New head of Our Revolution Nina Turner on Unity with DEMS!!

I got sick of their propaganda this election.

We shouldn't be discussing them. They have no desire to work with us and never have.

CM: Will the group be endorsing non-Democrats?

NT: You know what, yes. We are open to it. And for me, I’ve also heard the senator say this lately too: Let’s put the political affiliation to the side. If there is a Republican or a Libertarian or Green Party person that believes in Medicare for all, then that’s our kind of person. If there’s somebody that believes that Citizens United needs to be overturned, that we need the 28th amendment to the Constitution that declares that money, corporate money, is not speech and that corporations should not have more speech than Mrs. Johnson down the street and Mr. Gonzalez around the corner, then that’s our kind of people.

www.thenation.com/article/nina-turner-it-is-not-our-job-to-fit-into-the-democratic-establishment/

I have never met a person that identifies as a republican say that he or she is for Single Payer or want Citizen's United reversed. What a bunch of idiots.

So I have no use for her or her fucking ego...

The Tea Party's success and their ability to get Bannon and other into the WH in a realatively short period of time happened because they focused a lot of their energy on infiltrating the Republican Party. The "look at me" groups are invested in self promotion, not actual accomplishments. Turner is the perfect person to head them up if you are a Democrat.

even if their chosen candidate was not in the General. People like Nina Turner have no intention of doing that.

I honestly always felt uncomfortable with her speaking for Democrats, she had a tendency to put her foot into her mouth too often.

Exactly. They also showed up in primaries to get their Republican thru. As I stated above, that is how they gained power in short order.

The question Nina was asked wasn't about Democratic primaries. It was specifically about non-Democrats.

member.

We live here in Hawaii and Bernie was a huge hit here. Many people (surprised the hell out of me) did not vote for Hillary during the general and this is a blue state. Of course, a lot of Dems did, but there are still people here talking about "the revolution" as though it is still on.
Last night we were with a group of prominent people in Hilo enjoying some pupus and beers outside on the lanai of a restaurant and the owner had joined us--a woman and very well known and liked here in Hilo. The issues of the travel ban, Trump, politics, etc. came up and I was flabbergasted to hear that a few at the gathering went from supporting Bernie to voting for Trump, and a few decided "to hell with it" and didn't vote after Hillary Clinton won the nomination because "what's the point?", and a few voted for Stein. "Feel the Bern" signs can still be seen as you drive around.
To make a long story short the restaurant owner, with echoes of agreement from almost everyone there, explained to us that "both Democrats and Republicans are no different--both pander to corporate interests and power" and that "the revolution is not about the left vs right, but the top vs the bottom." She also explained that this is the only way forward and it will happen--"the revolution is happening." This was coming from a rather wealthy perspective as well, so I can only assume that the top percentile being described includes billionaires and corporate stooges--not wealthy business owners who like to write their own rules.
Since we were guests and relatively new to the area I kicked my spouse under the table to keep quiet and explained in the car headed home that we have to pick our fights carefully and as these people get to know us more we can get our views out there as we socialize with them separately, but not in a whole group where we were hopelessly outnumbered--like last night--while the beer was flowing.

That is so sad.. I was just freaking reading your post.

They are so blinded by brainwashed hate they can't see the difference between The Democratic Party and the stupid Fascistrumps.

Still Hillary got 70% on the Islands so we're not all brainwashed suckers.

Aloha

Glad you are there
Fortunately we do meet people who supported Hillary Clinton here. We often meet people from the mainland who are Dems, too, and often from "red" states which is surprising, but then Hawaii is a blue state and most people know that.
Bernie was quite a craze around here, though, and particularly with business people who identify as somewhat hip. There is quite a university crowd here, too, but lots of locals bought into the idea that Hillary is owned by Wall Street and is a war monger. It is hard to take since she has worked her guts out her whole adult life to help people, and not just here in America.
This whole notion of a revolution against the "other" top percentile (so many are successful themselves) scares me because it ignores so much unaddressed privilege and social barriers that keep people from their dreams and reasonable security with their families and futures.
It is important to stay positive and to never give up or in. Aloha again, Cha!

If they're so wonderful why do they have to lie all the time? the only thing they're good at is getting assholes elected like trump.

pandr

Susan Sarandon,
Cornell West,
Black Lives Matter,
Susan Stein
Nina Turner

can go work for Donald Trump

You're misinformed on that.

You don't even seem to remember BLM disrupting Sanders' events.

What.... you don't care for civil rights?

How much exactly was Sarandon's concerns affected by the election of Trump?

Same goes for.
Jill Stein supporters.
Cornell West and his supporters.
And so on.

Nina Turner and Jill Stein are basking in the glory of fame, so I guess it was worth it for them.

From my vantage point, I think civil rights are going to take as seat in the back of the bus for 4 to 8 years.

Forgive me for not celebrating

if they try to bring an issue to the fore there might be a backlash.

The election of Trump doesn't change that fact, it just enforces it, more so.

Racists elected Donald Trump. I think we were all disgusted by how may racists are still out there.

Civil rights will never take a back seat. It is the very tenet of our party. And I am disturbed by people who believe civil rights should be ignored.

But to answer your original question, a LOT.

with that bunch of RF.

They didn't LIE that "Hillary was worse than trump".

You need to get woke.

CM: How will Our Revolution relate to the DNC, the DCCC, the DSCC, that kind of establishment that so many activists and politicians, including you, have frequently criticized?

NT: I don’t think it is our job nor our obligation to fit in. It’s their job to fit in with us. But the overwhelming majority of registered voters in this country, I think it’s 53 percent or maybe 54 percent, identify as independent. Now, we know independents lean one way or the other but they identify as independent so that means that both political parties need to do some soul searching. I’m certainly willing to sit across the table with almost anybody if we gonna work towards the collective good, but it is not Our Revolution’s job to fit in with them.

CM: And how will Our Revolution relate to progressives within government who didn’t back Bernie, like Sherrod Brown and Tammy Baldwin, if they go on to seek reelection?

NT: If they want Our Revolution’s endorsement they will seek it like everybody else and so they gotta start with the local affiliates, and if the local affiliates say that this is the person that we want to back, then there it is. There it is.

....and its resources to fit in with Democrats? And essentially she feels that Democratic candidates should grovel for the endorsement of "Our Revolution"?

Wow, that's pompous if you ask me.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx
http://www.pewresearch.org/data-trend/political-attitudes/party-identification/

For years my father was a registered republican in NYC (he later changed to Democratic) but always "considered" himself to be a Democrat.

Do you think that people who feel no obligation to the Democratic Party should make use of Dem machinery to further their political aims?

is elect GOP types.

that unaffiliated voters (independent voters) are "registered independents".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Independent_Party

... just to show the "corporate 2-party system" who's boss, and ended up registered as far-right wing racist idiots in the AIP. I guess you have to be a crusty old Boomer who's time oughta be up to remember Alabama Governor George Wallace and his run for the White House.

When the partisan leanings of independents are taken into account, 48% either identify as Democrats or lean Democratic; 39% identify as Republicans or lean Republican. The gap in leaned party affiliation has held fairly steady since 2009, when Democrats held a 13-point advantage (50% to 37%).

And

Most of those who identify as independents lean toward a party. And in many respects, partisan leaners have attitudes that are similar to those of partisans – they just prefer not to identify with a party. (See this appendix to our 2014 polarization report for an explainer on partisan “leaners.”)

"So Nina Turner feels that it's not the job of those who want to use the Democratic Party........and its resources to fit in with Democrats?

I did not read that anywhere in this article - did you?

"I don’t think it is our job nor our obligation to fit in. It’s their job to fit in with us." and you wrote
"So Nina Turner feels that it's not the job of those who want to use the Democratic Party........and its resources to fit in with Democrats?"

I don't think she said that they want to 'use the Dem party and its resources'.

Right or wrong, and it's their rules, that if the Dem party wants their help/support/whatever that the
Dem party must fit in with them! If you run your own organization you can do whatever you want I guess.
I don't think the Dem party even cares about their organization.

I answered your question by reading what she said. Now its
"That was a response to a specific question." What does that mean?
Are you reading what you want to from her answer? If so, I can't help you....

"So Nina Turner feels that it's not the job of those who want to use the Democratic Party........and its resources to fit in with Democrats"

Senator Sanders has used the resources of all three of the entities mentioned in the question she was asked (and was included in your post to which I responded)- the DCCC when he was a Congressman, the DSCC as a Senator, and the DNC for both of those AND as a presidential candidate.

Inasmuch as she's representing "Our Revolution", the subject organization of the interview, which was created by Senator Sanders and his wife, and headed up by them, she feels that even though he and others associated with "Our Revolution" (most likely including her when she was a candidate in Ohio) have used the resources of the DCCC, DSCC, and DNC, she expects that THOSE organizations should "fit in" with "Our Revolution".

But, the primaries are over. Sanders is not a Dem. So what you wrote is now moot.

Edited to add:

Sanders was and is a statesman by asking to run as a Dem and was granted that. He
is a statesman because he could have run as an Independent but did not want to be
the so-called Nader or Perot 'spoiler'...

He has accepted money from the DNC, DCCC, and DSCC (last two when they were appropriate since one applies to House candidates and one applies to Senate candidates) over the years and has accepted assistance from the three over the years, long before the 2016 Presidential primaries to which you refer.

So, getting back to my original comment five or six posts ago, Nina Turner expects these three committees, the resources of which "Our Revolution" candidates have and will be used, should "fit in" with Our Revolution, even though they're USING those committee's resources and not the other way around.

That is chutzpah.

...and is an extremely reliably Dem vote and is rated near the very top in Dem values and votes taken. Beats out most Dems...
So I can see how the DCCC and DSCC contributed to his campaigns.

Any candidates can accept or deny any contributions from anybody. So, if a candidate accepts donations from
the Dems and Our Revolution - thats just fine. It does not obligate Our Revolution to support candidates they
choose not to support. The DCCC and the DSCC are also under no obligation to support Our Revoultion candidates either.
So, I am not sure what your problem is...

What I said (twice, now three times) is that Nina Turner feels as though it's not the job of people who have used the resources of the DCCC, DSCC, and DNC to "fit in" with Democrats, indeed it should be the other way around.

It's like "I will take your money and use your people, but you'd better work to fit in with OUR philosophy, we're not going to fit in with yours!"

George II, all she said was "NT: I don’t think it is our job nor our obligation to fit in. It’s their job to fit in with us."

There is no way that what you wrote can be derived from what she said.

With that, I think you are just 'spinning' with me, so thanks for the
conversation. But that's it for now...

....apparently you're refusing to accept.

There is EVERY way that what I wrote can be derived from what she said, which was in response to a question posted to her.

It's not that she said it at the outset, absent any question from the interviewer. But for some reason you're ignoring the question she was asked.

Not surprised you're now bailing on the discussion.

run as a Democrat. Nothing but divisiveness has followed and continues to.

the Our revolution (waste of time) wants the help of the Democratic party than the "our revolution" must fit in with the Democratic Party." That includes Greens...they (both Greens [more yellow like moose piss])can all fuck themselves and twice on Sunday.

GOP...it is a 501 C ...a money making venture.

This is the fundamental flaw I said would happen when they let Bernie have his fucking cake and eat it by dictating party policy without even being a member... Once you've lowered that standard, others will expect the same advantage...

fighting this same fight in 2018 all over again. Anyone whose followed this lengthy thread can see that Nina Turner and her ilk's way of thinking is severely flawed. We can't have people who refuse to be members of the Party coming in with their own hidden agendas and trying to take over the Democratic Party through threat and intimidation of those who are members, or else wanting to burn the house down if they don't get their way. These people will continue to wreak havoc within the Party while not choosing to become members, and we will have allowed outsiders to destroy our Party from within. My husband and I have been loyal party members for more than 40 years and I don't intend to have to get into fights with a bunch of twenty-somethings who think that they feel that they are the face of the Party because they suddenly woke up one morning and decided that they wanted to be in charge of something that they hadn't built. Not only hadn't they built it, but they didn't even want to register as members of the Party that they wanted to take over. How arrogant is that? And in what world would anyone sane stand for it?

Obviously the membership is where she would have to garner support. She and "Our Revolution" will try to promote certain ideals and endorse those who campaign on those ideals. If they gain popularity that will matter. If they don't it won't.
Certainly, if somebody wanted their endorsement, that person should behave in a way that fits with that organization's values. I'm not sure how that is distinguishable from the way most endorsements work.

out. I don't believe for one minute, Sen. Sanders would endorse (yuck) Republicans.

in favor of medicare for all and overturning citizens united either. I don't believe such an R exists, but if that candidate did I would wonder what his or her republican credentials were. I don't have a problem with her suggesting that "our revolution" isn't operating in a partisan space, but on one of ideals. That said, it is rhetoric and there will be no such R to step up and meet that criteria.

IE a majority. It doesn't matter what an individual thinks if he has an "R" next to his name...he helps enable a GOP majority...and any GOP can say anything about what they believe...most are liars...I want nothing to do with any group who endorses the GOP period. She can no longer be considered a Democrat end of story. I don't care what she says at this point.

about. Obviously that person would be a rare bird and a contradictory one at that. People can have a D next to their name and still screw you, i.e. not caucus with you. Conversely, it does sometimes happen, or used to back in the annals of history, where you would find moderates on the Republican side who would occasionally vote with democrats.

....the Democrats in his/her district or state aren't worth the probably smaller gain by "behaving" the way Nina Turner wants them to behave.

When has this come down to a matter of "behaving" in order to court support?

candidate is aligned to that entity's interest's, opposed, or predisposed to ignore them?

But just as you say, and as I already said, if "Our Revolution" doesn't ultimately have enough clout to influence a candidate over other influencers, then I assume that only candidate's already sympathetic to these issues will get or care about the endorsement. What's new?

...Senator Sanders have stated that it's not their job to promote party unity, it's the job of the Democratic Party to "fit in" with THEM, and they're perfectly willing to support candidates who are running against Democrats.

At least we all know where we stand with respect to Our Revolution.

be a rare occasion going forward.

....she's not going into it with an open mind.

is unfortunate, and it sheds light on why Democrats have been thrown out of at least one Our Revolution meeting. Trump voters are welcome, but people who supported Bernie in the primary but voted for Clinton in the GE are not, at least in one Wisconsin location. That incident now makes more sense in light of Turners appointment to head Our Revolution. It does not appear that the membership voted on the leadership position. Unlike head of the DNC, she was appointed.

Turner has repeatedly said the Democrats are worse than the GOP in terms of corporate interests. She said that just days after the GOP House passed a bill deregulating banking. Yet Turner isn't interested in what the GOP is doing to redistribute income to the wealthy. Her singular focus is lambasting Democrats.

Anyone who believes the GOP is better than the Democratic Party is not my ally or an ally of the poor and vulnerable whose lives are being worsened dramatically by this administration and congress. Anyone who works to weaken the Democratic Party serves the interests of the wealthy, whether they realize it or not. That posture also reveals a complete disregard for the lives of those suffering under Trump. The people who refused to vote for Clinton in the GE helped cause that suffering. They knowingly chose to impose a white supremacist, sexual predator in the White House, someone who is doing everything in his power to kill, deport, and imprison as many vulnerable Americans as possible.

The post below talking about how a wealthy woman in Hawaii was going on about how the two parties are both corrupt and she wouldn't vote Democrat are examples of precisely the kind of privilege and utter disregard for the well being of others that characterizes the Stein-third-party-Trump voters. There is nothing that can justify that kind of complete disregard for human rights and human lives. When people decide their egos are more important than the lives of thousands of Americans, they relinquish any high ground. Narcissism and entitlement are not morality.

Also, when we see so much focus on controlling the Democratic Party and little to none on what is actually being done by those governing the nation, it's clear that what we are seeing is a power grab. The citizens who suffer are of course no more relevant to such people than they were in November when they refused to vote for the Democrat. I submit that Turner and others who like the GOP so much better than Democrats focus on that party they prefer.

Why you think that excerpt in any way makes her look good, I can't begin to imagine. Trump and Dow Chemical are, I'm sure, delighted with Turner. I can't understand why anyone else would be.

From above:

CM: Will the group be endorsing non-Democrats?

NT: You know what, yes. We are open to it. And for me, I've also heard the senator say this lately too.

~~~~~~

She goes on and advocates supporting and voting for republicans, Libertarians, and Green Party candidates.

Thanks for posting that interview, it is highly enlightening.

Libertarians, GOP and Green. Sad.

Better yet, let it hit you so you will move out faster.

and 'Our' Revolution.

As with the shitheels on the right, I believe that unmasking the 'alt left' ratf*cking operation will ultimately be about following the money.

which doesn't have to report names of donors or amounts of donations. I found that fishy from the get-go.

"1. Any donor contributing $250 or more per year will be disclosed publicly at the end of each quarter on the Our Revolution web site"

Not sure if there is any law mandating that they actually do it thou...

And yes, it would be voluntary, and yes, who would know whether they left some donors out or not?

Lot of turmoil in that group since its inception. There were what, six or seven staffers who resigned en masse right off the bat, because they felt that the direction Jeff Weaver was going in was to cultivate big donors so he could run expensive tv ads, and they felt that undermined Bernie's message. Except Weaver was Bernie's choice. Except now he's out. All things that make you go hmm.

I didn't know that. And it is very fishy.

"Bernie Sanders deliberately set up Our Revolution as a 501(c)4 which doesn't have to report names of donors or amounts of donations. I found that fishy from the get-go."

since she should have no reason to keep talking about us - right?

lets her get close then they nuts too.

If it succeeds dems may never win another presidential election. And neither will "our revolution". We will split our votes. Never getting a majority.

Republicans it seems.

If you know what I mean

Since someone said Sen. Sanders appointed her to run "our revolution".

She's a disruptor...

So now it's not Democrats, it's not Republicans... are they really thinking they can base a movement on the loony 5% who perennially vote for people like Stein and Lyndon Larouch and Jonathan Winters? (Yes, you young whippersnappers, I am showing my age!)

On the bright side, their Christmas party is going to be easy to cater.

to try and figure out the answer to that same question. I still don't know. Nina Turner's comments have blurred the mission statement, for me at least. It seems like she has her own agenda and her own party. Oh how quickly Bernie's revolution went down the tubes!

Edit: I was looking around for background on her and came across the WaPo article from a couple days ago: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/06/29/nina-turner-a-democratic-party-critic-takes-reins-of-sanders-founded-group/?utm_term=.279b02ab9233

I think this is the most relevant quote:

But the stylistic differences between Weaver and Turner are vast, symptomatic of the divisions within a left that’s locked out of power and arguing about how to get it back. Turner, who made a splash in 2015 by jumping from Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign to Sanders’s, has become a superstar among left-wing activists who think the Democrats have become so “corporate” as to raise questions about whether they’re worth saving.

In 2016, despite her time as a Clinton booster, Turner was among the Sanders surrogates most resistant to “party unity.” After Sanders’s Democratic primary bid ended, she speculated whether a “young, new, burgeoning party” would be a better vessel for progressive energy. During the Democratic National Convention, after hackers released a trove of emails from the Democratic National Committee, Turner gave a rousing speech to the left-wing “People’s Convention” attacking staffers who had been revealed as critics of Sanders.


In the less polite circles that I sometimes dwell in, we would say "She's swinging from Bernie's balls".

Our Revolution is sure to die a quick but painful death.

I really think she is into self aggrandizement and furthering her own political career. She will definitely kill Our Revolution.

there is a huge difference in how she use to be. she use to be able to discuss specifics and legislation .

now she just repeats the usual lines about revolution which people do to feel cool but has little to no substance.

political experience and has never endorsed or advocated endorsing Republicans. She also doesn't have his magnetism...five minutes of listening to her makes my head ache. I voted for her in Ohio...wish I could have those votes back.

when he endorsed Sec. Clinton. I don't think he has that much influence in 'Our Revolution'. But I could be wrong. I have not read he appointed anyone...does anyone know how she got the job?

No, Nina, how about you learn how the political caucuses operate. A republican's belief in Medicare for All doesn't mean shit if they're going to vote to make Paul Ryan speaker and contribute to a bunch of loonies controlling committees and setting the agenda.

their job is to defeat democrats and help republicans win. nothing else.

I was hoping her 15 minutes were up after the election but I still see her on CNN panels taking the side of working families in Ohio who want jobs and don't care about Russian collusion investigations!

These are not allies.

joked 'expected'. I am paraphrasing...don't remember it word for word. I would never hide a post that bashed Greens.They are not Democrats and not protected as an 'ally'.

running for Congress in my district. Fortunately, he has a sensible opponent for the primary.

BOB and Our Revolution types would hurt down ballot races

United we win, divided we fall.

You know, I seem to remember the Berners having some very hardline, rigid, and unshakable thoughts on Hillary Clinton and bi-partisanship...

She should confine her limited efforts to Canadian politics.

The BOB types do not want unity

Greens, "Our Revolution," Libertarians, the lot of them. They will never be satisfied, because that's where their default setting is locked -- being dissatisfied. That, and latching themselves parasitically onto Democratic Party hopefuls, because they'll never peel off any Republican votes.

And that's an edge the GOP has held over Democrats for decades -- they back their god-awful, inhuman candidates and office holders. For Christ's sake, look at them with the #45 debacle: the enabling by silence.

But on the left, if there's a little something wrong here, a wayward move there, or a practical maneuver, the roof caves in about "selling out" or not quite "left enough." In the meantime, the right-wing fascists are calling the shots. 30+ states are under Republican governance, top to bottom.

They want to elect more republicans to destroy the working class and poor.

FO Our Revolution/Nina Turner, Green Party/Jill Stein. That POS Putin must be paying you assholes well!

Nina Turner was HAND PICKED by Bernie to serve on the Unity Commission, and all she did was show her ass and kick everybody in the crotch...

Jeff Weaver was HAND PICKED by Bernie to serve on the Unity Commission, and all he did was show his ass and kick everybody in the crotch...

Nomiki Konst was HAND PICKED by Bernie to serve on the Unity Commission, and all she did was show her ass and kick everybody in the crotch, laughing the entire time...

Dr. Cornel West was HAND PICKED by Bernie to serve on the platform committee at the convention, and all he did was show his ass, kick everybody in the crotch and tell everyone afterwards to vote for Trump...

Bernie also went on an unity tour with DNC chair Perez and we saw how that went.

Wondering wth going on?