal Canadiens, Pittsburgh Steelers, RT, Breitbart, Justin Trudeau, etc. That's how ridiculous the thought is that this is a credible, bona fide "poll".
George II
(67,782 posts)Regardless of the fact that its an article from today's "The Hill", this was discussed ad nauseum a week ago.
And no, very few if any threads end up being repetitive. In fact there are hosts in place for many of the forums here on DU whose primary job is to lock repetitive posts.
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)week ago.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)This is about a United States Senator who caucuses with the Dems who fights for Americans and fights for Democratic values.
How on earth could this be divisive? What exactly is the problem here?
synergie
(1,901 posts)fight based on RW nonsense and a badly written opinion piece that doesn't back up it's supposed thesis. It's silly and divisive. Try to contribute to unity and don't put so much importance into old Fox News polls, they're not the most credible and they do tend to reflect the views of their viewership, which is Right Wing.
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)that will get alerted...Just know that people know what's going on...it is clickbait.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)People said that this thread is 'divisive' - all my thread shows is a Dem ally being popular.
This is a good thing.
Still not sure why people are so bent out of shape here...
JudyM
(29,122 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)This OP is successfully instigating such attacks, why people are using RW terminology to attack people, that's the literal definition of divisiveness.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)a post demonstrating that someone who's out there fighting for our values is so popular. To me, it's a good thing, because I don't have a grudge against sanders.
synergie
(1,901 posts)an artifact of a rather skewed perception that is not my own.
Yes, I can see how much joy it created, why all that "triggering" and "spewing vomit" really drove home the pure, innocent joy of someone who bears no grudges at all.
As I said, projection is a sad thing to watch.
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)Hassin Bin Sober
(26,271 posts)Take it up with the people who aren't.
All throughout this clusterfuck wrapped in a fiasco of a US health system, it's becoming more and more obvious the only thing that will work is Single Payer.
Even some republicans I know are starting to agree.
Eyeball_Kid
(7,410 posts)Will look like the present fiasco before Congress. The only way to go is for either a public option or Medicare for all. It looks as if the choices are Stark. Anything else is fantasyland.
George II
(67,782 posts)Eyeball_Kid
(7,410 posts)And he is refreshingly on message. All of the time. That seems to be what we need right now. And since his popularity is peeking, it looks like the American public is responding favorably.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)And please, not just Hillary's, as welcome as she'd be.
C'mon, Congressional Dems. You've finally stopped rubber-stamping Trump's wish list. Present ours!
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)And the 'why' is because he is working for the people and the issues that people care about.
RKP5637
(67,030 posts)an independent. Far too many, way too many democrats IMO go with the flow ever edging rightward for years. We need democrats that kick ass!!!
woodsprite
(11,853 posts)Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Totally agree.
Normally, Dems and Reps displayed comity and worked for the benefit of
the people and our country. And Dems took the high road.
But now, the Reps are destroying our country. Dems need to acted as if
the Russians have infiltrated our government and destroying our country.
Oh, wait...
JudyM
(29,122 posts)alarimer
(16,245 posts)I cannot figure out why they do not get this. It is simply that Sanders is able to connect with people the way most (but not all) Democrats do not, especially when it comes to pocketbook issues. It might be BECAUSE he is an independent. Like it or not, Democrats are as beholden to a rotten system, swimming in the corporate money, as Republicans are and are thus not taken as being sincere. That assessment is often wrong, but there it is.
Juliusseizure
(562 posts)hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)Obama said something about working on getting more candidates. I love Sanders but we need MORE>
pangaia
(24,324 posts)bekkilyn
(454 posts)I don't know a whole lot about him yet, but liked what I saw of him in this video
Warpy
(110,900 posts)and so far, they haven't discovered clay feet, although I'm sure he's got them.
I would love it if the media would report on other lions roaring on our behalf, there are many out there, younger voices saying much the same as Sanders does, but we have to know we're facing a mass media that is particularly hostile to Democrats.
Future party organizing and campaigning have got to be grassroots up, the top down model hasn't worked well and won't work well with hostile news media.
We have great voices out there. One of my own Senators, Tom Udall, is one of them. The problem is that all the official voices for far too long have been conservatives from that other party.
synergie
(1,901 posts)We've all been talking about all the great voices that have been making themselves heard, but some are apparently deaf to them.
Any post in praise of such people is quickly turned into a Bernie thread, as if praising anyone else really bothers people, and they feel the need to act as if Bernie is being attacked, when no one brought him up in the first place.
He's doing his job, but he's not the reason that people are active in politics now, that's due to people organizing themselves, getting their friends and neighbors involved and holding elected officials accountable. We're getting to know our official voices and we don't need to depend on mass media or supposed "rockstar" senators to do this for us.
We're seeing that we have quite a few rockstars on our side. And even if mass media won't cover Franken and Klobuchar (from this past week, for example), we have other methods of disseminating that simple fact. We are not weak or feeble, and we are effective
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)Sanders is out, holding rallies in Bumfuckt USA, areas that the dems wrote off. I don't see any of our other leaders really doing that. We are either not doing anything or preaching to the converted. Just saying but if we want to reach voters in the bible belt we need more evangelists and Bernie seems to be the only one going now.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)was the most popular of the 8 politicians Fox asked about.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Take it with grains of whatever you want...
George II
(67,782 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)I'm not sure why the excitement over a Fox News poll, since it doesn't really say anything. Why the need to talk about it all over again? Care to explain the need to post this yet again?
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)It was in today's The Hill....
synergie
(1,901 posts)And what is it that you think this old poll says? If stating it's actual results is somehow putting words in your mouth. What is it that you felt it was saying? I mean, you knew all about it before, you post this as if it's new, and the opinion piece in today's Hill doesn't say anything more.
Use your own words and let us know the point you think you're making, with less snark, fewer allusions to "grains" one would need to see what you're seeing here and with whatever words you like.
lapucelle
(18,037 posts)It's not news anymore. It's a narrative, and narratives are frequently framed to advance an agenda.
And the analysis of the cited source is always facile and flawed in the same way. You cannot reach a conclusion about x with evidence about y.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)And the article was meant to reinforce that people hate trumpcare?
No, I know you and others did not...
lapucelle
(18,037 posts)then his argument is neither cogent nor persuasive. No wonder he didn't link to the data.
Thanks for pointing this out.
George II
(67,782 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,153 posts)I'm even tired of always seeing Bernie on TV as the spokesperson for the traditional and progressive base of Democratic party values. It should be bloody embarrassing. Its not Bernie himself that some of us want particularly, its the attention to the values he is pushing. If there were a younger, more charismatic Democrat (or two) that rose up with the same kind of integrity, values and fight behind them...I'd love it.
But then again, he IS fighting for us. He didn't just shrink back into the woodwork after what must have been disappointing loss to him in the primaries. I admire that. I can't believe his energy level at his age.
bekkilyn
(454 posts)But oftentimes it seems that Bernie's all we've got right now.
As much as I love him, I want hundreds more just like him out there fighting the good fight.
Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)Juliusseizure
(562 posts)He'll be 79 in 2020. His wife said he won't run. Even 70 is pushing it. Retirement age is 65. There's a physiological reason for that.
He's popular because his message resonates, he's passionate and unwavering about it, and he's the anti-Trump - consistently honest and transparent about his agenda. He actually intends to drain the swamp.
But regardless of age, I disagree about his viability as a candidate. There are numerous articles that confirm the white working class vote still prioritizes culturally conservative candidates over those with a very progressive economic message.
Sanders has cross-over appeal but only to an extent. Republicans will slam him as a socialist who will substantially increase taxes. He is a socialist. That is an easy sell.
Is America ready for a socialist? You'll find nothing to substantiate that.
He'd also be the first Jewish president. Romney had a lot of obstacles with his being a mormon. Again, that strikes irrational fear in a lot of voters. The country was only marginally ready for Obama and not ready for a female. We're dealing with a lot of people open to his message but then vote differently in the voting booths behind closed doors.
Seems to Elizabeth Warren would be a good choice if swing state voters could overlook their sexism. She doesn't have nearly the baggage Clinton had and is a passionate voice who would excite the base.
PatrickforO
(14,514 posts)He's turning crowds of erstwhile Trump supporters around using his simple economic justice platform.
Where are these younger people? They doing that? They going into red states and turning people around so maybe you and I can have single payer in our lifetimes?
The Dems have a big bench of younger people. You bet. But they need to get off their asses and get in there and fight. Who are we hearing about? Maxine Waters, who is about 200 years old, and Bernie.
And people like me aren't going to go away. I want single payer and I'm going to do everything in my power to get that for my children and my grandchildren. BECAUSE IT IS MORAL. It is the RIGHT thing to do.
bekkilyn
(454 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)Um, way to insult Maxine Waters, and ignore all the other folks who are doing their jobs on the senate and House floor fighting the actual fight.
We're hearing about lots of people doing that, not just the woman you insult.
Um, we get to single payer by actually taking the steps to ensure we do it right, because that's how things get done, not overnight, not with the wave of a wand or a speech, but through actual work on the floor. If only we had turned crowds of erstwhile Trump supporters around before election day, rather than attacking the only process we have to ensure we get 100% coverage for everyone.
Too bad the moral thing, the right thing to do, and only way to really get it done was attacked as something evil. We might have been in a totally different place in March than we are.
Day late and dollar short. Enough with the ageism and literally ignoring where the actual fight is, and who is leading it and doing all the fighting. This isn't a campaign where speechifying will lead to anything. The Resistance is doing the actual work, the elected Dems on the committees are doing the actual work. These rallies and town halls aren't really doing very much that's constructive, they're ego props, it's why Trump is being given them as a treat for behaving for short periods of time in between golf weekends.
PatrickforO
(14,514 posts)Just like you.
JudyM
(29,122 posts)so many to those town halls, rallies and calling congress that we put enough fear in the moderate repukes to take down this bill!!!
Thank you, Senator!
synergie
(1,901 posts)Congress, whatever this "Revolution" was, didn't do the work.
We continue to do the actual work of calling people, disseminating information and holding those town halls.
Literally no Senator or Representative or their group is leading this, they deserve no thanks, that's all us, the actual Democrats, that spent time grieving, found each other on hidden Facebook groups and then organized OURSELVES.
What are you thanking a guy who did none of this for after giving him credit for something that we did ourselves?
Please.
PatrickforO
(14,514 posts)Without vision the people perish. We have great leaders, LIKE BERNIE, and yes, Waters, Reich and others who are setting the vision, and then grass roots people like US, because I assure you you're not the only one with an open telephone line to your US Senators and Representative, or who is active at the policy level in local politics. There are many times many of us. I've never seen the grass roots so engaged. Not in my voting lifetime.
As to single payer, and doing it right??? C'mon. The infrastructure is IN PLACE right now. It's called Medicare, and can be expanded over, say 5 years to encompass all Americans.
As I said, you are looking at a guy who pays over $14K per year for shitty, rationed healthcare with financially crippling copays. When you go to the doctor or the hospital, they wheel you through the finance department first to make sure you can pay. We still have lots of bankruptcies with healthcare debt, and millions uninsured.
Now, the Republican 'die fast' plan has been tabled, but we still have a need to control the costs of healthcare, and that is because healthcare is a PUBLIC GOOD, a basic right, which should be PUBLICLY FUNDED. The profit motive is in direct conflict with the provision of the services we need, and big pharma has our Reps and Sens in its pocket - they charge more for life-saving drugs here than in ANY OTHER COUNTRY. Because they can. And yes, that is morally wrong.
So yeah, let's do it right and expand Medicare.
mcar
(42,206 posts)Last edited Fri Mar 24, 2017, 08:38 PM - Edit history (1)
Our Dems are fighting and doing it well.
JI7
(89,172 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]
jalan48
(13,797 posts)Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Do you think there would be an age issue? I personally am undecided.
jalan48
(13,797 posts)Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)We will have to wait and see and in the mean time, we need to support him.
liquid diamond
(1,917 posts)jalan48
(13,797 posts)matter. The Democratic Party has lost members over the years-we need independent voters if we want to win the big prize.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)which doesn't make him the most popular politician in America, just the highest among the 8 Democrats and Republicans in this poll (which didn't include Al Franken, Martin O'Malley, Patty Murray, for example.) And it doesn't say anything about how he'd do in 2020.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)jalan48
(13,797 posts)Let's see where we are in a few years, there's no sense in ruling him out now.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)unless we figure out a way to get the Russians out of our elections. There's no way they would have allowed Bernie to lose to DT this year. They would hate Bernie as much as Hillary.
jalan48
(13,797 posts)I don't think the Russians have any more influence over the process than the North Vietnamese did in 68 or the Iranians did in 1980. They may have influence over the Trump cabal but that's about it.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)that they didn't remove any registrations or otherwise tamper with them -- just that they supposedly didn't tamper with the actual votes. But I don't know how we can be sure of that since so many of our machines have no paper trails; and many of those with paper trails didn't match the machines. Do you remember what happened in Michigan? In heavily Democratic Detroit, half of the districts couldn't be included in the recount -- by law -- because the machine count didn't match the sign-in. And DT won Michigan by only 13,000 votes.
And now DT wants to get rid of the only Fed govt office that oversees the states' election offices.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/us-election-michigan-recount-donald-trump-broken-voting-machines-hillary-clinton-a7458231.html
Officials said at least 87 of Detroits decade-old voting machines had failed on Election Day, with many jamming when ballot papers were fed in. In 392 of the citys 662 voting precincts, the number of votes recorded on machines was not the same as the number of voters registerered by polling station staff.
According to Michigan state law, voting precincts where polling registers do not match with voting machines cannot be included in a recount. In that situation, the original election result will stand.
jalan48
(13,797 posts)I think the reason DT has chosen to work with the Russians is $$. The same with Manafort and others, including Nunes. They aren't conspiring because they believe in Putin-Trump is a wanna be oligarch who is leveraged and needs money. He's hoping Putin will be his meal ticket. I believe most Republicans are playing along because they have no choice, well they do but they are cowards, they want to stay in power and if getting rid of Trump will harm them they won't do it.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)what the hackers took from Republicans, just that they did target some but never released what they took.
jalan48
(13,797 posts)synergie
(1,901 posts)you realize that something extremely fishy was going on. Michigan proved that to be true. It's weird how all those making noises about "rigging" when there wasn't any, remain silent when actual rigging is found.
RKP5637
(67,030 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Idoru
(167 posts)This whole "healthcare" thing. Which he dismantled personally, I'm sure. When is the parade?
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Idoru
(167 posts)And I'm being sarcastic. This isn't about Bernie, as if we don't have enough posts about him in this forum.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,129 posts)msongs
(67,193 posts)Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)I think it is great that we have statesmen fighting for Dem ideals.
What am I missing?
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)There were only 4 Democrats that Fox polled people about.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Although, it *is* a Fox News poll...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2017/03/15/fox-news-poll-315/
Summary Chart Among Registered Voters
---------Favorable--------- --------Unfavorable-------- (Cant say)
Never heard of
TOTAL Strongly Somewhat TOTAL Somewhat Strongly
Bernie Sanders 61% 33 28 32 12 20 4 3
Planned Parenthood 57% 39 18 32 9 23 5 5
The 2010 health care law, also known as Obamacare 50% 26 24 47 11 36 2 1
Mike Pence 47% 30 17 43 12 31 6 5
Donald Trump 44% 30 14 53 6 47 2 *
Elizabeth Warren 39% 24 15 31 7 24 10 19
Paul Ryan 37% 13 24 47 16 31 7 9
Nancy Pelosi 33% 13 20 50 14 36 6 9
Sanctuary cities 33% 19 14 37 8 29 7 22
WikiLeaks 31% 11 20 46 16 30 11 12
Chuck Schumer 26% 11 15 30 10 20 14 30
Mitch McConnell 20% 3 17 44 13 31 13 22 T
The Freedom Caucus 19% 6 13 18 7 11 18 45
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Bernie, Elizabeth Warren, Chuck Shumer, and Nancy Pelosi.
Thanks for doing the digging.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Just saying...
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)is I knew it wasn't a poll showing which Dems in the country are most popular, as the OP seemed to say -- just which of the 4 on the list.
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)I think it is that theme song she likes best. She's always wandering around the house singing "Let it go... let it goooooo...."
Dustlawyer
(10,493 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,153 posts)I think its a case of poll envy
And that he didn't just shrink back into the woodwork after Hillary 'beat him by millions of votes!" And resentment that even though she WON he is still getting so much attention. It doesn't matter how much help he is tirelessly giving to core issues one may agree with.
BTW where exactly IS Hillary? I can understand giving her some space to lick her wounds, but its time we heard from her as well. I think she'd actually be pleasantly surprised at the response of her appearance.
Firstly, she won by 3 million votes
+ the ones that now regret their vote
+ the fact that most non-voters, who mostly reside in bigger cities where most of the population is, have more liberal views (as polls show is the attitudes of residents of bigger cities)
I think she'd be welcomed into the conversation. I certainly would like to see her more.
bekkilyn
(454 posts)We seem to have a "bad winner" problem in this country of late, at least with followers.
I saw something in a video very recently from Hillary about wanting to fight, so seems she's becoming a bit more active. Also heard something about her running for mayor of NYC, so she might be more focused on that than anything else.
H2O Man
(73,308 posts)Bernie is the middle class's best advocate.
RKP5637
(67,030 posts)H2O Man
(73,308 posts)him in 1982. He has not disappointed me since.
ananda
(28,779 posts)ymetca
(1,182 posts)She'd' have won by ten million votes, far beyond the threshold that the Republicans' vote-rigging could have gotten away with. People still think she lost those critical states where she was always polling ahead, and where exit polls showed she was leading until, well, we stopped believing exit polls when the results were flipped exactly on their heads.
But the seeds of Republican/Russian hacking bore fruit in all the "HRC vs. Bernie Texas Title Death Match" crap we had to endure. Most of us liked both candidates and voted that way. The election was stolen by gerrymandering, poll-rigging, and rank propaganda.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)I agree and do believe that our elections are stolen. This should be one
of our highest priorities.
toska
(199 posts)If it does get to the point where the country is presented with conclusive evidence that Trump and Pence were actively working with the Russians theres no roadmap for what happens. It doesn't mean that Paul Ryan becomes president though. Pence could resign in which case Trump puts up a consensus pick for VP and then resign after confirmation. We saw this with Gerald Ford and watergate. The most untainted, popular politician out there is Sanders.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)What do we (as in America and Americans) do if indeed the Russians put
Trump into the presidency?
The entire election would be fraudulent. The Constitution does not
provide for this.
stonecutter357
(12,682 posts)LOL Lib
(1,462 posts)Nothing without a majority behind him.
That is like dying with a winning lottery ticket in your pocket.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)The public agreeing with him? Congress? The Democrats?
At least he is talking and fighting for what Americans want and need...
LOL Lib
(1,462 posts)Popularity is great and so are moral victories, but neither one do anything to stop the repukes and Trump from killing off poor people. Sorry that I don't share your joy right now.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)And 'my joy'? - it's just an article I found interesting and important to share...
synergie
(1,901 posts)People chose to throw tantrums and write in invalid candidates and leave the rest blank. When you encourage people to do this, or discourage them from voting, or poison them against an entire system that they don't understand, you don't win elections.
Ya gotta vote to win elections.
And why was it so important for you to share, when you'd already discussed the poll in depth earlier?
It's interesting that you won't answer any questions. Yup, your joy is evident.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)So, no replies from me on these kind of posts....
synergie
(1,901 posts)and answering questions. I'm curious as to what you define as "civil" conversation, since you have some odd notions about it.
Simple facts are "uncivil"? Calling out the divisiveness is "uncivil"?
I'd suggest you study what compromises a civil conversation, you seem awful confused. I'm sorry facts are so hard and that you're upset that you can't answer simple questions without resorting to personal insults.
WiffenPoof
(2,404 posts)MineralMan
(146,189 posts)Bernie Sanders is the independent Senator from Vermont. That's all he is, frankly.
I can't see this as anything all that interesting, frankly.
cwydro
(51,308 posts)When Fox talks about his "soaring popularity" lol, I gotta wonder.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Sanders is a statesman fighting for true Democratic values and policies.
Sanders is popular with the people.
The People like what Sanders is saying.
I not only find it 'interesting', I find it refreshing that somebody is standing up for us big time.
MineralMan
(146,189 posts)small state in the Northeast. I've been hearing many Democratic voices lately. I do wish Bernie would join the party.
He won't, though, so he is a non-issue for me. I think he should speak out about whatever he finds important.
But there are lots of people "standing up for us." You might want to read the news more closely.
Right now, Bernie's not running for anything, except perhaps for his Senate seat in 2018. I don't know.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)I would take Sanders over somebody like Senator Manchin every time.
"You might want to read the news more closely." - really, you wrote that?
MineralMan
(146,189 posts)Bernie Sanders is a US Senator. How is that inconsequential? But, that's all he is, as important as that is.
And yes, I really wrote that. Nobody else is in the room with me and my keyboard.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)I don't understand where you are coming from here...
I would think Dem allies are a good thing.
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)Bernie's great, but he's not the only one doing great work. Your posts seem to be saying that only Bernie is doing good work.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)My original thread simply cites The Hill regarding a poll showing Sanders popular. then I simply said "glad he is on our side'...
WiffenPoof
(2,404 posts)RadiationTherapy
(5,818 posts)It's not that difficult to understand, is it? Symbols have meaning and power beyond the material facts of their existence.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Kentonio
(4,377 posts)Then I guess nothing will.
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)own benefit and to great effect in their attempts to split the Left.
And apparently the Russians did as well.
And the fact that Sanders is still stuck on his decades own efforts to trash Democrats helps them.
Example of Sanders trash talking Democrats as a whole, for anyone trying to alert my post, Sanders called Democrats "feeble" in the context of Health Care and the Republicans last night on Rachel Maddow's show.
I'd say the Democrats were strong as hell getting the ACA passed and in sticking together and allowing the current Republican health care bill to blow up.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Yes it is a Fox News poll....
How could this possible split the Left?
Jake Stern
(3,145 posts)We need Dems to follow that example: go into hostile territory and talk to the people as a way to counter Fox News and Rush by putting a human face on the party. Of course there will be some who wouldn't vote D if Jesus himself came to earth and ordered them to. That being said, how many could we win back from the siren song of right wing populism if we made an effort other than to smugly say "if they're too lazy to read the website.. . . . "?
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Its all about messaging, i.e. getting the word out *in person* by holding townhalls.
WiffenPoof
(2,404 posts)...for even suggesting that Sanders was the default leader of our Party. I mean totally trashed...
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)I think that was the thread where I had a 'post removed'...
WiffenPoof
(2,404 posts)...just how hated Sanders is by certain people on this forum. I would think he would be loved and supported here. For me, Sanders is a treasure and the kind of fighter that we need in our party.
I appreciate your posts yesterday.
synergie
(1,901 posts)spending so much time criticizing it instead. I would think that a man who wished to lead the Democratic party would join it and barring that, at least refrain from attacking it.
WiffenPoof
(2,404 posts)...where if I have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand.
I have explained this so many times that I'm dizzy. And, I have no interest in re-arguing the whole Bernie Sanders isn't a Democrat crap.
I'll try one more time...
Your post completely by-passes the points of my argument. This tells me that you either don't understand or you are not listening.
I don't care what Bernie Sanders calls himself. I really don't. It doesn't matter to me in the least. I'm coming from a position that only looks at his political philosophy. You need to try hard and look at this absent the labels.
Secondly...
His political philosophy is in line with the original tenets of the Democratic Party. This is simply MY OPINION. You are welcomed to disagree.
By original tenets I'm referring to people like FDR. I'm also referring to a time when our Party was known as "the Party of the People."
Thirdly...
Bernie Sanders has been fighting for these policies for the entirety of his political career. In addition, he is still fighting when he could have easily stepped aside (after the election).
All many of us are saying is that we admire this person. You may not...and that its fine. But to criticize someone who has been fighting all his life for Democratic principles is frustrating. If you don't like him as a person, that's ok. But why can't you criticize him on policy. You can't because he fights for what most Democrats want. Name one policy that does not align itself with Liberal thought.
If you want, you can call him Progressive. In today's terms, that is exactly what he is. All we are saying is that those Progressive policies reflect the original tenets of the Democratic Party (at least from the FDR standpoint).
I've already written too much. I will say that I am not alone. The turnout he generated during the presidential campaign was nothing less than amazing. He proved you could run without monies from corporations. His campaign was truly a grassroots effort.
Enough.
-P
On Edit: The people that followed him didn't care what he called himself either. They just knew that he was fighting for them and not the special interests.
I like Hillary Clinton. I voted for Hillary Clinton. I think she got royally screwed in the election. How I wish that she were our current president.
synergie
(1,901 posts)leads to screeds of Right Wing level abuse, and we're aware of how criticizing someone who has been fighting all of their lives for Democratic principles is frustrating that was de riguer here and is still being done ham handedly in poor attempts at obliqueness.
I can't criticize him on policy because he puts forth none. Speeches are fine, but where is the ACTUAL POLICY to put that into action? I'm glad you see how and why attacking people by ignoring their policies, their history and their actual adherence to liberal thought is a mite frustrating, it's kind of what Bernie is doing to the party as a whole. It's annoying, that doesn't mean we "hate" him, and stating that is both dishonest and disingenuous.
What many of you are saying, in the nastiest terms possible that it's okay to abuse those of us who do not fall down and worship him and who can and do legitimately criticize his words and his deeds, especially when he attacks us. I know you're not alone, I've seen the divisiveness on this very thread where people hurl the worst right wing nastiness, and speak disgustingly, the turnout was not due to him alone and it's annoying that literally everything is laid at his feet, as if he and he alone did everything.
Credit where credit is due, but he doesn't get to grab up credit for other people's work, be it on the turnout, the grassroots organization and the effects of what those of us on the ground have been doing. We don't need lectures on Single Payer, we understand what medicare is and why adding "for all" to the end of it is a simplistic view, and that achieving Single payer is something we need to do carefully and with thought, and in the mean time we need to work on getting as many people covered as possible, that incrementalism is not a sin.
Um, corporations are not allowed to contribute to candidates, so his opponent proved you could win without those monies too.
The people that followed him were not so great at actually getting out and voting, for the only party fighting for them. They were duped and ill educated, and told things that were patently false. An entire generation that doesn't know how government works and have contempt for participating in it. Who, if they bothered to register, didn't vote, didn't realize why it's stupid to not vote on the WHOLE ballot, not just the part where they wrote in an invalid name.
We have a lot of damage to repair, and we do that by not giving in to the divisive nonsense, the name calling and the abuse hurled at those who will not bow down to the cult of personality. That's not what we're about, and it's not what I ever thought Bernie himself was about. This need to treat him as if he and only he is doing anything, when praising the efforts of the all the other folks who do the work, is disturbing. This is not who we are as liberals, as progressive or Democrats. That's the other side, enough already with this unpleasantness.
I'm glad you did vote for Hillary, and I hope you followed through with the rest of the down ballot races, the sad fact is that many who believe as you do, did not. That's why we have a monster who won by 70k votes, and State and local elections still in Republican hands, despite there being more of us than there are of them.
bekkilyn
(454 posts)to say that Bernie puts forth no policy when he's one of the very few who actually *does* talk policy is mindboggling. Single-payer, free college, money out of politics, wealth inequality....he talks about this stuff ALL the time while nearly everyone else is going on about vague things like "better opportunities" or "defending our values". Love him or hate him, I don't see how anyone can not at least see this.
Also this...
Um, corporations are not allowed to contribute to candidates, so his opponent proved you could win without those monies too.
The absolutely ARE allowed to contribute all the money they want...unlimited. What do you think all the fuss was about concerning getting rid of Citizens United ruling? While no, they can't contribute directly, they do it through the superPACs.
https://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/10/18/11527/citizens-united-decision-and-why-it-matters
He hasn't tried to take credit for all the work people have been doing now in non-partisan organizations such as Indivisible, but at the same time many people have become inspired and active in the political process and the later joined Indivisible, OurRevolution, WomensMarch, etc. or even the Democratic party because of Bernie. No, not everyone...no one has ever claimed that...but a sizable number of people are now enthusiastically participating in democracy because of him. But over and over and over, Bernie has insisted it's not about him...it's about us.
As for divisive name calling, in your very post you're calling Bernie supporters ill-educated dupes, ignorant of government, and right-wingers, among other things. And no, you didn't say *some*, or a small minority of supporters...you pasted the labels onto us all even though the majority of his supporters voted for Hillary and other Democrats in the election, up and down the ballot and are even now participating in local Democratic precinct meetings and other things.
And it's ridiculous to blame voters for who they decided to vote for in the election. I hear this sort of thing from people all the time, but its a lazy argument that passes off responsibility. Other than issues with voter suppression, gerrymandering, and Russian influence, if a candidate loses an election because voters didn't vote for him/her, it's because the candidates didn't do a good job convincing those voters to vote for them, so they need to do a better job next time if they want those votes because for whatever reason, the candidates were unable to connect. We don't blame customers for deciding to shop elsewhere if they don't like what we are offering. We instead take ownership and responsibility and create a better marketing plan.
So again, I'm glad you're active, but so are we, and for the most part, on the same side even if there is some disagreement on how we reach those goals.
synergie
(1,901 posts)He says words, but he doesn't actually provide the actual nuts and bolts of policy. Those are tangible things. Any one can shout about single payer, but how do we actually go about doing that? Where is the funding coming from, how do we design the actual program, do we do the UK's version, Canada, some other country? How do we translate that to the population we have here in the US?
It's mindboggling to me that people don't seem to understand what putting forth actual policy actually means. I'm ever more grateful to my teachers who did educate me and I had no idea that I was so luck to have effective teachers who taught these basic things.
He talks vaguely about these things, and never explains HOW to do anything, that's what actual policy is, the HOW not just the titles, but the details. Those of us who actually do understand what policy is, honestly cannot understand how anyone sees these vague gestures as actual policy. I mean, they're great ideas, but HOW does he plan on doing them, the one time he was asked, he couldn't answer and then he and his whole side (wife, campaign and followers) got angry at the publication for daring to actually ask such a thing. Has he thought through any of these policies, if so then why won't he tell anyone what they are? Or does he think merely having a broad idea is enough policy work? That's literally not how policy works. You need goals, you need a plan to achieve those goals, you need to sit through and think about how to deal with the consequences intended and otherwise and how you fund things.
When you're talking big things, like overhauling the healthcare system, the financial system, the education system, you have to look beyond the bold faced titles, and it doesn't seem like he's doing that. Others are.
Citizens United was not about directly funding candidates, you might want to figure out what that ruling actually allowed, since it's not what you understand.
I didn't state that Bernie was trying take credit, I specifically stated that he's being GIVEN credit by his followers, when he didn't do the work. A lot of the problems with Bernie, other than his own abrasiveness is that utter nonsense his devoted followers do on his behalf, such as rob the people doing the work of the credit they deserve to lay it as his feet. Those groups you speak of? Many were started by HRC supporters, and they were not doing it because of Bernie, they were quite annoyed with his actions in the primary and not very happy with his inability to repair the damage in the general. It isn't about him at all, but that's not what his followers insist, as they project their anger, accuse of us being "triggered" and "spewing vomit" and other vile things when we simply point out that he's a mere politician, who puts his foot in his mouth a lot.
Actually, I never called ALL Bernie supporters that, and it's both divisive and dishonest to pretend that I did and it's also utter dishonest and disingenuous to pretend that the things I did say were not 100% factual.
I said the people that "followed him", after the primary, those were not just Bernie supporters, they were the minority of malignant folks who made it their business to attack the party, the candidate and supporters of HRC. You malign actual Bernie supporters by pretending they are identical to this group of followers. They were not. The vast majority of Bernie supporters were not these vile people who clung to the right wing lies fed to them by the fake news promoters. That was true even in the Primary. There was always a difference between people who supported Bernie and those who is paroxysms of religious fervor over a bird landing on his podium. Even Bernie was stymied by this response.
It's useless to pretend that those repeating things about rigging and "stolen" elections, who honestly and earnestly believed that one had to only wave a magic wand and Single Payer would appear and that they only had to mill about on the White House Lawn to effect change, who didn't know a blasted thing about Citizens United (who actually believed that the suit that was a direct attack on HRC was something she supported), and believed that a president has any power over what cases the Supreme Court reviews... that these people are anything but profoundly ignorant. These were in the minority, but they truly failed to do come out and vote, because they didn't know any better, and were being lied to constantly, and bought that nonsense they were being told. It's why the margin was so low, and why all that Stein diversion mattered, though they weren't supporting her, just pouting about not getting their way.
That wasn't most of Bernie supporters, they were not that toxic, but they were the deeply ignorant group who were played. I thought that was implied, but you chose to create drama to excuse the vile name calling and divisive garbage that follows anyone daring to not fawn over Bernie.
I wish more people would be more active and actually pay attention to the boring nuts and bolts and that much reviled incrementalism that actually gets things done. Speechifying doesn't cut it.
It's ridiculous to blame voters for not doing their homework and falling for utterly stupid lies they don't have the education or common sense to combat on their own? I quite agree, with you, that's why Bernie lost the primary, but too many didn't make that connection that he did not connect with voters. 4 million is a big number to lose by.
But you're forgetting that she won by 3 million, despite the CrossCheck, the Russian nonsense, an hostile media that favored her opponents, the lukewarm support from the guy who inflicted damage and didn't do enough to correct it.
Quite literally anyone and everyone who did look at the actual policies and saw what was behind them did connect with her, hers were fleshed out, agree with them or not, there were substantive and achievable. Voters are not customers, and if they're shopping elsewhere because the opposition is lying to them and your advertising is drowned out by a complicit media that silences you, is it your fault that customers go elsewhere? How effective is a marketing plan when no one will carry a message that is positive towards you, but will only promote that which is negative? Your analogy doesn't work here.
So again, I wish you were active, but you aren't doing your homework, as your post plainly shows, that's not an insult, it just means you have some work to do. Learn what actual policy entails and why Bernie needs to do better to enact the things he's been talking about for decades in office but hasn't done much to accomplish.
Also, learn what Citizens United is, it does not allow unlimited contributions by corporations to candidates, they're still not allowed to do that. Corporations are not allowed to give money to candidates.
" Corporations and Unions
The law also prohibits contributions from corporations and labor unions. This prohibition applies to any incorporated organization, profit or nonprofit. For example, the owner of an incorporated "mom and pop" grocery store is not permitted to use a business account to make contributions. Instead, the owner would have to use a personal account. A corporate employee may make contributions through a nonrepayable corporate drawing account, which allows the individual to draw personal funds against salary, profits or other compensation. "
From: http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/citizens.shtml
(It's a gov page, don't know if it's been Trumpified, but I'm guessing no, since it's coherent.)
So, being active means a bit more than what I think you're thinking. I'm not attacking Bernie supporters, I had no ill will towards him, or those who supported him. I do have ill will to those who imbibed the RW and Russian nonsense, who were feral in their attacks and abuses, and who are still to be found muttering things about rigging, these are not the vast majority of Bernie supporters, but those who did dedicate themselves to promoting animosity were very much present and few of them bothered to do their homework or vote. When every vote counted, that's unforgivable, blaming the candidate rather than doing their own homework is lazy and in light of what we know happened, it's just plain dishonest.
We get beyond this by not playing victim, not doing the condescending bit and understanding what happened here, and why that's going to bite us in the rear if we don't address it.
We are on the same side, and if you'd read what I wrote without the assumptions you made, I don't think you'd disagree with me as much as you think you do, we don't actually disagree on how to reach those goals. You need solid implementable policy, you need critical thought and you need people who will inform themselves beyond whatever the media is buzzing about.
Please do look at what Citizens United says, and read the link I posted. There is a lot of misinformation, some of it simple mistakes some of it malignant. All of it needs to be corrected and we can only start with ourselves. Those of us who are not in the legal profession don't offhand know what CU was about, but it's easy to find out, too bad the media didn't bother doing their job on this and that Bernie didn't explain. He had the platform but failed on this score. His points about getting money of this process is valid, but I guess even he didn't know how little the people listening to him knew about it.
bekkilyn
(454 posts)A whole bunch of stuff about Bernie's policies can be found in a very un-obvious place. His website. Here's the Medicare For All section just as one example:
https://berniesanders.com/issues/medicare-for-all/
There's even a section on that page that is titled:
HOW MUCH WILL IT COST AND HOW DO WE PAY FOR IT?
The absolutely ARE allowed to contribute all the money they want...unlimited. What do you think all the fuss was about concerning getting rid of Citizens United ruling? While no, they can't contribute directly, they do it through the superPACs.
I'm sure you'll enjoy picking it apart with unbounded glee.
Please also allow me to quote myself concerning what I said about Citizens United since you pointed out something I'd already said.
Regardless of the details of the methods multi-national corporations and other wealthy donors funnel money to their chosen candidates, Citizens United allows an unlimited amount of it. It has contributed an extreme amount of corruption into our political process. You may disagree, of course, as is your right.
Anyway, believe whatever you will about the above things, but I am done discussing anything else with you as it is getting too inflammatory and it seems you are determined to be right about everything at all costs and I'd really rather do something more productive than go around in circles.
synergie
(1,901 posts)You think what's on his site are full fledged policies? Bless your heart.
As I said, there are titles, but that's it. Nothing to back it up, no substance. I'm sure you posted this with the unbounded glee and pure joy that seems to be going around preaching unity and delivering anything but.
And allow me to correct you once again, I do actually understand the fuss of the CU ruling, which you still appear not to, no surprise give the amount of disinformation being spread around and all those folks yelling about corporatism.
I don't actually disagree, I believe CU was a huge mistake, what I think is to tie one's hand behind one's back in such circumstances and brainwash people who literally don't know any better with the dishonest claim that a president can do anything to make the Supreme Court change it's ruling. You may disagree, but that doesn't make disseminating false claims about how the SC works and presidential powers any more right.
I don't see much discussing on your part, but yes it started out inflammatory and continued on that way, that was in fact the whole point of this thread. It seems you are determined to be incorrect about things and cloak it all in a rather thin veneer of saccharine that doesn't fool anyone.
I'm truly sorry that you still don't know how policies work and that you are content with vague shallow title headers that don't produce anything of substance or any actual plan of action to achieve said goals.
Good luck with finding something more productive to do, sadly until you can admit that you might be wrong about something, no growth or education is possible. I chose to do my homework, you decided to shrug it off and "bless" people. That's ever so helpful with not being inflammatory and working towards unity. Thankfully, those who are fighting the actual fight on our side aren't so willing to embrace the cult of personality and are willing to do the work, even if a certain minor faction insist on robbing us of the credit to lavish it upon those who are merely waving around in the general direction of progress than actually taking any steps to achieve it.
Thanks ever so much for sharing, you take care now, ya hear?
PatrickforO
(14,514 posts)I've often said Sanders is more of a Democrat than many Democrats these days, and he's certainly in line with what I believe.
I'm with the guy you're arguing with. Completely irrelevant what Sanders calls himself. Doesn't matter. Don't care. Doesn't affect me.
See, we criticize the Repubs for being Repubs FIRST and Americans a distant second. I'm not saying that about most Dems, but what I WILL say about Sanders is that he's American first and party a distant second and THAT IS WHAT WE NEED FROM ALL THOSE WE ELECT WHO OSTENSIBLY GO TO DC TO UPHOLD OUR INTERESTS.
Nation before party. No one has the guts to make unpopular decisions, like raising taxes for infrastructure improvements or single payer healthcare, because they are too afraid of not being reelected.
Bernie has fought all his life for things that would make OUR lives measurably better. Don't care what party he says he is with. Never will.
synergie
(1,901 posts)it, is not the default leader of that party is not "trashing you", it's merely explaining a simple fact that you don't seem to like.
Metsie Casey
(208 posts)Should be the president. I voted for him in the primary. Hillary for the election. I still don't understand how the polls (from the ny times) had her as a sure win and the don won. Can't trust polls anymore.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)they commit election fraud (gerrymandering, voter suppression, compromised voting machines).
Metsie Casey
(208 posts)Still confused that Kerry didn't win. 2nd term for gw ? How ?
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Kimchijeon
(1,606 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)his seat is a safe seat and generally less of a concern
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)They typically get a lot of push back,
and a few 'alerts'.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)I think Sanders is one of the 'good guys' fighting for us just like Franken, Schiff, Warren, Schumer and many others.
Orrex
(63,083 posts)I've lost track--has anyone made the Sanders:Messiah comparison yet?
George II
(67,782 posts)I hear the New England Patriots are soaring in the polls, too.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)we can't kick the shit out of the GOP in the coming elections.
George II
(67,782 posts)Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)This is yesterday's FOX News. A ridiculously biased "poll" (actually the creators call it a survey, not a poll) with highly limited "choices". And you even commented a number of times on this survey a week ago! Remember that, when you all but demanded that someone find sources to Sanders quotes even though they were given?
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,271 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)Hassin Bin Sober
(26,271 posts)underthematrix
(5,811 posts)just a little. I support Bernie Sanders efforts toward single payer. I can support his healthcare policy agenda and still hate him with the heat of a trillion suns. And no he's not more popular than President Obama.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Perty strong statement....
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)on Rachel's show last night even if he did bring up single payer again which will not happen anytime soon...we will have a public option first, but only if Democrats can win back the government...no third party or independent can win...but they can cause a loss if they attack the Democratic party. Many of us feel we need to move forward and fight the GOP not Democrats.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)And it is important to take 'quotes' in context...
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Especially if it is valid criticism.
This also causes People to call their representatives and voice their opinion to
get them to shape up.
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)and we had a policy against big donors which I hope has been revoked because if not, we will continue to lose. There is not enough money in the states to fight Koch money. Try fighting the GOP which will be a new experience for some.
JCanete
(5,272 posts)to say that we are going to work with the bankers and the leaders of other industries to get something that works for everyone. THAT is unicorns. They could certainly get damn close to pleasing everybody if they stopped trying to play arbitrators between the people and the rich, and went full on populist already. The bullshit things that people hold onto would start to fall away as worthless dead weight if people thought their racism and backwards ass thinking on science and climate change, etc. was standing in their way of tangible things our society could be providing. They just have to believe that they could get a piece of that better life.
Of course that doesn't do anywhere close to most of the work. That is just a fundamental crack in their bubble that we could achieve with the right messaging, but we choose instead to try to thread the needle between our liberal base and corporate interests, and we get ground up for it.
I say yes, lets fight the GOP and EVERYTHING they stand for, and lets fight the damn interests that they are the proxy for, all the way, not just some of the way.
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)to the types of people supporting him now who think legislation is a simple process and it's possible to IMPLEMENT legislation without Wall Street stakeholders. It's not.
With that said, I support Bernie's healthcare efforts. He's doing a great job pulling in red state voters. He's educating them about policy and I like that.
I'm African American and know I don't have to like you to work toward a shared goal. We've done it for years.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)underthematrix
(5,811 posts)all the time just for that purpose so I stopped watching them for years. I just returned to watching Rachel is last couple of months.
Luciferous
(6,067 posts)don't like him, but I truly believe he is trying to fight for the people.
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Yes, it is a fox news poll....
But how is it decisive? It shows that Sanders is a popular Senator and trumpcare sucks. This is a good thing.
bekkilyn
(454 posts)guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)Sanders represents change, and Trumpcare represents a huge step backward..
Calculating
(2,954 posts)Even if you disagree with some of his positions, you gotta give him credit for his honesty and general good intent. Even Republicans don't 'hate' Bernie sanders with the passion that they hated Hillary.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)Sanders is a real statesman, and yes, nobody is perfect.
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)Seems pretty demoralizing. It is also dead wrong. It is the DEMOCRATIC PARTY that got the ACA passed in the first place and is waging a ferocious battle against Trump. There are many great Democrats leading the charge like Adam Schiff, who is leading the Intelligence Committee's Trump Russia ties investigation, or Al Franken who in a brilliant cross-examination on national TV revealed Gorsuch to be a heartless corporate stooge with poor judgment. Or Schumer who has vowed to filibuster Gorsuch. Or all the Democratic state attorneys general, who have blocked both of Trump's Muslim ban executive orders. Those Dems inspire me. Those Dems don't demoralize me or bash the Democratic Party.
Those anti-Dem statements by Bernie last night on Rachel were counterproductive to fighting the GOP's attempts to eviscerate the ACA, which is what Rachel was asking him about when he inexplicably said that.
bekkilyn
(454 posts)The party has some very serious issues that need to be addressed as it's been losing elections for many years now. It can't all be blamed on Republican cheating and Russia as it started long before 2016. While Democratic party "loyalists" may not like Bernie's style of addressing issues, those of us who are not so inclined to party politics appreciate the honesty while using the critiques to try to determine future strategies.
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)He was not giving an election post mortem. He was attacking Dems who are fighting Trump right now. Dems are kicking ass right now. They held together and the AHCA went does in flames. I've never been more proud of our party.
bekkilyn
(454 posts)Sure, there have been some exceptional times like this recent AHCA thing, but Dems are pretty well known for being notoriously bad for coming together and standing firm on things, and are willing to compromise on practically anything. There's nothing wrong at all for being proud of the party when it does something right, but the party seems to usually need to grow a backbone and it's incredibly frustrating to keep losing more and more every year because Republicans never give up and Democrats have been wishy washy out of fear of making the Republicans upset.
People in this country tend to like strength and like to *see* strength, so it would be a really good thing if Dems kept up on other things like today with the AHCA. We need MORE...much more of that sort of thing.
I'm not trying to bash the party, but it's something that has been incredibly frustrating to me for years, and Bernie speaks to people who have similar feelings and gives us a bit of hope that things can be different. (And yes, there are some other Democrats and Democratic allies doing it too, so it's more of a party-as-a-whole...perception thing.)
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)It would have been helpful if Bernie said that passage of yours rather than calling Dems weak and unable to fight back. Clearly they are not weak and can fight back. How about we encourage our Dem representatives to fight and tell them we will have their back in November, that they are strong? Telling them they are weak is counterproductive.
bekkilyn
(454 posts)He gets a lot of criticism sometimes from some of his progressive base about his decision to continue working closely with the Democratic party rather than doing something like creating his own 3rd party. He gets a good deal of pressure to do that.
I think Dems have a big opportunity with the disastrous results of 2016. People might *finally* start seeing the terribleness and gross incompetence of the Republican party and their way-out-of-touch ideology and if the Dems can really step up and lead and get out there everywhere, boots on the ground, hammering home how the Dems are going to help solve problems, then there's a good chance of sweeping the Republicans aside *despite* their cheating, gerrymandering, and Russian interference.
SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)I totally agree that if Dems "get out there everywhere, boots on the ground, hammering home how the Dems are going to help solve problems, then there's a good chance of sweeping the Republicans aside *despite* their cheating, gerrymandering, and Russian interference." That is our new DNC Chair's plan.
bekkilyn
(454 posts)Even though we do argue about the methods and motives.
Nevertheless, I do hope the new DNC Chair's plan is as we agreed above. Will just have to see how things go and help however we can!
George II
(67,782 posts)...what is he trying to accomplish? Certainly nothing new, he's spouting the same old tired refrain that he began with way back in early 2015.
And that old tired refrain is not complimentary to Democrats or complementary to the Democratic cause.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)ecstatic
(32,566 posts)The jig is up, bro. We see you.
Omaha Steve
(99,054 posts)SunSeeker
(51,367 posts)Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Orrex
(63,083 posts)At least while he's running for the national spotlight. Then, when he needs to score that sweet "Independent" label so important in Vermont, he's a True Independent again. Until the next time he decides that the "Democrat" label serves his purposes better.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)BainsBane
(53,001 posts)He's on TV a few times a week, is popular, and living large. The citizens of America aren't doing so well, but Bernie is what really matters.
Talk Is Cheap
(389 posts)BainsBane
(53,001 posts)Yes, he's fighting for the people dedicated to ensuring that Bernie is on TV as much as possibke.
Those of us who care about the citizenry and immigrants more than the career of any politician don't qualify as people, but then that's nothing new.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)In a poll of randomly selected registered voters Bernie's favourablility was higher than Trump's, Planned Parenthood and the ACA also did well. This is a GOOD thing.
No one has been able to explain how this poll is biased. Some don't like the categories and/or the limited amount of politicians and others definitely don't like the results but that doesn't indicate bias - at least on the part of the firms conducting the polls.
A quick Google search shows this isn't an outlier, Bernie has been popular for years.
Here's just one example:
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/04/28/bernie-sanders-voted-americas-popular-senator-year-row.html
So as a liberal who despises Trump with ever fiber of my being I am THRILLED that Bernie is still far more popular than Mango Mussolini and I'm tickled to death to see he's still popular here as well.
Every time Bernie speaks out for voter rights, women's and minorities' rights and workers' rights he is fighting for all of us. This poll is just proof that we the people appreciate his efforts.
As an aside - this poll really angered Twitler's fans on social media and that's an added bonus.
So yay for PP, the ACA and Bernie!
BainsBane
(53,001 posts)And women who care about equal rights are "weak." Women's reproductive rights lost, but Bernie's a star.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)BainsBane
(53,001 posts)To ensure they remain the permanent minority. Talking about working with Trump, on the other hand, is great, as long as it's accompanied by condemnation of the Democratic Party.
That will show them for letting the women folk out of the kitchen.
JI7
(89,172 posts)I pointed out that she is only 3 years older than Sanders.
People have different standards when it comes to women.
synergie
(1,901 posts)fallacious correlations being drawn in this opinion piece. The poll was thoroughly discussed last week, which makes one wonder why post it again.
Of course it angered Trump's fans, it showed that Republicans like Bernie and PP and the ACA. They think their fellow right wing nut jobs are somehow betraying them.
flamingdem
(39,303 posts)and his organization.
Let's end the rift. We've got a good guy on our side.
synergie
(1,901 posts)But the people encouraging people to step up and run for office aren't his organization. That's actually the hard work of the Resistance, Indivisible, and Emerge just to name a few that are actively doing this.
Our side isn't weak or feeble, and it's nice that he's on our side, but credit where credit is due, we're doing a fine job of organizing ourselves without Senators or Reps doing it for us.
flamingdem
(39,303 posts)that came out of the election, it's directly millenials who were not dem identified who are running.
synergie
(1,901 posts)a part of. It's directly from places other than Bernie's organization. Quite literally, these ones stepping up are from the Resistance, Emerge, Indivisible, and PantSuitNation which turned into a whole lot of smaller organizations.
A lot of millenials who now identify as Dems (like myself) strongly identify as Dems now, and we're a bit annoyed by what he throws in there when he doesn't have to, and what our friends who were his biggest supporters were turned into. We all know people who outright refused to vote, and who still are going on about "rigging" and how losing by 4 million votes means it was "stolen" and other such nonsense.
I think you might not have kept up with what all these other groups were doing, you've seen the efforts on TV, the various marches etc. they were not Bernie or his organization, they were the actual grassroots.
The people running came out of these groups, Bernie's not doing much organizing, we are. His Revolution or whatever has been coming to our events, but they were not organizing them. They're welcome of course, but they aren't responsible.
flamingdem
(39,303 posts)Congrats on becoming a dem. I support Bernie choosing to remain independent but think we need to strengthen the party numero uno.
synergie
(1,901 posts)Dem based on the candidates, with a couple of notable exceptions. (A pouty vote for Stein and family loyalty vote for the black sheep cousin who ran as an R for some local thing.)
I don't really care what he chooses to call himself, I'm just aware that he said something entirely different during the campaign and it bothers me how quickly he abandoned that promise.
We do indeed need to continue our work in this party, and hopefully we can continue this momentum. Minimizing the work of those doing it does tend to be a bit of a slap in the face. It's not some Senator or Rep, and it's not just Milennials, our older siblings who are just a few years older are getting annoyed at being ignored too. All that attention was on the college kids, who apparently didn't get the civics lessons the folks too young to be Gen X or Y and don't make the cut off for Milennials. These are the folks who are stepping up too. The people settling into careers and raising families and who know that lofty goals are great, but we need hard headed pragmatism too on every level.
I think we'll be fine, but a little respect for the people doing the work is in order. We don't need the top levels to organize us, we're doing that well on our own (and doing so with our parents and older siblings/cousins too).
flamingdem
(39,303 posts)Would be interested to know about what he said that was different during the campaign? A promise? Promises? How he treated those who worked for him? >> I'm just aware that he said something entirely different during the campaign and it bothers me how quickly he abandoned that promise.
I have family ties in Vermont so have known about and met Bernie years ago. He's pretty solid but of course old school at this point.
FDRsGhost
(470 posts)FOX is a little high but generally Bernie does really well across the board
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/bernie-sanders-favorable-rating
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)You can search by politician's name as well. I looked up Obama, Hillary, Warren and a few others.
Thanks! Bookmarked it.