Rhetoric and the BS Revolution

[SunShine22]

... A revolution is appealing on a visceral level. To those experiencing injustice, anger is a real and completely justified emotion, and change is a matter of survival. But how can he save us from inequalities when he seems incapable of understanding that economic inequality is a symptom for far more complex social inequalities? How can he bring people together to resolve complex problems when he so consistently paints any dissenters as either foolish or malicious? And most critically, how can he create the change that he owes the people who are justifiably angered by their suffering if he refuses to overlook political disagreements to build coalitions for the greater good? [whole article http://www.dailynewsbin.com/opinion/empty-rhetoric-and-the-bernie-sanders-revolution/24442/]

[fleabiscuit]

1. Thank you for the lead in I was thinking of posting as an OP...

Rhetoric and the Bernie Sanders Revolution
By Avery C. Bauer | April 11, 2016

“… Sanders stump speech follows a basic formula. First, he introduces a binary (such as big banks versus the average citizen, or the party establishment versus the outsider). He then emphasizes that said binary represents a moral dichotomy (big banks are morally bad, the little guy is morally good). He then frames the morally deficient side of the binary as the enemy, and proceeds to emphasize the threat presented by this enemy, frequently using fear-based language to build anxiety and anger. He proceeds to link this enemy to his opponent, even when the connections are tenuous. At the same time, he places himself in the center of the binary, battling the enemy to protect the morally pure victim. He builds a personal narrative that creates the impression that he has always fought for the morally pure side of this binary, only to fail due to the pervasive corruption of the entire political system. He concludes by arguing that he can only successfully defend the morally pure side of this binary by garnering the support of the population and creating a political revolution that operates independent of the political establishment.

This stump speech uses three rhetorical techniques that I find particularly frustrating in politics in general:

1) Binary thinking
2) Fear-based language
3) Unilateral change independent of legislative, executive, and judicial branches…”
http://www.dailynewsbin.com/opinion/empty-rhetoric-and-the-bernie-sanders-revolution/24442/

[upaloopa]

2. Any one of us who have posted here over the last few years could list the

problems Bernie lists. They have been talked about over and over.

Nobody has a real in depth solution. It will take years to build the type of government that can make real change.

The problem as I see it is that Bernie folks never think long term.

Until we can pass laws through Congress and signed and get the Supreme Court to support them we won't change much.

[fleabiscuit]

4. Never think long term?

Shoot, I'd argue they are not even in the present.

[yallerdawg]

3. Martin O'Malley would have been a better Democratic candidate.

The Democratic Party opened the door to a leftwing extremist DINO candidate, and the extreme fringe left and Hillary Haters carried him along in open primaries and caucuses. Another darling of the media who didn't get vetted.

It's not about winning, it's about message and purity.

[misterhighwasted]

5. Yes O'Malley is true to the Dem Party. He would have been a far greater benefit

Which is why the bern jumped on that from the beginning.
Teaparty redux. And look what we got when the Republican Party welcomed that trojan horse. They believed the TP would be a uniting force.

Thank gawd for the Dem firewall, the SD's.

Notice how TP leftie bern, is trying his damndest to bust the SD's now?
He will never succeed.
Not ever the Pope PR stunt can revive his drifting candidacy at this point.
Buh bye bern

I see O'Malley as having a distinct place in Hillary's Presidency.
HRC 2016