Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:18 PM Feb 2016

Bernie done ruined everything

Imagine no Bernie campaign. Imagine there was no real choice in this primary and that all there was was a vote for Hillary.

Well, that's what the Democratic Party elites were hoping it would come down to. They were hoping they wouldn't have to do anything but sit back and watch as Hillary got what was coming to her.

But Bernie decided to run, and when he did, his campaign focused on several things the party elites had established to keep their kingdoms humming along. One of those was the big money super-PACS that made bribery common place.

Ol' Bernie has put a hurtin' on the old same politics and for that the elites hate him. He exposes their shenanigans on a daily basis and appeals to a wide spectrum of potential voters whose participation in the political process is seen as a threat to the establishment.

Given Bernie's proclamations and promises that he will make real changes if he is seated in office, the establishment has fought him and his campaign. For they know their days are numbered and the old ways of politics are about to be cast out of DC as a new wave of real democracy washes up the Potomac like a Tsunami.

Here it comes!


105 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Bernie done ruined everything (Original Post) RobertEarl Feb 2016 OP
There was always going to be a candidate to the left of Clinton. NCTraveler Feb 2016 #1
Nate Silver's 538 came to that thought. JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #3
People predict a lot of things. I never saw Webb as a threat for anything other.... NCTraveler Feb 2016 #5
Your consternation not withstanding.. JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #7
I truly see no clue as to your point. NCTraveler Feb 2016 #8
My point was to show that some thought Clinton WAS the left JonLeibowitz Feb 2016 #9
There is no doubt that Clinton represents the left. Everyone knows that. NCTraveler Feb 2016 #11
... Javaman Feb 2016 #44
Are you a contortionist in real life too? kenfrequed Feb 2016 #47
That's true. Same thing happened on the right. Before the Koch brothers co opted it, the TP was a PatrickforO Feb 2016 #80
I think the TP was Koch/Armey astro turf from the jump. merrily Feb 2016 #84
But the Oligarchs lost control ErisDiscordia Feb 2016 #86
Dont stop bernie charlespercydemocrat Feb 2016 #96
I hope Senator Sanders stays in until he's in the Oval Office. merrily Feb 2016 #104
Clinton rpresents "The Left"????? bvar22 Feb 2016 #57
Clinton represents the left hifiguy Feb 2016 #61
Cool story bro Katashi_itto Feb 2016 #82
LOL! Someone better tell Hillary. merrily Feb 2016 #83
Really? daleanime Feb 2016 #99
Thanks for admitting you were never an O'Malley supporter. Ken Burch Feb 2016 #66
Was s/he saying s/he was an O'Malley supporter? merrily Feb 2016 #85
people buy into Nate Silver because of one thing that happened once PatrynXX Feb 2016 #34
The left of Clinton is a very large space unfortunately Armstead Feb 2016 #22
Having Bernie in the race will make Hillary stronger for the general yeoman6987 Feb 2016 #101
Yes, but they weren't supposed to ACTUALLY POSE A THREAT nxylas Feb 2016 #23
Too bad you don't get the two minute credit. Nice try. Those that are successful usually rhett o rick Feb 2016 #48
This message was self-deleted by its author NCTraveler Feb 2016 #49
Not one word of my post was personal to a poster. NCTraveler Feb 2016 #50
Nice try but I didn't get personal. Seems that's an easy way to justify avoiding rhett o rick Feb 2016 #54
You were clear. NCTraveler Feb 2016 #59
Not a word in my post was directed at a poster. Playing the victim card isn't becoming. nm rhett o rick Feb 2016 #60
I'm no victim. NCTraveler Feb 2016 #62
Since you were not attacked from post 48 as you claim kristopher Feb 2016 #88
+1 dreamnightwind Feb 2016 #97
How will a two-time national candidate, who has come from sure thing, to no thing, be of help to GS? libdem4life Feb 2016 #63
For the same reason they pay her $200,000 for a few minutes of speech that has no rhett o rick Feb 2016 #70
But without political power? Bill hung on because of Hillary. libdem4life Feb 2016 #71
Some times it's for past favors. nm rhett o rick Feb 2016 #72
Oligarchs do not pay people millions of dollars for past favors GeoWilliam750 Feb 2016 #103
A small nation could survive on the loot they have accumulated ErisDiscordia Feb 2016 #87
Once Warren ruled it out, Bernie was the only possible progressive challenger remaining. Ken Burch Feb 2016 #65
Huge difference between a candidate and a viable Candidate quakerboy Feb 2016 #75
O'Malley was the one who ran before Bernie. I would be supporting him if Bernie had not sabrina 1 Feb 2016 #79
I wouldn't want to live in that alternate universe, thanks. ErisDiscordia Feb 2016 #2
I think even if he loses, Democrats have learned a lesson. DemocraticWing Feb 2016 #4
As long as we all knuckle under and vote for teh Corporatist candidate (should such a terrible thing Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #6
Heartily concur. Especially your last line..."Except to not give Euphoria Feb 2016 #12
I don't see it that way. A movement has been started. People now realize they are not rhett o rick Feb 2016 #51
Hillary, and her donars won't allow it Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #52
Maybe that's what optimism is, "kidding yourself". Optimism is what keeps me going. Try it. nm rhett o rick Feb 2016 #56
too much optimism is not good Ferd Berfel Feb 2016 #58
Everybody involved will be better for it in the long run. RobertEarl Feb 2016 #10
When did HRC ever push for single payer? thesquanderer Feb 2016 #21
I'm not sure she ever "pushed" for a single-payer system, BUT Stevepol Feb 2016 #39
re: "she declared that a single-payer system was all but inevitable" thesquanderer Feb 2016 #45
I hope so. gollygee Feb 2016 #91
No, he hasn't "done ruined" anything. zappaman Feb 2016 #13
Yes I agree. He is only a participant in the People's movement to get honest government. rhett o rick Feb 2016 #67
Just tryin to put the people back into politics. n/t WHEN CRABS ROAR Feb 2016 #14
We'll always have Bernie. Gregorian Feb 2016 #15
A Nerve wracked world watches and waits RobertEarl Feb 2016 #19
I didn't realize how much they watch but I just got back from Europe dana_b Feb 2016 #98
The US is the leader RobertEarl Feb 2016 #105
If no one had shown up to challenge Clinton, SheilaT Feb 2016 #16
it made them defend their policies, how they ran, and what they'd turned the party into MisterP Feb 2016 #17
no mention of the progressive groundswell around E.Warren that informed Bernie. Kip Humphrey Feb 2016 #18
They specifically let Sanders into the party so Clinton would have an opponent. randome Feb 2016 #20
Ya, I guess those that dropped out didn't matter. SoapBox Feb 2016 #26
How else would you get into a political party if not allowed in? randome Feb 2016 #29
UM the GOP gatekeepers do NOT want him as a Republican, and certainly not their candidate Armstead Feb 2016 #33
Did the Democratic party allow you in? frylock Feb 2016 #36
Just my opinion platitudipus Feb 2016 #38
What are the qualifications to be a Democrat? If Zell Miller could be a Democrat rhett o rick Feb 2016 #68
They don't "let" people into a party Armstead Feb 2016 #32
Where do they come up with this crap? frylock Feb 2016 #37
"Where do they come up with this crap?" malokvale77 Feb 2016 #40
Hunh? Hissyspit Feb 2016 #77
I'm very grateful to Sen. Sanders for LiberalElite Feb 2016 #24
Thank you RobertEarl for posting. SoapBox Feb 2016 #25
Days are numbered DI Freighter Watcher Feb 2016 #27
A tsunami revival of FDR Progressive policies with Bernie! Dont call me Shirley Feb 2016 #28
I often wonder if they expected him to go after them...Corrupt polticians, corrupt Wall St., Corrupt in_cog_ni_to Feb 2016 #30
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Feb 2016 #31
if the 18-34 age demographic galvanizes to the extent they did for BHO NoMoreRepugs Feb 2016 #35
New Quinnipiac poll: 74% of 18-44 year olds have Bernie's back. Avalux Feb 2016 #43
HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Feb 2016 #41
Kicked and recommended. Thanks! Duval Feb 2016 #42
Watch Out In States With Electronic Tabulators billhicks76 Feb 2016 #46
K&R Paka Feb 2016 #53
No matter what happens, at least he dragged her to the left for a little while. Vinca Feb 2016 #55
That's just what NPR pundits said RobertEarl Feb 2016 #69
With respect, Bullcrap. You can't drag "her" anywhere. If forced she might state rhett o rick Feb 2016 #74
Chamber of Commerce expects her to greenlight TPP as well. Jackilope Feb 2016 #102
Kickety rec! hifiguy Feb 2016 #64
Thank you for a beautifully reasoned post. Full of truth. n/t Mira Feb 2016 #73
Any change in politics as usual for the Dems is welcome jonestonesusa Feb 2016 #76
.^that 840high Feb 2016 #78
Kicked and recommended a whole bunch! Enthusiast Feb 2016 #81
wouldn't have to do anything but sit back and watch as Hillary got what was coming to her... Oldenuff Feb 2016 #89
Get out the Millennial Voters HockeyMom Feb 2016 #90
Spot on RobertEarl!!!! monicaangela Feb 2016 #92
Some people were looking forward to a full season of Coronation Street (the USA version) Babel_17 Feb 2016 #93
Yeah, we bad RobertEarl Feb 2016 #94
There's a reason they hide the big money donors... Ivan Kaputski Feb 2016 #95
There might have been a few other choices... dubyadiprecession Feb 2016 #100
 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
1. There was always going to be a candidate to the left of Clinton.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:21 PM
Feb 2016

I don't get how one comes to the thought there wouldn't be. It is an important part of the democratic party. Kucinich was huge for us.

Sanders hasn't ruined anything, though I believe it is in the hopes of most of his supporters. For some reason they want the whole country to be scared of Sanders, when there simply isn't one single thing that is frightening about him.

Good on Sanders. He will probably have a little more clout when he goes back to the senate as a democrat.

JonLeibowitz

(6,282 posts)
3. Nate Silver's 538 came to that thought.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:28 PM
Feb 2016

He predicted there was not much room to her left which meant that Jim Webb was her strongest challenger.

No, I'm not making this shit up.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
5. People predict a lot of things. I never saw Webb as a threat for anything other....
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:31 PM
Feb 2016

than the prison industrial complex.

"He predicted there was not much room to her left "

That doesn't make sense to me. Every single election we have a more left candidate. Every one. It is an extremely important role they play in keeping the party strong. Sanders is playing that role this year.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
8. I truly see no clue as to your point.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:43 PM
Feb 2016

Anyone paying attention to politics for more than a decade fully knew there would be a challenger from the left. It is very important to the party. Kucinich held that position for years. Sanders has it this year. I'm really excited about our new crop and who will hold it in 2024 when Clintons Presidency is finished.

To stick with your side-track, Webbs thought on our prison system are second to none.

JonLeibowitz

(6,282 posts)
9. My point was to show that some thought Clinton WAS the left
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:46 PM
Feb 2016

To respond to your point of "I don't get how one comes to the thought there wouldn't be" I provided evidence that some came to that thought.

No great mystery to what I meant...

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
11. There is no doubt that Clinton represents the left. Everyone knows that.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:48 PM
Feb 2016

Says nothing to the point I was making. Good on Sanders for filling that role this year. I think going back to the senate as a democrat might actually give him a little clout. That will be new territory for him. It's a good thing.

kenfrequed

(7,865 posts)
47. Are you a contortionist in real life too?
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 04:56 PM
Feb 2016

Seriously, the point wasn't that she Is the Left, but that she wasn't going to get actual competition from the left. The party and the pundits and the media wrote off the left-progressive wing of the party like they do every four years.

Suprise, the people are tired of being written off.

PatrickforO

(14,471 posts)
80. That's true. Same thing happened on the right. Before the Koch brothers co opted it, the TP was a
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:40 AM
Feb 2016

grass roots movement on the right. All the holy-rollers, the anti-abortioners, the homophobes, xenophobes and all the gun-toting militia types got sick of the establishment right sucking up to them and then ignoring them once they helped whatever establishment candidate slither into office. Started with Reagan, and long before the TP - those people got ACTIVE at the local level.

That's why I like your point so much - it was PAST time for us to do the same thing.

Only...I like to think we're not crazy...

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
57. Clinton rpresents "The Left"?????
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 05:35 PM
Feb 2016

Hahahahahahahahaha!
That is really funny.
She is slightly to The Left of some hard Right Republicans on some issues, but that does NOT
make her a representative of "The Left". There are still plenty of mainstream-Center FDR/LBJ Democrats who can see her for what she really is.


* Sanders has supported gay rights since 40 years ago. Clinton and Republicans have not.

* Sanders wants to end the prohibition of marijuana. Clinton & The Republicans do not.

* Sanders wants to end the death penalty. Clinton and Th Republicans do not.

* Sanders wants to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Clinton and the Republicans do not.

* Sanders wants to break up the biggest banks. Clinton and The Republicans do not.

* Sanders voted against the Wall Street bailout. Clinton and the Republicans (and too many "Democrats) did not.

* Sanders introduced legislation to overturn Citizens United. Clinton and The Republicans did not.

* Sanders refuses to accept money from super PACs. Clinton and the Republicans do not.

* Sanders supports a single-payer healthcare system. Clinton and The Republicans do not.

* Sanders refrains from waging personal attacks for political gains. Clinton and The Republicans do not.

* Sanders considers climate change our nation's biggest threat. Clinton and The Republicans do not.

* Sanders opposed the Keystone XL Pipeline since day one. Clinton and the Republicans do not.

* Sanders voted against the Patriot Act. Clinton and the Republicans did not.

* Sanders voted against the war in Iraq. Clinton and The Republicans did not.

* Sanders wants to Raise (or eliminate) the CAP on FICA deductions. Clinton and the Republicans do not.

* Sanders opposes unrestricted "Free Trade". Clinton and the Republican do not.


Hillary sure seems to agree with Republicans a lot.
I don't,
that is why I am a Democrat, and voting for a Democrat....Bernie!

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
61. Clinton represents the left
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 05:58 PM
Feb 2016

of the 1970s-80s REPUBLICAN party. She has disowned and run away from every program and policy that real Democrats stood for over generations.

"She is a hyper-hawkish Wall Street ally who’s championed disastrous, racist criminal justice and welfare policies." And that is the truth and nothing but the truth.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/hillary-never-saw-coming-why-democratic-primary-has-become-battle-and-why-its-going

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
66. Thanks for admitting you were never an O'Malley supporter.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 06:06 PM
Feb 2016

Clinton doesn't have anything locked up, and we've proven she isn't the only Dem who can win.

PatrynXX

(5,668 posts)
34. people buy into Nate Silver because of one thing that happened once
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:53 PM
Feb 2016

2012. Even the rotten barn door on Mitt Romney's dog cage could see who was gonna win except Mitt.

although as someone pointed out there are Super Pacs for Bernie Sanders per se , except it's like an open secret. Hillary can control hers as long as they aren't caught. Bernie isn't , he wants no part of it so they can do what they do if Hillary is referring Bernie going Negative that would insinuate that Super Pacs for Bernie and her are doing something illegal (coordinate with the candidate they support. ) Now this is my opinion I'm not saying thats where the "negative" fiction is coming from. Because if someone is pointing out issues with her Email server hey Bernie only pointed it out they attacked. Which is why whistleblowers should be protected going forward. Snowden special case , my view of him is tainted since he went to China and Russia. Two countries we don't get along well with. Although frankly it would have looked better if he came out with the stuff in Russia compared to China. True he needed a place he couldn't be extradited from but being that I've dealt with IT via CCNA/and MCSE/A because I'm in computers, some people can't handle security. I know one I used to work with a coworker and he got paranoid. Sent a bunch of usb drives to Post offices and said they were bombs X_X. Nicest guy in the world. Then Oct 20 she shipped out jobs down an hour south.. Newspapers.. Hillary lost me the moment the UAE deal came thru the door in 2005 and fell apart because of it in 2006. She couldn't get me back if she tried now , with plenty of help from the DU hillary page. which pulled me by the pants and threw me out their door. okay don't want my vote your not gonna have it. and I could repeat that story line to death wait I think I just did that. ADD much? (ADHD) clinical depression happened after Oct 20th 2008 too. Kept telling them in 2008 at the rate we are going we'll all be out of a job. They laughed it off until it came true . Teamsters union didn't stick up for us then

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
101. Having Bernie in the race will make Hillary stronger for the general
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:08 PM
Feb 2016

I think everything is going fine.

nxylas

(6,440 posts)
23. Yes, but they weren't supposed to ACTUALLY POSE A THREAT
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:15 PM
Feb 2016

The idea was that you have Sanders and maybe O'Malley providing a symbolic challenge from the left, giving the illusion of choice, getting a few votes from disgruntled lefties who were never going to vote for Clinton anyway, and allowing her to play a progressive on TV by agreeing with them, which you can do when they're only running at 5% in the polls or whatever. Unfortunately, the peasantry went and spoiled the plan by getting all enthusiastic about Bernie, and turning him into a serious contender for the nomination. The people have spoken, the bastards.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
48. Too bad you don't get the two minute credit. Nice try. Those that are successful usually
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 05:11 PM
Feb 2016

dont have much text as it takes that extra minute. Your quick reply time was great but not withstanding, what is your point here?

There hasn't been a candidate like Sen Sanders in my long lifetime. He is bringing out people that had given up on the political process. There still seems to be some hubris concerning the inevitability of Clinton but it's dying out with the momentum of the People's Movement. Granted your side has the Big Money which is usually enough to win elections, but something new is happening. People are beginning to believe that we can have an honest government not corrupted by Goldman-Sachs and Wall Street.

But don't worry about Clinton. When she loses Goldman-Sachs will find something for her.

Response to rhett o rick (Reply #48)

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
50. Not one word of my post was personal to a poster.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 05:19 PM
Feb 2016

As a forum host you should hold to that same standard. Thank you kindly.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
54. Nice try but I didn't get personal. Seems that's an easy way to justify avoiding
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 05:29 PM
Feb 2016

the actual discussion. I truly didn't get your point. Seems you were trying to say that the OP was wrong and that the Sanders' campaign was nothing special which is hard to believe. I am sorry if I misunderstood you.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
59. You were clear.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 05:43 PM
Feb 2016

As you have been in the past with me. As a host, stop making it personal. Not a word of my post was directed at a poster.

As a forum host, please stop.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251979917#post9

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
62. I'm no victim.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 05:59 PM
Feb 2016

As a host please stop making it personal with me. As a woman, men have been lecturing me about the victim card my whole life. Please stop. You are a host. Thanks.

kristopher

(29,798 posts)
88. Since you were not attacked from post 48 as you claim
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 08:06 AM
Feb 2016

Your repeated diversion based on the false claim that you were personally attacked is classic argumentation and is called "playing the victim". It is a form of bullying behavior.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511110415#post48

However, your header line in post 62 was completely correct, you are no victim. You are the aggressor.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
63. How will a two-time national candidate, who has come from sure thing, to no thing, be of help to GS?
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 06:01 PM
Feb 2016
 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
70. For the same reason they pay her $200,000 for a few minutes of speech that has no
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 09:05 PM
Feb 2016

value to them. It's called GRAFT. Her husband is said to have made over $100 f'n million dollars since his presidency for "services rendered". You know you write some books, you give some speeches and bingo-bango they give you $100 million dollars. Gotta love the American way.

This is the corruption we are fighting.

 

libdem4life

(13,877 posts)
71. But without political power? Bill hung on because of Hillary.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 09:10 PM
Feb 2016

But with neither of them in politics, what do they have to sell? I mean unless she runs for Senate or something, but without national political power, her value to them doesn't seem to be very much.

 

ErisDiscordia

(443 posts)
87. A small nation could survive on the loot they have accumulated
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 07:07 AM
Feb 2016

and their social security and pensions....don't worry about the Clintons! They will be fine. If they have to, they can crash with Chelsea.

 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
65. Once Warren ruled it out, Bernie was the only possible progressive challenger remaining.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 06:04 PM
Feb 2016

Nobody else of any stature existed.

O'Malley would still be at 5% in a two-way race. He was never going to get the votes Bernie got(a lot of them would simply not have voted, because there would have been no one for them to believe in, no one for them to trust.

BTW, now that Bernie has proven, over and over again, that he is just as good on "social justice&quot a set of causes which were never at odds with economic justice at all), don't you feel a little guilty about all the relentless hostility you've shown him? Do you still think he deserved even one-tenth of all that contempt?

You don't even have any good reason to still regard him as a sure loser.

quakerboy

(13,876 posts)
75. Huge difference between a candidate and a viable Candidate
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 11:06 PM
Feb 2016

Tonight proves Bernie is a viable candidate, which was never true of Kucinich.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
79. O'Malley was the one who ran before Bernie. I would be supporting him if Bernie had not
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:06 AM
Feb 2016

decided to run.

But not with the same certainty that I have regarding Bernie not succumbing to Corporate influences. I really like O'Malley and am surprised he didn't do better, he should have.

DemocraticWing

(1,290 posts)
4. I think even if he loses, Democrats have learned a lesson.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:30 PM
Feb 2016

And Hillary Clinton is included in that. I don't think that, deep down, many Democratic politicians are all that unsympathetic to liberalism. Believe it or not, I've actually heard Hillary Clinton push for campaign finance reform and single payer healthcare before. She actually said those things were good ideas. Why has she backtracked? The political process is messy and unfortunately not always great for the left.

But I do think that she and similar Democrats know that a Democratic message has to authentically address these issues raised not just by Bernie but by the millions of people who have stood with him to get that message out there. Those of us who truly believe in his call for revolutionary change do believe he has the best platform out there, but I (and Bernie, apparently) fundamentally believe that making the Democratic Party a vehicle for progressive change is possible and necessary. Some of the work is being done simply by this campaign's existence.

Everybody involved will be better for it in the long run.

Ferd Berfel

(3,687 posts)
6. As long as we all knuckle under and vote for teh Corporatist candidate (should such a terrible thing
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:39 PM
Feb 2016

occur) The DLC, DNC Third Way Corporatist elitists will have won, still be in control, still be pushing the 1%, still be killing Unions, stil be telling you that NAFTA and the TPP are GREAT FOR YOU, and will have learned nothing, except to not give YOU this much of a choice next time.



 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
51. I don't see it that way. A movement has been started. People now realize they are not
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 05:24 PM
Feb 2016

alone. I think there will be set-backs but unless the Oligarchs back off with their foot on our necks, people will continue with the movement to overthrow the corruption of Big Money in government. If nothing else (I think he will win) Sen Sanders has carved a path for who follows, like Sen Warren. I also think that when the progressive politicians see the backing Sen Sanders is getting, it will give them hope to be more aggressive themselves.

I understand this is a war. A war for our democracy that the Conservatives in our Party have given up in their worship of the rich Aristocracy.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
10. Everybody involved will be better for it in the long run.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:47 PM
Feb 2016

And that means Bernie, and we, have already won.

He has inspired so many people, that on a daily basis I sit in awe of what is transpiring across the electoral landscape. I have never seen anything like this. In 2008 I saw the people come out of the woodwork for Obama, but that was well after he was nominated. Now, before the first vote, the crowds are even larger!

Bernie is expressing the hopes and dreams of so many. Hopes and dreams that have been heretofore crushed by the 'realities' of establishment politics that treated us as children, saying:
""That's all so nice and wonderful sounding, but NO, you can't have any of that.""

Guess what? We can have it. We are the richest country in the world and we can afford health care for all, a clean environment, justice and equality, and a future we can believe in.

thesquanderer

(11,909 posts)
21. When did HRC ever push for single payer?
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:12 PM
Feb 2016

I know of at least two quotes from the 90s where she rejected it... I don't know of any where she supported it.

Stevepol

(4,234 posts)
39. I'm not sure she ever "pushed" for a single-payer system, BUT
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 04:12 PM
Feb 2016

in 1994, she felt sure that a single-payer system was "all but inevitable." A recent CBS news report talked about this.

Her comments also contrast with what she herself said in 1994 during remarks to the Lehman Brothers Health Corporation. As CBS News notes, back then she declared that a single-payer system was all but inevitable, saying: “I believe that by the year 2000 we will have a single payer system. I don’t think it’s — I don’t even think it’s a close call politically ... it will be such a huge popular issue in the sense of populist issue that even if it’s not successful the first time, it will eventually be.”

The CBS report goes on to say that

Between that declaration and her now saying single-payer can never pass, Clinton has vacuumed in roughly $13.2 million from sources in the health sector, according to data compiled by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. That includes $11.2 million from the sector when Clinton was a senator and $2 million from health industry sources during her 2016 presidential campaign. In a 2006 story about her relationship with the health industry, the New York Times noted that during her Senate reelection campaign, she was "receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from doctors, hospitals, drug manufacturers and insurers" and had become "the No. 2 recipient of donations from the industry." The Intercept also reported that from 2013 to 2015, Clinton received more than $2.8 million in speaking fees from the health industry.

Clinton and her daughter Chelsea have suggested that Sanders plan would dismantle the Affordable Care Act, which Sanders voted for. Sanders has disputed that and has also disputed that passing a single-payer system is impossible if a president pushes it.

In 2014, that view got a boost from then-Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin. He told the Hill newspaper that year that when it came to creating a Medicare-for-all system or a government-run health care option in the Affordable Care Act, “We had the votes in ’09. We had a huge majority in the House, we had 60 votes in the Senate.”

Democrats, however, are not expected to have such numbers in Congress after the 2016 election.

Link: http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/hillary-clinton-gets-13-million-health-industry-now-says-single-payer-will-never

thesquanderer

(11,909 posts)
45. re: "she declared that a single-payer system was all but inevitable"
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 04:20 PM
Feb 2016

Read that source more carefully. She was telling them that if people didn't get behind her plan during that congress, then single payer was likely inevitable. She was using it as a threat. She was saying, "if you don't want single payer, then get behind my plan before it's too late."

So no, she was not supporting single payer. She was selling her plan, in part, as a way to prevent it.

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2014/december/hillary-clinton-1994-statement-on-single-payer

gollygee

(22,336 posts)
91. I hope so.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 09:46 AM
Feb 2016

I don't dislike Hillary like a lot of Bernie supporters, but I do think the Democratic Party as a whole is too far to the right.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
67. Yes I agree. He is only a participant in the People's movement to get honest government.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 06:17 PM
Feb 2016

The Oligarchs have had their day and need to be run out of town.

Gregorian

(23,867 posts)
15. We'll always have Bernie.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:56 PM
Feb 2016

And it is the end of the line for the Dinos.

If only I were 20, this might be a bit less stressful. But having seen JFK and all that followed, it hurts to see our equivalent not garnering the respect he deserves.

It doesn't have to be a slow process, but it is by virtue that some just want to pull in differing directions. However, your post does instill a sense of calm in what is otherwise a rather nerve wracked morning.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
19. A Nerve wracked world watches and waits
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:05 PM
Feb 2016

Bernie brings a sense of tranquility to a nerve wracked world that looks to the US for leadership. GW, war, and equality for all are issues Bernie addresses in a way that commands respect and offers alternatives from the Big Business capitalism which only digs deeper holes.

Much is at stake .... the people know it... finally someone speaks to them with assurance that we can change course.

dana_b

(11,546 posts)
98. I didn't realize how much they watch but I just got back from Europe
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:18 PM
Feb 2016

and ALL of their news channels (I went to 5 countries) covered the U.S. politics and what we are up to. People would come and sit down to talk to my daughter and I about things and our politics because it directly affects them. They were all very respectful and kind but serious in their discussions. They were all very happy to learn that we do not support the Republicans and most knew quite well who Bernie is.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
105. The US is the leader
Tue Feb 9, 2016, 09:37 PM
Feb 2016

And tonight, after seeing Bernie do so well in New Hampshire, it breathes a sigh of relief knowing the US has a chance to get better,

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
16. If no one had shown up to challenge Clinton,
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:57 PM
Feb 2016

not only would this board be a much more boring place, but I wouldn't be even remotely motivated to vote for her.

Plus, the Republican field would probably still be the same, meaning Hillary and the Democrats would have zero coverage until after the conventions, would would put her even farther behind the Donald than she currently is.

The limited number of debates and town halls is bad enough. Imagine no debates?

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
17. it made them defend their policies, how they ran, and what they'd turned the party into
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 02:57 PM
Feb 2016

heck, they even thought that he'd get half of Kucinich's numbers since he's twice as lefty as him

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
20. They specifically let Sanders into the party so Clinton would have an opponent.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:09 PM
Feb 2016

So your main point doesn't hold true about him 'ruining' anything.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"
[/center][/font][hr]

SoapBox

(18,791 posts)
26. Ya, I guess those that dropped out didn't matter.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:32 PM
Feb 2016

So the DNC Elites and Little Debbie all got together and decided that instead of just letting the Queen sit back and wait for her swearing in...that they just had to have any old person to run against her...just to be running. So THEY decided to let Bernie be that person (Opps...forgot to tell him about this secret plan.)

Did I get that correct? Gosh...who knew!

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
29. How else would you get into a political party if not allowed in?
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:44 PM
Feb 2016

If there was no 'gatekeeper' then Trump could run as a Democrat but I don't think the DNC would allow that, and neither would any of us.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"
[/center][/font][hr]

 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
33. UM the GOP gatekeepers do NOT want him as a Republican, and certainly not their candidate
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:47 PM
Feb 2016

He crashed their party...but he has every right to do so

 

platitudipus

(64 posts)
38. Just my opinion
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 04:12 PM
Feb 2016

but I'm thinking that when he told the DNC he was going to run, everybody decided rather than run the risk of splitting the vote and letting a Republican win, the DNC didn't see him as a credible threat and welcomed him.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
68. What are the qualifications to be a Democrat? If Zell Miller could be a Democrat
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 06:21 PM
Feb 2016

I guess just about anyone can. And the DNC hasn't really embraced Sanders and you know it. I think they are tolerating him because a whole lot of real grassroots would be very upset if they didn't .

 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
32. They don't "let" people into a party
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:46 PM
Feb 2016

People choose to join or not. There is not a secret panel who decides who is allowed to be a Democrat or Republican

LiberalElite

(14,691 posts)
24. I'm very grateful to Sen. Sanders for
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:16 PM
Feb 2016

running for president. Otherwise there would be no one for me to vote for.

in_cog_ni_to

(41,600 posts)
30. I often wonder if they expected him to go after them...Corrupt polticians, corrupt Wall St., Corrupt
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:44 PM
Feb 2016

Corporations or did they think he'd play nice?

Did they really think he would play their game?

Did they know he wouldn't play their game and just thought the American voters would hate what he had to say and he'd just go away?

Did they know he wouldn't play their game, but they knew they had more money than sin to take him down if he got out of hand?

I wonder what they're thinking now! OH, fuck, what have we done now?! It's out of control!

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

NoMoreRepugs

(9,157 posts)
35. if the 18-34 age demographic galvanizes to the extent they did for BHO
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 03:54 PM
Feb 2016

an awful lot of people are going to feel the Bern

Avalux

(35,015 posts)
43. New Quinnipiac poll: 74% of 18-44 year olds have Bernie's back.
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 04:16 PM
Feb 2016

Hillary was at 23%. Those numbers blow my mind - wow.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
69. That's just what NPR pundits said
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 07:45 PM
Feb 2016

Problem is ... she doesn't mean any of it. She spilled the beans the other day when she said we can't, we can't, we can't.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
74. With respect, Bullcrap. You can't drag "her" anywhere. If forced she might state
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 09:26 PM
Feb 2016

some leftish rhetoric. Take college students debt. She wants them to quit whining and pull themselves up by their bootstraps and get a job like she did.

Jackilope

(819 posts)
102. Chamber of Commerce expects her to greenlight TPP as well.
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:32 PM
Feb 2016

I just don't get those who trust her. Time and time again her judgement, words, and actions don't meet up.

jonestonesusa

(880 posts)
76. Any change in politics as usual for the Dems is welcome
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 11:15 PM
Feb 2016

and way, way overdue. A drubbing of the Clinton political establishment would be good for everyone. But we'll take whatever we can get. It can only improve the party.

 

Oldenuff

(582 posts)
89. wouldn't have to do anything but sit back and watch as Hillary got what was coming to her...
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 08:55 AM
Feb 2016

Which many of us had hoped would be a sound drubbing.Sad that there are so many that find comfort in supporting the status quo candidate instead of supporting a candidate who wants to represent regular people like you and I.

 

HockeyMom

(14,337 posts)
90. Get out the Millennial Voters
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 09:44 AM
Feb 2016

These young people are Bernie's biggest supporters. When my own kids were that age, I really nagged them to vote. Daughter at college got her absentee ballot. My other daughter I drove her in my car to the polls and voted with her. Ironic part of all that? We all voted for Hillary for Senator! Both today have never missed a vote.

If you yourself are a Millennial, please vote. If your children are, light a fire under them to go vote.

Babel_17

(5,400 posts)
93. Some people were looking forward to a full season of Coronation Street (the USA version)
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 10:12 AM
Feb 2016

The plot involved someone standing on stage and pointing to individual supporters while the crowd cheers. That's it, from what I've been able to gather.

And now it's been cancelled thanks to the horrible, horrible, supporters of the Sanders campaign. I guess they organized, and wrote in nasty letters, and caused BBC America to cancel it.

Because of them people are being deprived of their show.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
94. Yeah, we bad
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 11:04 AM
Feb 2016

It's not Bernie's fault, it's the dang people who are sick and tired of the same old politics who done did it.

 

Ivan Kaputski

(528 posts)
95. There's a reason they hide the big money donors...
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 01:03 PM
Feb 2016

because if they didn't then people would change who they vote for. Yeah if you worked for GE you'd vote for who ever they endorse cause your job matters to you. If you have all your retirement money invested in Wall Street then yea you're going to vote for the Wall Street candidate. Get it?

dubyadiprecession

(5,537 posts)
100. There might have been a few other choices...
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 03:01 PM
Feb 2016

Martin O'Malley, Jim Weber, Lincoln Chafee besides just Hillary. Interesting Fact: Bernie joined the establishment when he was elected as a congressman in 1990. He was there before the Clintons showed up, and he has never left!

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Bernie done ruined everyt...