HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » How the Democratic Party ...

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:34 PM

How the Democratic Party Establishment Suffocates Progressive Change

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/03/22/how-democratic-party-establishment-suffocates-progressive-change


The Democratic Party establishment persistently strives to downsize economic and political expectations. Sanders aims to upsize them, which is why he is viewed as such a threat


The Democratic Party establishment has recently found itself discomforted by Sen. Bernie Sandersí campaign to return the party to its modern roots of New Deal social democracy. The establishmentís response has included a complex coupling of elite media and elite economics opinion aimed at promoting an image of Sanders as an unelectable extremist with unrealistic economic policies.

The response provides a case study showing how the party suffocates progressive change. Every progressive knows about the opposition and tactics of the Republican Party. Less understood are the opposition and tactics of the Democratic Party establishment. Speaking metaphorically, that establishment is a far lesser evil, but it may also be a far greater obstacle to progressive change.

(snip)

Rather than an excess of pipe dreams, our current dismal condition is the product of fear of dreaming. The Democratic Party establishment persistently strives to downsize economic and political expectations. Sanders aims to upsize them, which is why he has been viewed as such a threat."

(snip)

There is legitimate room for intellectual difference. What is so stunning is the tone of the critique and the fact it sought to diminish an important policy (fiscal stimulus) just because Sanders was using it to his political advantage.

(snip)

Progressives must surface the obstruction posed by the Democratic Party establishment. Primaries are prime time to do that, which means there is good reason for Sandersí campaign to continue.

?itok=NDzmC0Rt

77 replies, 3009 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 77 replies Author Time Post
Reply How the Democratic Party Establishment Suffocates Progressive Change (Original post)
Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 OP
ibegurpard Mar 2016 #1
think Mar 2016 #2
CorporatistNation Mar 2016 #23
Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 #61
dflprincess Mar 2016 #27
AZ Progressive Mar 2016 #3
DanTex Mar 2016 #4
choie Mar 2016 #8
rhett o rick Mar 2016 #11
DanTex Mar 2016 #14
rhett o rick Mar 2016 #16
DanTex Mar 2016 #17
rhett o rick Mar 2016 #50
DanTex Mar 2016 #51
rhett o rick Mar 2016 #53
DanTex Mar 2016 #56
rhett o rick Mar 2016 #58
DanTex Mar 2016 #59
Scuba Mar 2016 #52
DanTex Mar 2016 #54
Scuba Mar 2016 #55
DanTex Mar 2016 #57
Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 #62
DanTex Mar 2016 #64
Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 #63
Karma13612 Mar 2016 #18
DanTex Mar 2016 #19
rhett o rick Mar 2016 #66
DanTex Mar 2016 #68
rhett o rick Mar 2016 #69
DanTex Mar 2016 #70
rhett o rick Mar 2016 #74
Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 #67
Karma13612 Mar 2016 #75
timmymoff Mar 2016 #30
DanTex Mar 2016 #36
timmymoff Mar 2016 #37
DanTex Mar 2016 #39
timmymoff Mar 2016 #41
DanTex Mar 2016 #43
timmymoff Mar 2016 #45
ThePhilosopher04 Mar 2016 #71
w4rma Mar 2016 #5
Tarc Mar 2016 #6
w4rma Mar 2016 #7
Tarc Mar 2016 #9
w4rma Mar 2016 #10
Tarc Mar 2016 #21
Atmosk Mar 2016 #49
Lorien Mar 2016 #15
noretreatnosurrender Mar 2016 #12
rhett o rick Mar 2016 #13
Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 #65
astrophuss42 Mar 2016 #77
Zira Mar 2016 #73
colsohlibgal Mar 2016 #20
pat_k Mar 2016 #22
JoePhilly Mar 2016 #24
Atmosk Mar 2016 #25
sadoldgirl Mar 2016 #29
Atmosk Mar 2016 #48
forjusticethunders Mar 2016 #60
Broward Mar 2016 #26
upaloopa Mar 2016 #28
sadoldgirl Mar 2016 #31
upaloopa Mar 2016 #33
timmymoff Mar 2016 #32
upaloopa Mar 2016 #34
timmymoff Mar 2016 #35
upaloopa Mar 2016 #38
timmymoff Mar 2016 #40
upaloopa Mar 2016 #42
timmymoff Mar 2016 #44
upaloopa Mar 2016 #46
timmymoff Mar 2016 #47
Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2016 #72
KoKo Mar 2016 #76

Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:38 PM

1. sometimes the easiest explanation is the correct one

The modern Democratic Party is controlled by Rockefeller Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ibegurpard (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:40 PM

2. "I'm a registered Democrat and a Rockefeller Republican ... where that will get me, I'm not sure yet

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ibegurpard (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 09:33 PM

23. The Third Way/DLC "Play" Is To Persuade Rank And File To FOCUS on Social Rather Than Economic

matters of interest... That way they can just continue to make excuses and define "progressive" via means less financially costly to their TOP 1% Benefactor Class whose objectives they now place at the HIGHEST PRIORITY!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Reply #23)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 01:46 PM

61. just like the republicans do....

huh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ibegurpard (Reply #1)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 09:59 PM

27. Actually I think a lot of the Third Way/DLC/"New" Democrats

are to the right of Old Nelson.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:41 PM

3. The current Democratic Party is a big tent with the right-centrists being the bullies

They think the party is theirs and treat the progressives like shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:43 PM

4. Silly. We have two progressives currently vying for the nomination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #4)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:57 PM

8. uh....wrong

one progressive and his name Bernie. The other one is a DLCer at best.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #4)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:02 PM

11. Clinton is as progressive as Nixon. No I take that back she isn't as progressive as Nixon.

 

Progressives do not support Republicon wars for profits.

Progressives do not support the Patriot Act, domestic spying, indefinite detention, etc.

Progressives don't support job killing Free Trade agreements.

Progressive don't accept pay offs from Banksters

Progressives don't support environmental damage from fracking, drilling in the arctic, etc.

Progressives don't get endorsed by the neocon community

Progressives don't support the Prison For Profits industry

If you've seen the debates you should understand that the two Democratic candidates are miles apart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #11)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:04 PM

14. The two are running on remarkably similar platforms, and voted the same 90+% of the time.

If you take out the pie-in-the-sky stuff from Bernie's platform, you basically get Hillary's, except that Hillary has a much stronger grasp of foreign policy and more experience across the board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #14)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:09 PM

16. Her "grasp" on foreign has cost thousands of lives. I gave you a list of issues where they

 

are miles apart. Her platform is total rhetoric, filled with "I think we should", "it would be good if", "students shouldn't have to be". She is a master of not saying anything. Not committing herself.

Bottom line is that she does not have a progressive foreign policy. The neocons have endorsed her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #16)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:12 PM

17. She made a bad vote, I agree.

As far as your list, those laundry lists that circle around the Bernie-nets are wildly inaccurate. As soon as you say something like she "accepts pay offs from Banksters" you've disqualified yourself from the realm of intelligent conversation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #17)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 09:33 AM

50. So let's talk about her "pay-offs". Do you deny that she has taken money from banksters for her

 

campaign, her foundation, and her personal pocketbook? Maybe you think that all those millions won't influence her. Those that give money to politicians want something in return, quid pro quo. They see it as an investment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #50)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 09:36 AM

51. You're accusing her of bribery with zero evidence. You're also conflating individual campaign

contributions with corporate contributions. Also, only a small fraction (5% of so) of her campaign funds come from individuals employed in financial corporations (which, BTW, are some of the largest employers in her home state of NY).

I've heard the smears and the conspiracy theories. Not impressed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #51)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 09:40 AM

53. And you are ignoring quid pro quo. The Clintons have amassed $150,000,000

 

from "friends".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #53)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 09:42 AM

56. You have no evidence of quid pro quo, whatsoever. It's all insinuation.

The Clintons are very wealthy and successful. So? Yeah, if you're voted most admired woman in the world 15 times, and have the wide range of knowledge and experience of Hillary Clinton, people pay a lot to see you speak.

Did the far left not know about the fact that there's a paid speaking tour until this election?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #56)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 10:00 AM

58. To pretend that quid pro quo doesn't exist is denial. Sadly

 

the lower classes will suffer. Do you honestly believe she will work to reverse the widening wealth gap? or close Prisons For Profit? Or raise the defense budget? Continue a very aggressive war in the middle east?

We are at a crossroads to save our democracy. We may never have this chance again. We need a true progressive in the WH.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #58)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 10:05 AM

59. I didn't say it doesn't exist anywhere, I said there's not a trace of evidence that it exists

with Hillary Clinton. It's all baseless smears.

Do I think she will work to reverse the wealth gap? Of course. Fight mass incarceration and for-profit prisons? Of course.

On foreign policy, she will be better both in terms of reducing Middle East instability and keeping the US safe than Bernie. You don't want a naive newbie doing this stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #17)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 09:38 AM

52. As soon as you say that stating she accepts payoffs from banksters DQ's you ... you are DQ'd.

 

Burying one's head in the sand is not the path to enlightenment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #52)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 09:40 AM

54. Umm, she doesn't accept "pay offs", that's a dishonest smear.

And, sure, DQ me if you want. Meanwhile the Democratic electorate is DQing Sanders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #54)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 09:41 AM

55. What do you call all that dough? The fruits of her labor? Bwahaaaahaaaa.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scuba (Reply #55)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 09:44 AM

57. "Bwahaha" is a poor substitute for substance. This is why Hillary is winning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #57)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 01:51 PM

62. HIllary is temporarily ahead in come areas becauwse

the system is rigged in her favor. From the DNC to M$M it's rigged

Don't bother to come back with " show me the links" They are hundreds all over DU alone. Go look them up your self.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #62)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 01:54 PM

64. LOL. Rigged in her favor. Temporarily ahead. Y'all crack me up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #16)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 01:53 PM

63. Amen


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #14)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:13 PM

18. Oh DanTex, not even close.

First off, Hillary's platform is Just Bernie's platform slightly modified and presented after Bernie presented his.

And I don't consider voting for war as an example of a 'much stronger grasp of FP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Karma13612 (Reply #18)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:17 PM

19. The fact that you're accusing her of stealing his platform goes to show how

aligned they are. Of course, she didn't steal it, like I said they voted the same way in the senate over 90% of the time. Do you think she was simply copying his positions for all those votes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #19)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 02:03 PM

66. He wants to tax speculation on Wall Street to pay for college educations.

 

She wants to give parents $2,500 deduction (worth about $1,000 real money) and tell the states to behave themselves. They are not close.

She favors fracking (only if the corporation promise to be careful) while he rejects the environment damaging fracking for profits.

How about the Patriot Act, domestic spying, indefinite detention. Not close on those issues.

Prisons For Profits - He wants to eliminate them, she likes tough laws to fill them. Not close.

He wants to end the ever growing wealth gap, she wants to take advantage of it (made her very wealthy)

He doesn't believe in big money control in politics, She takes advantage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #66)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 02:08 PM

68. Meh, you hate her, and so you misrepresent her platform in order to smear her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #68)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 02:58 PM

69. Nice try. I don't hate her, I hate those that put corporate profits ahead of the lives

 

of our children and families.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #69)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 02:59 PM

70. So why do you misrepresent her positions so badly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #70)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 04:42 PM

74. Your argument lacks substance.

 

I left a lot out like her position on marijuana. No federal legalization. Would allow the states to determine but could be overruled if certain federal guidelines weren't observed. Medical marijuana needs more study.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Karma13612 (Reply #18)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 02:03 PM

67. THat's the point

voting for War: Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc, etc is not a grasp of FP. It does show a grasp of feeding your Military Industrial Complex puppet masters though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #67)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 07:54 PM

75. Very good point! eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #4)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:07 PM

30. No, not even close

 

Fracking isn't progressive. Private prison isn't progressive. Regime change isn't progressive. Selling out the minimum wage fight isn't progressive. Supporting jail for marijuana isn't progressive. Free trade deals are not progressive. Hillary is far from progressive, please stop labeling her as such, she is a blue dog democrat at best.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timmymoff (Reply #30)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:45 PM

36. Bash bash bash. Doesn't it get boring?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #36)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:47 PM

37. Do you deny

 

the things I have stated about her?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timmymoff (Reply #37)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:50 PM

39. It's mostly false, at best misleading. At this point I'm used to it from the fringe left.

The good news is that Bernie's going to lose, and Hillary's going to be the nominee, and all the anti-Hillary smears will add up to nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #39)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:54 PM

41. No

 

those are all stances she has taken, it also coincides with people she has taken money from, but I wouldn't want to imply anything is wrong with that. After all, bashing is now pointing out someone's record. Please take the time to tell me which one is wrong or misleading. I have time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timmymoff (Reply #41)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:57 PM

43. Like I said, mostly false, at best cherry-picked and misleading.

Like I also said, irrelevant now that she's the nominee and the far left is once again relegated to making noises that nobody listens to or cares about, and threatening yet again to throw the election to the GOP.

Sorry, it's a little late, and I don't feel like correcting the same set of smears for the 20th time. Use google. Or else don't and keep repeating the nonsense. In the real world, we have a strong progressive nominee named Hillary Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #43)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:00 PM

45. She's the nominee?

 

Since when? And you are slandering the word progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #4)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 03:02 PM

71. Clinton isn't progressive in the least bit. You know that.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:45 PM

5. They won't be able to stop it for much longer. The "centrists" will be dead from old age, soon. (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Reply #5)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:46 PM

6. Protip; people drift to the center as they age

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #6)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:47 PM

7. ProTip: That's not the rule anymore. And "centrists" aren't moderates. (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Reply #7)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 06:59 PM

9. You'll find out soon enough


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #9)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:01 PM

10. No. I promise that I'll never support someone like Clinton in any primary election, anywhere. (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Reply #10)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 08:08 PM

21. Will you be leaving the Democratic Underground when Hillary wins the nomination?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to w4rma (Reply #7)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:08 PM

15. Hillary is to the Right of Bush and McCain on many issues

any Dem should be ashamed to even CONSIDER voting for such a corrupt far right wing poser. There's nothing "Centrist" about her in the least!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #6)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:03 PM

12. Only Some People

My husband and I are both in our 50s we haven't drifted nor have a lot of others our age or older. Hillary may be getting the majority of older voters who have voted but she's not getting all of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #6)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:03 PM

13. But they can only loot our resources so much. Then what does capitalism have in store for them?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #13)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 01:57 PM

65. THis?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarc (Reply #6)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 08:21 PM

77. Generally because they are more comfortable in life...

This pattern is faltering atm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to w4rma (Reply #5)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 03:07 PM

73. I used to think the same about the Republican party

 

it's only gotten worse though.

But yes, it's the same old crones doing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 07:20 PM

20. Lessons From Obama 2008

Obama talked like Bernie running then once in acted mostly nothing like that. I believe in the Who song saying we won't be fooled again...or at least me and other Bernie fans won't.

Hillary would just about do and say anything to get in. But her actions....lumping her in as a progressive with Bernie is quite the stretch....who voted for the tragic Iraq War and who did not?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 08:49 PM

22. We must "surface the obstruction posed by the Democratic Party establishment..."

Progressives must surface the obstruction posed by the Democratic Party establishment. Primaries are prime time to do that, which means there is good reason for Sandersí campaign to continue.


Absolutely! Challenging Beltway Group Think is a key reason Sanders needs to stay in through the convention, regardless of cumulative delegate totals.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511507143

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 09:38 PM

24. The disgruntled left sufficates its own movement ...

... they spent most of Obama's 7+ years complaining about Obama and not building up an array of "sufficient liberal" candidates for 2016.

They wasted a few of those years calling for a primary AGAINST Obama. That was time they could have spent building up alternatives for 2016.

Did they do that ... NO.

I tried to explain to them BACK THEN that if they did not build up such alternaitves, they'd spend 2015 and 2016 complaining about Hillary.

And so here we are.

Hillary will win the Nomination, and become President, and they'll spend her years doing the exact same thing. Complaining while developing no alternatives. Again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 09:54 PM

25. Progressivism isn't going to lose

Within the next ten to twenty years the baby boomer generation will go from the largest cohort to being almost nonexistent and the millennial generation will take the helm with over 80 million voters. Even if for the next 4 years every progressive at every level of office was somehow spirited away by DWS, then it wouldn't change the fact that the vast majority of Americans want a progressive agenda. The democratic party doesn't really have a choice in the matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atmosk (Reply #25)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:04 PM

29. You may be right, but the planet cannot wait that long. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadoldgirl (Reply #29)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 12:12 AM

48. It might have to


The reason there are sometimes generational divides is due to how one comes to see the world as they mature. It is simply a fact that they way young people see the world right now is fundamentally different then the way older Americans do. Those people who grew up in the 60's, 70's, 80's knew a very different America then the one I grew up with. To them America is the same place as it was all those years ago, as time goes on and one moment casually interspersed into the next the differences merge into the back ground, small outbursts here and there, but in the end its all just fades into white noise.

Not only will they not help solve the problem, they don't even understand that a problem exists. To many what is actually happening this year is baffling. Some seem to think that this year is some weird el nino type event, that the stars just happened to align some certain way and after its over it'll never happen again, rather then face the fact things are like this for a reason and ignoring it will only make it that much worse. No argument no matter how eloquent or explicit can convince them to shift their perspectives. We don't admit defeat, but we can't take the ground today.

Looking at all the information points to an eventual end to the 40+ year long era that has brought the nation to its knees. Many factors have coalesced to support the rise of a massive extremely liberal cohort, which will put the nation back on its feat again. It'll be a huge effort, we'll need to correct the mistakes of past generations and pay off their debts. The statistics say we aren't buying homes or cars like earlier generations, that we aren't getting married or having kids because we can't afford to, that we won't make as much money or live as long or be as happy as our parents were, but its ok. Its going to be us who saves the dying oceans, its going to be us who pay back the 20 trillion debt, its going to be us who fight the rampant social and economic injustices pervading our society, its going to be us who overthrow the oligarchs who have perverted the law and silenced the will of the people. We will do this, because if we don't nothing but ashes and ruins will remain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atmosk (Reply #25)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 10:56 AM

60. Progressivism might win due to demographics.

 

But it's going to do so IN SPITE of the whiny "Left", not because of it. The primary proved that the grassroots simply weren't there; if they were, the progressive candidate would be beating, or at least not getting destroyed by, the establishment candidate. Even the under 50k income voters are voting Hillary now - doesn't that speak volumes about where we have failed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 09:59 PM

26. Great article, nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:00 PM

28. You know how you get progressive change? You join the party and work at the lowest level and build

it.

You don't call yourself a Dem a year before the election and say you are taking over then whine that your being suffocated.

And you don't threaten to not vote if things don't go your way!


Weeping Jesus on the cross!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #28)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:09 PM

31. Jesus was an early democratic socialist,and

his teachings worked in the early Christian community.

Nothing here to compare with the present Third Way
party, which stands in awe of money. On the contrary
he pushed the money changers out of the temple.

Remember your New Testament?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadoldgirl (Reply #31)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:38 PM

33. I know Bernie, Jesus, FDR, Gandhi all are in the same club

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #28)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:16 PM

32. Therein lies the problem

 

If you support Hillary, you aren't progressive, so please stop telling us how we should be doing things. I do not need advice from someone who is willing to sell out democratic principles for an election win in one office and disastrous results down ticket. Right now the democratic party in my area is begging our Bernie group to join them. Why? We kicked her ass in our county by +5000 . Pretty bad when a rag tag group of individuals can outperform a party that's existed for over a hundred years here. I'm not interested in joining the cesspool of democratic principles gone by, instead we will form our own thing and you guys can continue with your right of Rockefeller republican stances. I want no part of a party not willing to fight for the people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timmymoff (Reply #32)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:41 PM

34. Don't define us!

But no you'll keep looking at the world through your narcissistic paradigm and label and criticize everyone who doesn't measure up.

Your like a fundy in that way

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #34)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:43 PM

35. Your vote and support is defining you.

 

Own it, embrace it. It's all you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timmymoff (Reply #35)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:48 PM

38. In your mind which means little to anyone

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #38)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:51 PM

40. Seems to be roughly 45%

 

of the people voting democrat. But you don't need us and our progressive stances, you got wall st., big pharma, and the MIC. Why would you want us when you have all that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timmymoff (Reply #40)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:55 PM

42. why don't you write me a long rambling critique and if I have some time maybe I'll read it.

By the way, we all need each other. The only way any of us gets anywhere is by working together against the common enemy.

There are many ways to do that. Voting is only one. But look at the states where Dems didn't bother to vote like KS and NC and WI

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to upaloopa (Reply #42)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 10:59 PM

44. We do?

 

No, we don't. You guys trying to sell us a shit sandwich we want no part of need us. We will be making the changes with or without you, and honestly I hope it is without so we can have a truly progressive platform instead of one whose slogan is " no we can't!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timmymoff (Reply #44)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:06 PM

46. enough

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timmymoff (Reply #44)

Wed Mar 23, 2016, 11:12 PM

47. I agree

 

Enough is enough. Enough of being sold out by the wall st. wing. Enough of being sold out by bad trade deals. Enough supporting conservadems, we are just going to change the dynamics, the revolution is here, you may win the primary and even the election, but shit is changing. The youth, with some fed up older folks, are going to bring the gop and the conservadems kicking and screaming into the current century. You said it clear. Enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 03:03 PM

72. Like Hillary, the establisment has a lot of "experience"...at protecting the establishment.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Thu Mar 24, 2016, 08:02 PM

76. OMG....This Donkey is what "This Dem" felt like when Rahm kicked us Liberals in the Teeth after

Obama won and before he was even inaugurated. It didn't stop even after that.

And, I was insulted when the cold and calculated "Circle Blue D" was replaced with our great Braying Kicking Donkey showing our Fighting Spirit. But, I realize that many younger people though the "Circle D" was pretty cool so we had to go with it. Still..it is a cold and heartless symbol for a Party that has Fought honorably for many decades.

That's why I still use the and not that cold, heartless Symbol Thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread