Sanders’ next fight: A more liberal Democratic Party platform

[LuckyTheDog]

With his prospects of becoming the Democratic nominee for president fading, Bernie Sanders is pushing hard for what he thinks is the next best thing: the party platform.

It's a document of policy positions and goals few are likely to read and the White House will barely notice. But Sanders hopes it will enable him to put his imprint on the broader party brand and influence what it stands for beyond Election Day.

He wants it to include "Medicare for all," free tuition at public colleges and universities, aggressive efforts to ease income inequality and end the role of big money in political campaigns. Likely nominee Hillary Clinton won't necessarily go along, and will find Sanders and his passionate supporters ready to fight.

"Bernie doesn't want to be secretary of state. Bernie wants to lead a movement," said Roger Hickey, co-director of Campaign for America's Future, a liberal group sympathetic to the Vermont senator.

MORE HERE: http://yonside.com/sanders-next-fight-more-liberal-democratic-platform/

[brooklynite]

1. ...and if he was more cooperative and not beating up the prospective nominee...

...he might be given more influence on the Platform Committee.

[villager]

3. Projection: Not just for movie theaters anymore. nt

[kaleckim]

6. Oh, if he wasn't as mindlessly supportive of her

like all her followers (at least all your arrows point to the right, you got that correct) she and people like DWS would give a damn about working people? Wonderful "logic", and telling that he has to push to do things you Clinton supporters pretend to believe in.

In the end, the Democratic Party is so corrupt and right wing now, whatever mildly progressive things that get in the platform would just be a bunch more words the leaders of the party would have to ignore.

He could just form a democratic socialist party that could run candidates in some city council races and a congressional race here or there, which would force Democrats to start to compete for the left's vote. If he were to do that and if he worked with the countless smaller parties at the local level to do so, he'd have a massive amount of people on board. If he simply gives his support to someone that is the opposite of many of the things he's fought against, he'd have accomplished nothing this election cycle.

The Democrats need to start earning the left's vote and the left needs a place to go electorally when it doesn't, even if that means starting out with very modest short term goals.

[COLGATE4]

8. By all means, then go for it. Start the Democratic Socialist Party

and run for City Council, School Board and maybe a congressional race. Let's see where the support is for what you're arguing.

[kaleckim]

10. Well

it has already happened in Seattle with Kshama Sawant, almost happened in Minneapolis with Ty Moore. There is also a strong support for the left's policies, which Democrats like Clinton have zero interest in, and democratic socialism has unprecedented support among the young. Then throw in how large independents are now nationally, which Sanders does much better than Clinton with, largest percentage of the public since polling began. Do you really think that there would be no support for expanding that? The fact is that no one of Sanders clout has proposed that to this point. Sanders can play a major role in pushing that forward, or he can be a lap dog for the very politicians and forces he has tried to battle this election cycle. I hope he chooses a path forward that he would be proud of, instead of helping to cement a corrupt and inequitable status quo (which has treated him horribly), and which is leading us straight to ecological collapse.

Any rate, I think the arrogance of Democrats like yourself is dangerous to the Democratic Party. Even if you aren't as radical as someone like myself, it would make sense from a partisan point of view to try to objectively analyze this. Or don't, and watch everything continue to get worse.

[COLGATE4]

14. Sanders is simply the flavor de jour

of those who long for more radical policies. I doubt if his 'movement' has any staying power, especially when he is no longer willing or able. Cults of personality don't traditionally do well in the US. But I was being serious - have the courage of your convictions and see if the movement gains support.

[kaleckim]

16. Okay

compare the long standing support for someone like him to a situation in the last few decades. Not a flash in the pan thing that flamed out after an on stage scream or something. How did a democratic socialist almost beat the most powerful Democratic family in the country, with all of her built in advantages, establishment support, money and name recognition, in a year long campaign? Also compare where the country is and how sick of the status quo people are. Lots of polls on this. You'd have to go back to the Great Depression era to find something similar.

"Cults of personality"

You're just proving your aren't making sense of the changes underway. There is a huge gap between popular opinion on the issues and government policy, and if you want to challenge me on that I have many studies proving this. The left's actual policies are popular, they are. The public is to the left of the entire political system, Clinton included, on the actual issues. He happened to come along at a time when people were radicalized because of the decades of stagnating wages, the de-industrialization, the explosion in inequality, the crumbling infrastructure, the systematic corruption (which Clinton is guilty of), the coming ecological collapse and the total ineptitude by the both major parties in regards to dealing with that. People like yourself have no answers to these problems. Everything you've done has in fact cause this horrible mess. You saying it is a cult of personality is nothing more than projection and your total misreading of what is going on. Maybe, as time goes on, you Clinton supporters will wake up, realize Seinfeld is no longer on the air, and try to wrap your heads around the changes underway.

"I doubt if his 'movement' has any staying power, "

If it confines itself to the Democratic Party, it has no staying power. It will flame out and die and the country will continue to get angrier and more frustrated. If you think that isn't playing with fire, you aren't thinking this through. If the Democratic Party, as corrupt as it is, cannot push for changes that actually benefit working people, it will face an existentialist crisis in the coming decade. That is clear as day.

[COLGATE4]

17. Well, as I previously said, go for it. Actions speak louder

than words. i look forward to reading about the electoral successes of the Democratic Socialist Party.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

2. With the election for the Democratic nominee all but over, Bernie can accomplish much

if only his followers will support him.

He can accomplish NOTHING if his millions of fans and followers get pissy and walk away from the process.

The first thing Bernie MUST have to accomplish his movement is a democrat in the WH.

[kaleckim]

13. No

he must figure out a strategy to get policies he believes in pushed. If the Democrats prove they are a progressive force for change, which they can't, then so be it. If another means towards that end is better, then so be it. The assumption implicit in your argument is that getting a Democrat elected leads to progress and policies he supports. There is no evidence of that, none. Given the decades of stagnation for workers and overall decline and the Democrats' move to the right in recent decades, doesn't a case actually have to be made that the Democrats are that vehicle of change? Cause, from where I sit right now, I don't see it, and I have the data to back me up.

[Trust Buster]

4. Did you read your own article and think about how unrealistic it is ?

[VulgarPoet]

5. If he concedes, she won't listen to a goddamn thing he says,

and thus both parties will finish the circle of corruption. I'm losing sight of any real point, it's a total "which leg do you want to lose" situation.

[tonyt53]

7. Bernie should have started years ago

He will be lucky to have a seat at the back of the room of the convention.

[COLGATE4]

9. He'll be lucky to have a seat on any Senate committee.

[kaleckim]

12. I agree

gotta make room for all the corporate bought politicians that played the game to Clinton's and DWS's liking. We wouldn't want someone like him with any power in this corrupt and inequitable system, when room can be made for someone that politicians like DWS and Clinton want in his place. We all know they have tons of integrity and our interests at heart, so him not having any power would be to our collective benefit.

[COLGATE4]

19. No. Committee assignments go to the most steadfast members of the

Democratic Pary, Perhaps Bernie will actually join the party this time.

[LuckyTheDog]

11. I don't think he should be punished...

... for having the temerity to run against Hillary Clinton.

In 2008, Hillary stayed in the race until early June. Sanders has every right to do the same.

[COLGATE4]

18. Not for funning against her. But absolutely for not getting on board

with party unity once it became clear that he had no chance for the nomination.

[Skwmom]

15. A platform is MERE words on a piece of paper when you can't trust the nominee.