What comes to my mind when I see the Dems panic about Bernie Sanders...

[retrowire]

When I hear and read Claire McCaskill or any of those others say things like, they won't work with a socialist or here comes the hammers and sickles... This is the first thing that comes to my mind.

Oh, I'm sorry. Do you get to choose who we support? Do you have control over it? Do you get anything, other than the very same vote that we have?

No? Then shut the fuck up.

Because when any of you politicians were sworn in, you swore an oath to the people. You became a servant to us.

We are not indebted to you or your comfortable way of life, you are indebted to US.

US. The people. So don't get all pissy because we're going for the candidate that runs a campaign with the idea that he needs the people and can't do it alone. See how inclusive that message is?

What's Hillary's message? "You need a leader? Follow me. We can't do all that, just shut up and row the damn boat."

Fuck that, we're ALL LEADERS, it's OUR nation, NOT yours and we will run it TOGETHER with the leader of OUR CHOOSING.

So keep panicking, but don't you dare take the rug out from under us. Everything we all know and love will change pretty fast then, and not for the better.

[closeupready]

1. Democratic leaders, I'm beginning to fear, would rather lose the White House than

see Bernie Sanders win. Bcause you see, nearly all of them have sold out (to great personal financial gain) to the very same entities which have squeezed working people and the middle-class over the last 36 years. So you see, income and wealth inequality are ESSENTIAL to their ways of life.

I very much want to be wrong on that, and I want that to be nothing more than a crazy conspiracy theory.

[rhett o rick]

2. It's imperitive that we throw all the Corporate Puppets that call themselves Democrats,

out of our Party.

[closeupready]

3. I agree - they weaken our "brand" and message.

(By design, of course.)

[kath]

15. Yes!

And wouldn't it be tragic if we weren't able to do that and a new People's Party sprung up on the left out of the ruins of the Dem Party?

[rhett o rick]

25. I don't want a new party. I want our Party back. Kick the damn conservatives back

to the Republicon Party where they belong. We need a balanced two party system. Sen Sanders should be facing a moderate conservative like H. Clinton in the General. That would effectively squeeze out the Republicon whackos. What has happened is The Third Way moved the pro-corporates into the Democratic Party and left the Republicons to be the disaster party to scare everyone into voting for a conservative Democrat.

[kath]

33. I want our Party back too, Rick.

There is a huge schism in the Party. Something's gotta give, but SOME entity in this country needs to represent working people and the poor, the way the Dem Party USED to.

I hate the fucking ThirdWay and Trojan Horse assholes who have infiltrated the party and ruined it.

[scottie55]

76. "I hate the fucking ThirdWay and Trojan Horse assholes"

There's the problem.

Someone hit the nail on the head.

If you don't want top play "the game" they will trash you.

You know, the gravy train game.

[PFunk1]

82. Same here. But Im starting to feel that's no longer possible.

It seems the ThirdWay folks, corporate dems and DINO have somehow got such a strong hold on the party that forming another party is the way to go.

But in spite this I still feel we can save and get the democratic party back to it's roots (I just don't know how). But the time to do so is almost over (as seen by the increasing number of folks becoming democratic independents).

[Enthusiast]

86. Yooge plus one!

[passiveporcupine]

61. We all fall somewhere on the political spectrum, from left to right

The dem party should be made up of a range of ideologies, from very liberal progressive to very moderate. It's not so much that moderates are in the party (and seem to keep ever shifting rightward) and you don't agree with them, it's that they have the money behind them, so they have more power in the party than the middle class and poor, unless we form huge grass roots movements to represent ourselves. We can compete against the money, but only when we are engaged and enraged enough to bring out the necessary numbers, like now. That needs to change. We need to get money out of politics, and then we can work more peacefully with the entire range of own party, not just the republicans.

Money is the evil that is destroying our party. Not conservative dems.

[rhett o rick]

67. It's the conservative Dems that are puppets for big money. They are against

regulating big corporations. They support wars that make profits for the Wealthy 1%. They support the domestic spying of the NSA/CIA and they support the Patriot Act. They support drone killing of 100 innocents just to get one suspect. Indefinite detention.

I don't disagree that money is the evil that is destroying our Party. It's doing it by buying Conservative Democrats.

[passiveporcupine]

68. And if money is taken out of the picture,

they will just be a voice in the discussion like the rest of us. Maybe a balancing voice. I think we need all voices to have a balanced perspective.

[rhett o rick]

69. If money were to be taken out of the picture, the Conservative Democrats would dry up.

They aren't real Democrats. They don't share Democratic principles. The Conservatives have a Party, it's the Republicon Party.

[Enthusiast]

89. Absent money they will have to speak with a regular voice rather than with a megaphone.

[Enthusiast]

88. Yooge plus one!

[rhett o rick]

109. I always appreciate your enthusiasm.

[Ferd Berfel]

34. Truly. Let's not forget that the party was sold to The Koch Bros

and other oligarchs when the DLC was created. These people are just disenfranchised republican moderates

[kath]

36. And don't forget that the CLINTONS were involved in the creation of the DLC.

[Ferd Berfel]

42. I didn't

[kath]

44. I figured that was the case. Just trying to be a little edumacational for others.

[Enthusiast]

90. Keep the edumacation coming, kath.

[INdemo]

46. Amen

[stillwaiting]

60. And electing Bernie would be a HUGE first step in doing that.

HIS Party Chairperson would actually recruit Democrats that supported his vision and policies. The Democratic Senate is ridiculously corrupt right now. We need new Leadership to transform this Party BACK to the party of FDR.

Bernie as President can do that if Al From and Bill Clinton did it against us (and they did).

[rhett o rick]

70. It will be a tough fight all the way. The Big Money has the resources to get nasty. Sadly

some Democrats side with them, side with the Wealthy 1%. They either worship money or think the Wealthy 1% deserve to lead because they have money. H. Clinton has amassed a huge fortune in a very short period of time. Some came directly from Big Banks. Seems to me that amassing a huge personal fortune is very important to her and I don't think that is a good thing for our President.

[AlbertCat]

120. And electing Bernie would be a HUGE first step in doing that.

Actually, Sanders just running like he is now is a HUGE 1st step that won't go away, even if he loses the nomination.

[global1]

6. They Don't Fear Bernie As Much As They Fear The Political Revolution He Will Bring....

Last edited Wed Jan 20, 2016, 05:59 PM - Edit history (1)

to the office. They fear 'We The People'.

[closeupready]

8. I'm reminded of that song from the Clintonian 90's, recorded

by New Age musician Enya, "How Can I Keep From Singing?", and interestingly, it's a Christian hymn written by American Baptist minister Robert Wadsworth Lowry:

[nxylas]

18. I think anyone other than the Anointed One really

If Martin O'Malley started to surge in the polls the way Bernie has, I suspect they'd be training their guns on him too.

[CharlotteVale]

21. I've been thinking that for awhile now.

[Hortensis]

26. Panicking when Hillary's WAY, WAY ahead nationally,

and Bernie hasn't even faced the tough stuff yet? NH and IA both play to Bernie's strengths. After that it gets VERY different. He has some opportunities in some western states, but, like all the others, at this point those states too are still Hillary's to lose.

And then comes the convention and the delegates, and Hillary has pledges from a majority of the superdelegates. These pledges aren't binding, of course, but they also are hers to lose. Bernie has virtually none.

This isn't to say Bernie can't win our nomination. It's to say, get real!

BTW, how come almost none of Bernie's colleagues endorse him? Many want change, so why Hillary instead of him? From Fivethirtyeight.com, updated today:

The Endorsement Primary

In presidential primaries, endorsements have been among the best predictors of which candidates will succeed and which will fail. So we’re keeping track.
UPDATED 4:02 P.M. EST | JANUARY 20

CANDIDATE REPRESENTATIVES
1 POINT EACH SENATORS
5 POINTS EACH GOVERNORS
10 POINTS EACH TOTAL POINTS
Jeb Bush 51
Marco Rubio 43
Chris Christie 26
Mike Huckabee 26
John Kasich 20
Ted Cruz 17
Rand Paul 15
Lindsey Graham 5
Carly Fiorina 3
Scott Walker 2
Rick Perry 1
Rick Santorum 1
Ben Carson 0
Donald Trump 0

Hillary Clinton 458
Bernie Sanders 2
Martin O'Malley 1

Before any votes are cast, presidential candidates compete for the support of influential members of their party, especially elected officials like U.S. representatives, senators and governors. During the period known as the “invisible primary,” these “party elites” seek to coalesce around the candidates they find most acceptable as their party’s nominee. Over the past few decades, when these elites have reached a consensus on the best candidate, rank-and-file voters have usually followed.

[Ferd Berfel]

38. Well that accounts for the Corporate employees

next comes the People.

[TIME TO PANIC]

49. +1 n/t

[Fast Walker 52]

96. except this year seem to be different, with both Trump and Sanders surging in the absence of

traditional support. Note, I am not equating them, just noting that both are doing well without establishment endorsements.

[Hortensis]

102. FiveThirtyeight agrees, STOP comparing Bernie

and Trump. A lot of people are doing that, including me, because they're both speaking to populist anger in voices resonating with yuuuge conviction and sentences made up of short, easy-to-understand phrases (but no to scant or questionable detail on how).

Nate Silver, though, has a lot more to say, including,

"You can call both “outsiders.” But if you’re a Democrat, Sanders is your eccentric uncle: He has his own quirks, but he’s part of the family. If you’re a Republican, Trump is as familial as the vacuum salesman knocking on your door."

and

"Sanders holds policy positions of a typical liberal Democrat; Trump’s are all over the place. While Sanders doesn’t officially call himself a Democrat — a fact that might annoy Democratic elites — he takes policy positions that are consistent with those of Democrats in Congress. In the previous Congress (113th), Sanders voted the same as liberal Democratic senators Barbara Boxer, Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand and Sherrod Brown 95 percent of the time or more.1 He voted with party leader Harry Reid 91 percent of the time and the expressed position of President Obama2 93 percent of the time. He also voted with Clinton 93 percent of the time when the two were in the Senate together."

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/stop-comparing-donald-trump-and-bernie-sanders/

[Fast Walker 52]

110. Don't get me wrong, I love Bernie

[Hortensis]

111. Sure. Bernie votes with Hillary 93% of the time.

And he is doing great so far without establishment endorsements. If he starts looking as if he will take this thing, some endorsements will shift to him. His colleagues may not feel he's their best person for the job, but the imagined strong difference in ideology just isn't there.

[Fawke Em]

116. It's not imagined on the issues that need to be fixed, though.

That's where the rubber meets the road.

[Hortensis]

118. They meet well enough on problems that can be fixed, Fawke,

which is somewhat different from the pie-in-the-sky he's promising in the campaign. That is my biggest problem with him, and it is a big one. It's one thing to push farther left for achievable goals (good!), but a whole different thing to lie about what is achievable (bad!).

I don't like pols on either side of the spectrum trying to play me for a fool. I don't like pols who substitute overly emphatic catch phrases for intelligent details. IMO, people who do that are trolling for those who can be fooled.

[Fawke Em]

121. No, they don't.

And the biggest problem with her is her "no, we can't because the 1 percent don't want us to" attitude.

[JDPriestly]

124. Please see my post about the Weimar Republic.

When the population of a country is in distress, the people turn to leaders who solve problems.

Simplistic, authoritarian solutions like those Trump offers are usually not the first choice, but if democratic solutions do not solve the problems, then the people, historically will seek solutions before they will be patient with the democratic process.

Before Reagan, before NAFTA and our other trade agreements, jobs were relatively plentiful. Many families could if they wanted to live fairly well on one income.

No longer are jobs plentiful. And because pay scales have not kept up with inflation especially in housing prices, ordinary families need two good incomes just to live. And those who go to college almost always come out with debt that is high compared to their wages. Everybody's early childcare costs are high compared to their wages.

The economy is working for rich people, but not very well for most others.

That is the problem that needs solving.

And what is the DNC and what are our Democratic politicians, most of them, throwing at us? Yet another trade agreement that will make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Inadequate responses to low wages, to climate change, to the cost and quality of education, to the de-industrialization of our country, to our dependency on fossil fuels and imports of all kinds. That's what the DNC and the Democrats are giving us.

Bernie offers a new approach to solving our problems. It isn't just the solutions he is offering. We all know the problems we have with a dead-wrong conservative Congress.

But Bernie is offering a new frankness, a new appreciation for the problems of ordinary people. He understands what people are angry about -- our trade policy and the indifference in D.C. to our environmental problems and above all disparity in wealth and income being at the top of the list.

I don't think that Bernie supporters see Bernie as someone who will be able to deliver every proposal he makes. But we see Bernie as someone who AT LEAST recognized and voiced the list of REAL PROBLEMS we face.

We do not want that pipeline. We want alternative fuels. We want to see us solve the technological problems that prevent us from having alternative fuels with the determination and scientific expertise that got us the atomic bomb and our astronauts to the moon. (Note that both of those achievements were reached when the very rich paid a very high proportion of their earnings and wealth in taxes to help make our government capable of achieving great things. We could not have gotten either the bomb or to the moon on today's tax structure.)

We want some solutions regarding getting living wages, free tuition at state schools, clean air and water, a reduction in the warming of the oceans and earth, health care insurance for all THAT IS AS AFFORDABLE as possible, no more trade agreements of the kinds we now have. We want for example labels about country of origin on our food. No foreign body should be able to tell us we can't vote to label foods from foreign countries. What is that about?

The DNC has failed us in all of these areas and more. That is what Bernie is about.

It is time for our Democratic leadership to get out of D.C. and out of our state capitols and into our communities and not just in meetings attended mostly by their friends.

It's time to get the big money and the corruption out of politics. And the DNC and its friends lead the way toward the pig trough outside Congress, the lobby trough that is betraying the American people.

We want an end to the corruption and the insulated bargaining and barter in D.C. and a return to dealing with the problems of Americans.

[Deny and Shred]

28. I have been fearing the same

Some at the top of the party now have a seat at the BIG table. Democratic insiders are able to get rich. Years have been spent ingratiating themselves to the beltway institutions that can make that happen. The problem is the cost of that seat at that table.

It costs selling out the rest of the party. They turned the Democratic Party into a vehicle for their own enrichment. We peons are, as Rahm so eloquently put it, "f*cking retarded" anyway. They got rich by getting us dems to go along with neoliberalism.

The problems are: it isn't 1992, Hillary doesn't have Bill's charisma, and America has seen this movie several times now.

Most of the party insiders haven't collected several years' worth of quarter-million-dollar speaking fees. Their promised payoff is yet to come. Bernie upsets that entire apple cart.

I do believe they'd rather keep the possibilty of a movie sequel alive and sell out the party further than give it up. They've sacrified so much already - they deserve a payoff. Besides, Bernie isn't of their ilk; thus, he is easily put on the chopping block.

If they were smart, they could get some restitution from the other side of the aisle for taking down a common enemy, if they haven't already.

[closeupready]

35. "turned the Democratic Party into a vehicle for their own enrichment" -

yes, that's it.

[Hortensis]

45. Too much cynicism is as misguiding as none.

[closeupready]

52. Tell me, good sir, what other democratic state allows unlimited campaign donations?

[LiberalLovinLug]

81. I fear you are not far off in that theory

If all the so-called Democrats, like DWS, and the blue dogs that are part of the Wall Street forces in the Clinton Third Way team fail in getting their pet stooge as the front runner, then they will join the Rethugs, if covertly, in trying to sabotage the Sanders Revolution. I hope I am wrong. But I also think that WE can overcome any onslaught by any of the old guard oligarchy by simply getting the truth out about Bernie and what his Presidency would deliver.

[Enthusiast]

84. I think we need to face up to the reality that it is not our interests they are protecting.

The rest of the entire industrialized world has single payer health care.

How should we feel about the gate keepers of both parties preventing us from having reasonably priced health care?

[raouldukelives]

87. I hope your way off base myself.

But I believe you are not.

When people invest into and become themselves partial owners of the very corporations committed to assuring nothing ever changes, corporations who use that power and wealth to grease the palms of democracy, it is no surprise our leaders are corrupted. They are just natural extensions of what the people are daily laboring to bring to fruition.

When one busies themselves setting fires all day for Wall St, one should never act surprised to see a burnt wasteland behind them.

[msongs]

4. panic? what panic? nt

[seaglass]

5. I can't stand Claire McCaskill, she has proven frequently that she is an idiot. But she has as much

of a right to speak out and voice her opinion as you do.

[retrowire]

9. No disagreements there.

But I didn't swear an oath to serve her did I?

She can say whatever she wants, but she has to come along kicking and screaming if she doesn't get her way.

[seaglass]

10. I have no idea what your relationship is with McCaskill - what a weird question. n/t

[retrowire]

11. It's the same relationship as yours.

We're citizens of the United States, she's an elected official who took an oath to serve we the people. Simple.

[seaglass]

12. And? n/t

[retrowire]

14. Whooooosh nt

[seaglass]

16. Nah, you're just not making a very cogent point. n/t

[retrowire]

22. Yep, everyone else in here gets it though. *shrugs* nt

[seaglass]

24. Well of course, Bernie supporters are really good at having each other's backs, it's a group thing.

IF Claire McCaskill said she wouldn't work with Bernie if he was President because he is a "socialist" - which I haven't seen those words so not sure that is correct, but even IF she did - do you really fucking take that seriously?

[retrowire]

31. Why shouldn't we take a politicians word seriously? nt

[notadmblnd]

48. Nah. The problem is with you and not the poster

The poster has articulated his point clearly.

[kath]

51. +1

[kath]

39. Yes, whoooosh.

Happens all too frequently with some.

[seaglass]

47. Typical. n/t

[Gore1FL]

54. She said she wouldn't work with Sanders

Hence she is threatening not to do her job. She happily did her job* under Bush, though.


* badly, she has always been bad at her job.

[seaglass]

58. Do you have a link to that statement? As I said IF she did say it, I wouldn't take it

seriously. This OP seems like a whole lot of nothing to me.

[Gore1FL]

71. It was a statement in the OP I was referring to.

Probably he was referring to the "too Socialist," or maybe the list of actual good and solidly democratic positions that Bernie has that she was against.

McCaskill is a horrible Senator. The only thing she has going for her is that Roy Blunt is my most aggrevating Senator.

Here is a link to her latest embarrassment therein you will find what I described:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/25/claire-mccaskill-bernie-sanders_n_7662124.html

[seaglass]

83. I truly think she is kind of dumb but I did not see anything in that article that said she would not

work with him if he was elected. So this whole thing was made up.

[Maedhros]

7. Freedom of choice is what we've got.

Freedom from choice is what they want.

[daleanime]

20. ........

[Maedhros]

27. A Change is Gonna Come!

[TIME TO PANIC]

56. They certainly were prophetic.

WE ARE DEVO.

[libdem4life]

13. Their varying standings in the Oligarchy and striving ever higher is the

misunderstanding. Oligarchs don't share power...the wield it. Oligarchs don't listen...they decree. I could go on, but this person from Whereveristan is sadly mistaken and those and those like her's days are numbered.

Pitchfork Voters, Arise ~!~

[scottie55]

78. I Got My Pitchfork

Sharpened.

Look at the picture.

Ma helped....

[libdem4life]

119. Love that pic...isn't it great our "pitchforks" now are voting handles?

[Eatacig]

17. The Dems?

The Dems. Is that you Karl Rove?

[MisterP]

19. they're machine politicians: voters ARE only there to give millions-strong backing to legitimate

the system every 2 years, and then go home thinking that they got the best deal they could under the circumstances and not make any *demands* that might scare off "swing voters" the next time around

at worst we're to kneel and beg our betters for forgiveness for daring to think we could evaluate domestic and foreign policy on our own: no demurral, no defense of our actions, just confession of unworth and inexperience

[Hortensis]

37. Out of 300 MILLION of us, the electorate is about

150,000 MILLION. They don't do anything to us that we don't allow. In fact, the assistance of a majority has usually been required -- in voting into office people they chose, as well as being on their side as each issue arises.

Remember "We've got to get off the backs of business?" That's how the plutocrats convinced most of a nation to support the transfer of enormous amounts of wealth and power upward. Interestingly, one of the main enemies the "people" were supposed to fight and block all through most of that period was Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton enemies
Plutocrat class.
GOP establishment
Tea Party and conservative Republicans.
Religious Right
Conservatives registered as Democrats.
Bernie's anti-Hillary supporters. (Nice company they're keeping.)

[JDPriestly]

23. Something people don't know about the history of Germany before WWII.

The Weimar Republic was an attempt at democracy in Germany that followed WWI.

Why Study the Weimar Republic?

The history of the Weimar Republic (1919-1933) illuminates one of the most creative and crucial periods in the twentieth century and serves as a significant case study of the critical issues of our own time. Many of the questions asked about the Weimar Republic are relevant to problems that individuals and societies face in the twenty-first century.
Citizens and leaders of the Weimar Republic had to wrestle with the problems of a newly developing democracy: the creation of a new constitution and political culture and the need for institutional reform particularly of the judiciary, the police, and the educational system.
The Weimar Republic experienced hyper-inflation and depression, gender and generational conflict, political violence and terrorism, conflicts dealing with the relationship between church and state, and racist antisemitism.
The fourteen years of the Weimar Republic were a way station on the road to genocide, and yet they also witnessed the struggle of many decent, sincere people to create a just and humane society in a time of great artistic creativity.

https://www.facinghistory.org/weimar-republic-fragility-democracy/readings/why-study-weimar-germany

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


Thanks to a number of factors including the imposition of a huge debt for the cost of the war on the German people after WWI and enormous inflation that nearly destroyed not just their economy but the families of Germany, Germans suffered.

The failure of the Weimar Republic led to the NAZI movement. People were desperate. Hitler had what sounded like simple answers. The rest is history.

Our Democratic Party reminds me a bit of the leaders of the Weimar Republic. Rather helpless and maybe reluctant in trying to solve the underlying economic problems of our country. The trade agreements have made us into, on the international scale, a debtor nation. The banking industry combined with a low wage structure due to the flood of cheap labor imports had put our families and especially due to college tuition debt, our young families, into endless debt and despair.

The Democratic leadership is not responding agilely or honestly enough to the crisis we are beginning to be aware of. It is not just a crisis of lack of economic growth and of climate change and a failed trade policy. It is a crisis in our families and in our cities (think of Flint, Michigan as just a omen of what is to come if we don't make structural changes) and our nation.

Just thought I would add this.

Democratic leadership. Please wake up. Our country is in trouble. Trump is attracting supporters to his neo-fascist viewpoint because Democrats have not been strong and persuasive enough. That's your job. To be strong and to lead the country to new solutions. You are not doing it well. If you can't do better, please quit and let others give it a try. The country needs help, more than you are giving it.

Please.

The 2016 election is not just any election. Wealth has not trickled down to the middle class and the poor in America. We cannot as a nation continue business as usual. There is going to be a major change.

I think that Bernie is offering plans that are viable, that can be adjusted and modified to get the votes but that speak to the urgent problems we face like climate change and the need for better access to healthcare, childcare, better education and all the crises we face.

At this time, we need the DNC to lead us out of this despair and disunity in the country. Please do your jobs, and let the voters decide. Stop knocking yourselves out to push Hillary. She is not the creative problem-solver we need at this time.

Hillary's many scandals will be a big problem in the general election. We need the DNC to open up to new ideas and to working in a new, more effective way to educate Americans about the alternatives that are presenting themselves to us.

Please, DNC, get with it. Stop being so conservative and fearful. We need leadership from you, leadership to new solutions, not just same old, same old.

[retrowire]

29. This is great!

Thanks for the lesson. Have you considered making this an OP?

Trump is the next Hitler, and the Welmar Republics hesitation to act progressively left that vacuum for him to claim. The very same thing could happen with us. Fuck.

[kath]

41. Great post, JDP. Do consider making it an OP, as retrowire suggested.

[notadmblnd]

53. That should be an OP in itself.

nt

[libdem4life]

73. Had heard all of that at different points, but put together in a cogent and readable style...

very impressive. I agree...post as an OP.

[Paka]

94. Awesome post!

Thanks JD.

[Ed Suspicious]

101. You are rapidly becoming one of my favorite posters at DU.

[WillyT]

30. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[Spitfire of ATJ]

32. They're not "leaders". They're "representatives"....

Republicans vote for a LEADER that they can FOLLOW. (Also a BOSS they expect US to OBEY).

Democrats vote like it's for a Union Steward and watch them like a hawk for signs they've been sold out.

[jomin41]

40. Dear Claire, I'm sorry we are

rocking your boat. But see, you don't represent progress. You and Hill represent the status quo. The status quo is not working for most of us who call ourselves Democrats. So we want to change the status quo. We want the crap to stop. The crap is on your shoes but it's up to our chins and you and Hill are saying, "Be patient, be reasonable, yada yada yada...". We've been patient for a generation at least. This isn't just Bernie. This is millions of pissed off people who have supported you and all other Dems for years and years and here we are. You better get out of the way. Tsunami warning. Sincerely, Joe

[silvershadow]

43. Her republican red slip is showing (again). nt

[Avalux]

50. Excellent post. K&R.

They are beginning to realize that they can't stop what's happening. No amount of money, character assassination, and outright lies is going to stop it.

How sweet it is.

[captainarizona]

55. republican think bernie will be easier to defeat

Democratic elected officials are afraid of the onslaught from republicans if Bernie Sanders is the nominee. We think its cute when pictures of che guevara wearing a tee shirt with Bernie Sanders face on it. Independent voters might not think its cute. republicans will bring out the hammer and sickle on Bernie. I will be voting for Bernie anyway in the primary but unlike many young supporters I know what will come if he gets the nomination.

[TIME TO PANIC]

57. They call us commies anyway.

Bernie can handle it. I look forward to the fight.

[retrowire]

59. Well yeah but honestly...

sticks and stones may break bones...

They're just mud slinging. We live in a generation where the majority is made of Gen X and Yer's, both of which aren't scared by red baiting, and in fact Gen X saw during the Cold War Era that our own government could lie to us about so called "Commies".

We're a nation of skeptics and truth seekers. Anytime people yell "Socialist" we have the easiest access to just find out, "What is a socialist? and if Bernie is a socialist, and all the things he wants are so good... Why is socialism bad? Oh it's not? Hmmmm..."

Maybe I have too much faith in people. but... look whats happening!

[GoneFishin]

62. The semi-permanent fixtures in both parties do very well money wise regardless of who takes the WH.

They've got their little scam working smoothly for everyone but the taxpayers.

I believe they would rather throw the election to the Republicans than to let in an outsider like Bernie.

[malokvale77]

63. This comes to mind...

http://www.muckety.com/John-D-Podesta/8565.muckety

[Warren DeMontague]

64. I'm getting the old "he should just drop out for the good of the party" in another thread.

Obviously, Hillary cannot run on the issues!

[retrowire]

65. Really?

He should drop out for the good of the party? He is the true spirit of the party. To elect him would bring the democratic party back to it's freaking roots! No more third way, no more centrist bs.

[Warren DeMontague]

66. Some people here are going to lose their freaking minds if he actually does win this thing.

And not in a good way.

[Odin2005]

100. It's going to be 2008 times a hundred.

When the Shillary supporters lost their fucking minds and many showed their true right-wing colors. IIRC the Birther BS was started by them.

[Nyan]

72. It's THEIR precious apple cart.

As Bernie alluded to this in the last debate, establishment dems and repugs are not divided on issues that REALLY matter.
They are united. It's THEIR apple cart. And they're not gonna let someone turn it upside down without putting up a fight.

As you can see, Bernie's decision to run on the democratic ticket is starting to have a really interesting effect; it's revealing true colors of the dem establishment -data gate, rigged debate schedule, establishment's DISGRACEFUL red-baiting, Bernie blackout in the "liberal" media, you name it.

They've been partying hard with bankers and billionnairs for decades now. They court donors. They don't court voters.
Voters are supposed to be fooled, manipulated, pandered, patronized, and lied to. Voters are given a false choice between Wall Street's candidate who's for abortion and Big Oil billionnair's candidate who's against abortion.

Let's see how far they're willing to go. Let's see if they replace Hillary with another Wall Street candidate.
And let's see how intransigent they are about Bernie as a dem nominee. Depending on how they react to all of this, we're gonna have to decide whether or not we push for a party fraction. Let them try.

[Populist_Prole]

74. +1

"establishment dems and repugs are not divided on issues that REALLY matter"

You summed up the root of the issue perfectly.

[SoapBox]

75. Epic!

You GO retrowire!

[retrowire]

77. I'm feeling pretty epic! nt

[Wibly]

79. Dangerous game

The DNC better be careful. If Sander's groundswell remains, and the DNC blocks him in any way, they could set up in a situation where Bernie goes rogue. If that happens, the Dem vote will be split. The end result of that would likely be a GOP president.
So what will Clinton do. Will she read the writing on the wall, which she almost missed last time, and do the right thing? Or will she split the party by accepting the nomination and meet her defeat later rather than sooner.
Right now, looking at it all, I don't see, as long as Sanders is around, any way for Hillary to win the general election. She might win the party but it will take some nasty internal nonsense, which will ultimately play out against her.

[Enthusiast]

85. Kicked and recommended to the Max!

[lonestarnot]

91. Just a bunch of clucking out of the mo senator. Hmmmf. Bernie hasn't lost my support over it. And

further, I smell bullshit.

[MrMickeysMom]

92. OMG.... Did that dopey elitist really say THAT?

See... When I skip over somebody with a lot of goonery coming out of their mouth, I've just missed another article featuring Claire McCaskill!

[Paka]

93. Beautiful posting.

You said it so well.

[randome]

95. "The Dems" sounds like "You people".

[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]

[laureloak]

97. This video told me the kind of President Bernie would be

[roody]

98. I haven't been listening to them but

that sounds like the repugs with Obama.

[Odin2005]

99. The Third Way would rather the Republican win than a genuine progressive.

In local and state politics I've always been disgusted by how the party tries to force shitty "party-endorsed" establishment candidates down our throats rather than allow a genuinely fair primary.

[closeupready]

112. You aren't exaggerating - heck, DNC chair Debbie WS refused to endorse DEMOCRATIC

candidates in tight races against Republican incumbents:

Released On: March 24, 2008 DFA Calls on Rep. Wasserman Schultz to Support Democrats in Florida BURLINGTON, VT -- Democracy for America, our nations largest progressive political action organization, is calling on Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz to be removed as the Chair of the Red to Blue program. Rep. Wasserman Schultz is refusing to campaign on behalf of Democrats running against incumbent Republicans in south Florida. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committees Red to Blue program works to defeat incumbent Republicans throughout the country and is an essential component in the effort to expand the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives. Joe Garcia a Democracy for America endorsed candidate running in Floridas 25th Congressional District against Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, Annette Taddeo running in the 18th CD against Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and Raul Martinez running in the 21st CD against Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart are being denied crucial support from Rep. Wasserman Schultz. All three candidates have been endorsed by such Democrats as Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Majority Whip James Clyburn, Democratic Caucus Chair Rahm Emanuel, and DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen. How can Debbie Wasserman Schultz be the head of the Red to Blue program and not be willing to fight Republicans in her own backyard?, said Daniel I. Medress, Communications Director for Democracy for America. She has to step down as chair of the Red to Blue program or be removed from that position by the DCCC. Rep. Wasserman Schultzs attempt to remain neutral in these Congressional races is perplexing in light of comments she made in 2005. At that time, she backed Ron Kleins successful challenge of Republican incumbent Clay Shaw in Florida. Rep. Wasserman Schultz said, It's not good for my relationship with Clay Shaw, but Democrats can't afford to leave a seat like that uncontested. There is important work to be done like ending the War in Iraq, providing health care to all Americans, and combating the effects of global warming. Either Rep. Wasserman Schultz wants to be part of the culture of activism that is changing the political dynamic of this country or she wants to be part of the tired culture of incumbency that has brought us war, debt, and 50 million uninsured Americans, said Jim Dean, Chair of Democracy for America.

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/blog/453-debbie-wasserman-schultz-forgets-who-her-friends-are

[L. Coyote]

103. Did you just rant, "... shut the fuck up" in Bernie's name? How very undemocratic of you!

Everyone has a right to express their opinion and concerns for the future. Your reaction is not consistent with that right. Rant away, but in a democracy "shut the fuck up' is not how we do it.

[retrowire]

107. gasp!

you're telling me what I can't say while judging me for telling sworn in officials that they should stop complaining!

how hypocritical! I thought it was undemocratic to control what others say!!!

it's democratic beyond belief, my right to hold elected officials accountable and to tell them what they can't do. they are public servants elected by we the people. they are indebted to us, not the other way around.

[L. Coyote]

104. Nixon 520, McGovern 17

Richard Nixon Republican 1972
60.67% of popular vote
520 electoral votes = 96.7%

I'm guessing you are way too young to remember when Dems last nominated a left-winger for President.

[retrowire]

108. what does that have to do with today? nt

[L. Coyote]

113. Perhaps not much if Republican swing right of Goldwater - 1964 D 486 : R 52

Lyndon Johnson Hubert Humphrey Democratic 43,129,040 61.05% 486 90.3%
Barry Goldwater William Miller Republican 27,175,754 38.47% 52 9.7%
How I remember that victory, like it was yesterday. But, I forgot William Millar's name.

[Odin2005]

126. Bernie is not McGovern and the electorate is much different now than in 1972

McGovern lost because back in 1972 there were still a lot of socially conservative working class white men in the Democratic Party and they hated the Dirty Stinking Hippies. Now nearly all of those people are Republicans who will never vote for a Democrat no matter who the nominee is, and those people especially hate the Clintons.

[merrily]

105. Jury results, for those who are shocked, shocked to learn that alert stalking goes on at DU's casino

On Thu Jan 21, 2016, 09:07 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

What comes to my mind when I see the Dems panic about Bernie Sanders...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511036315

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Telling people to STFU is not only disruptive, it is undemocratic.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jan 21, 2016, 09:25 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Stupid alert.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerter must be new here. He/she needs to STFU.
Oops. But seriously.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: How on earth is "telling" McCaskill to shut up disrupting DU? Alerter, unless you can prove that you are the Senator, please stop abusing the alert button. Thank you.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Hide it? I want to recommend it!
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[retrowire]

106. hahaha

yes, silencing people's voices is undemocratic, I agree alerter.

but I'm not telling these dems to shut their mouths forever. I'm telling them to not complain when the people are liking the politician that makes them uncomfortable. they have a vote just like us, only difference is, they swore an oath to us when they got the job.

so if we select Bernie, they better work with him or they'll just have to kick and scream while we vote their asses out.

[SammyWinstonJack]

114. Bernie, because fuck this shit!

[LanternWaste]

115. I too, often see things that aren't there

I too, often see things that aren't there, imagine they are, construct a premise from the imaginary, pretend people are saying and acting in ways I cannot illustrate with objective evidence, infer a message from them, translate it in the way most beneficial to my argument, and then tell all these pretend people "fuck that!!"

Magic thinking is much more rooted in politics than in religion, but we rationalize otherwise to better validates our biases.

[seaglass]

117. No kidding. What a waste of time this thread was, I thought the OP was stating something true not

making shit up. Learned my lesson about 1.) credibility and 2.) sheep

[retrowire]

125. Your signature tells me everything I need to know about you

And about how much to respect your opinion of others.

[RoccoR5955]

122. When the first people lead

The leaders must follow.
WE THE PEOPLE decide, not DINOs

[Volaris]

123. McCaskill serves herself.

She's a politician first, and a policy theorist second.

The American Culture is very much a first half of life culture, and we succeed where others would fail ONLY when our backs are to the wall...ONLY when we're out on the frontier of what is possible. That requires taking risk.

McCaskill is a very good politician, and I'll give her credit where credit is due. But there's no risk what she does.

Therein lies the problem. Therein also lie the seeds of the solution.