Sanders may have lost but he was right a lot also.
Some of his ideas may seem pie in the sky to some but they rightfully deserve a serious discussion by us as a party. Medicare for all, college tuition free, income inequality. We should be able to make these things happen, if not now then lets move towards making them happen. This is not a hijack Clinton thread, all due respect to her and the ideas she wants to put forward but we have to challenge her. I think Obama would have been even better if we had challenged him more. We also have to vote, not just in GE's but in off years. Millions of millennials got interested in politics, its up to us to keep them interested and one way to do that is to listen to the ideas they have, the ones they support and to actually consider them and not just brush them off and make them feel even more alienated from the political process.
= new reply since forum marked as read
to talk about Sanders. He will continue his message, which is good.
Regarding conceding, it seems entirely likely that he means exactly what he says -- that he intends to try to overset the majority vote at the convention. That's not good, but democracy will win and he'll have to continue his "revolution" some other way. Maybe even through cooperation with and persuasion of the undefeated forces; perhaps he will be temporarily capable of that.
If this man understood that the entire left, in and out of office, wants what he's trying to accomplish, he might just have been our nominee. "Divide and conquer" refers to dividing the enemy, not dividing your own side. 
In my view, there is no justice when the 15 wealthiest people in this country in the last two years, saw their wealth increase by $170 billion. That is more wealth acquired in a two year period than is owned by the bottom 130 million Americans.
Income and wealth inequality have reached obscene levels, the threat of climate change is more frightening than ever, and the billionaire class is now allowed to spend unlimited amounts of money to buy the candidate they want. And it is up to us to stand up and fight back. If we stand together, there is no limit to what we can accomplish.
If you can't afford to take care of your veterans , then don't go to war. - Bernie Sanders
Lots of European countries, especially the Nordic/Baltic ones, provide the things he's talking about, have much less income inequality, and (what really matters) much happier populations. It is SO possible to help each other out and for everybody (except perhaps the 1%) to end up happier and more secure as a result. And I think we would feel more like one America, not red America and blue America, if we could restore that "we're all in this together" feeling.
And it's just a matter of practical importance to the future of the Democratic party to keep the young voters engaged. Young voters got Obama elected in 2008; it's essential, and democratic, to listen to what matters to them, both for this election and for the future.
His ideas are a little short on substance. Let's take the ones you mentioned:
1) Medicare is an insurance program, with premiums, copays, annual enrollment and all the rest of the headaches. Which is what people don't like about ACA.
2) College is already free at least in CA. It's the fees that have gotten out of hand.
3) Income inequality is not something to aspire to.
Yes, yes, pure snark, but all of his ideas are about as sound as a bank in a Hollywood backlot. There's no there there. 
and all the other boring Democratic programs Bernie never mentions but Bill and Hill can talk about for hours at stretch. I've heard all three in the last couple of weeks and I'd much rather elect the guy and gal who know whereof they speak.
President makes treaties and appointments. 
talking about?
And actually, Mr. self-appointed Expert, you're not entirely correct. Apparently Hillary does understand this better than you do.
the DEA can decide to reschedule cannabis, which they won't do because no one wants to torpedo their favorite gravy train.
Or, yes, Congress can do it.
OR the executive can do it. The process via which it can be done administratively- basically, through HHS and then the Atty. General, both operating under the executive branch- is more complex, but probably not more complex than getting our gridlocked congress to do jack shit. And since medical experts have known for decades that cannabis is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man, any honest science-based HHS inquiry can only come to one conclusion.
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2015/02/13-how-to-reschedule-marijuana-hudak-wallack
See? That was kind of fun wasn't it?
Read the Constitution
Not that I'm keeping score.
One, in your assertion that none of Sanders's proposals are legitimate, substantive, or make any sense. (quote: "all of his ideas are about as sound as a bank in a Hollywood backlot. There's no there there."
I provided one, which is, is, and does. Makes a lot of sense, both morally and politically.
Two, in your assertion- and lets not be facile, here, this was the point you were clearly trying to make- that ONLY congress and not the POTUS has the power to re- or deschedule cannabis from the CSA.
...I get that you like to wave, that's nice.
Yes of course.
I was for Bernie, but when it became apparent it was not to be, the goal could only be to change the narrative. And I think he has largely done that. The movement will continue and it will be interesting to see who the faces of it are down the road. Hopefully the party does a little navel-gazing and figures out (imo) that progressive populism is the right direction in which to proceed.
In any event, I'm sorry my guy lost, but congratulations to Hillary Clinton. Personally, I think Trump is so toxic that any candidate we put forth would clean his clock. I look forward to Hillary annihilating this clown in November. 
You may very well be right about the party marginalizing progressives. I guess we'll see. In the interim, we push for change. Beats giving up.
