I feel crazy seeing some of these responses to Bernie's speech.

[SpareribSP]

He's trying to keep younger people engaged and lead them into the Democratic party. I don't think it's that confusing. The issues he listed are very real, and need to be tackled not only by the next President of the united states, but at the local and state level as well. It feels like people are mad just because it was Bernie, but I thought his message was quite good, and I think it's even good for Hillary because it's aimed at keeping people engaged in the political process and inspiring people towards public service.

[arcane1]

1. Conservatives don't want people engaged and inspired in the political process.

They might start demanding Free Stuff(tm)

[eastwestdem]

84. Yes, it's strange that we don't just become repubs. nt

[MaeScott]

157. Blue dogs.....what's the diff

[vintx]

88. Yep. Neolibs are neolibs and they act a lot like repugs.

[WayBeyondBlue]

101. You don't have to be a Republican

to be a neolib. All you have to do is take The Market as your own personal Savior, and you're in.

[vintx]

133. Yep. We have a LOT of those types in Texas

I've seen progress on the social issues front in the local Dem party, but ZERO progress on economics / populist issues.

[Rockyj]

219. Need to repost here re: Bernie Supporters

91.41% Bernie supporters will NOT support Hillary Clinton if she is the nominee, so maybe they will leave us alone! They don't need us they have Hillary!

http://www.usainfobox.com/latest-survey-91-41-of-bernie-sanders-supporters-will-not-support-hillary-clinton-if-she-is-nominee/

Together, 2.7 million people made over 8 million individual contributions to our campaign more contributions at this point than any campaign in American history.

That means 2,468,070 million of Bernie's donors won't support her! YIPPIE!

http://time.com/4372673/bernie-sanders-speech-text-read-transcript/

[boston bean]

2. By keeping a charade going where you if he doesnt get exactly what he wants democrats suck and

Are corrupt? Yeah thats gonna help.

[swhisper1]

71. Rabies

[Seeinghope]

87. Do we still have free speech in this country?

[WayBeyondBlue]

112. The right to Free Speech

is about *government* not impinging on it. Your employer can still fire you, your neighbors curse you (like here at DU for example). Hence, this right is limited in scope and it's best to remain at least civilized in discourse.

[roguevalley]

120. I don't know if we do. I'm too busy reading Wikileaks.

[WayBeyondBlue]

122. Ah, don't worry about Wikileaks

Fun to watch but, you should realize that any required fixes are already in

[Seeinghope]

143. So there you have it!

[cui bono]

147. That's not at all what he is saying but go ahead and keep being ignorant.

Did you listen to the speech? Or is this just like the time when you asked if the "King" that wrote an article I posted was a crazy right wing Republican when if you had taken just the slightest peek past the headline you would have seen that it was King, the BLM activist.



You should be thankful Bernie is trying to get his ideas into platform. They are more beneficial to you than Hillary's are.

.

[ladjf]

166. Very good point. Nt

[Warren Stupidity]

173. such anger and hatred, really strange.

perhaps this whole civility thing is just too difficult?

When Clinton lost in 2008 it was the Clinton supporters who went ballistic. When Clinton won in 2016 it was the Clinton supporters who went ballistic.

[LiberalLovinLug]

189. Strangely true

give it a rest, Hillary sups, you won. And instead of still smearing the rival, maybe take this opportunity to step back, and for one time take a look at what Bernie is saying. That its more than who is the "winner" of the primary, its about ideas and how the party will look going forward.

I know you (Hillary supporters) are so used to plugging your ears and circling the wagons but its time to peek out through the horses and make peace with the very real and large faction of your own party that has woken up. Those that the party will need to defeat Trump.

[Scootaloo]

201. I've been very puzzled by it as well

I've never seen such poor winners.

[Scootaloo]

206. FFR says what?

[WhiteTara]

3. Yes, he also needs to say he supports

Last edited Fri Jun 17, 2016, 04:48 PM - Edit history (1)

the next president and that he will support her to make these things real. Just to harp on the problems doesn't solve the problems.

[SpareribSP]

7. Getting people engaged

So that they take over the process from right-wing obstructionists IS the way forward.

[WhiteTara]

95. Yep. What office will you try for?

There are so many board seats in every county that goes unseated.

[Surya Gayatri]

146. And, harping endlessly from his morally absolutist and heavily negative high-horse

is hardly an inspiration to get involved to work for positive change.

Screaming "you bad, all bad" in a ceaseless stream of invective does NOT a revolution make.



This horse ain't goin' nowhere.

[cui bono]

148. Of course that's not what's happening but don't let that stop your bloviating.

[Surya Gayatri]

156. As one of the blindly devoted, you necessarily have difficulty perceiving

the adverse effect your long-winded leader has on normal, non-believers.

You want to talk "bloviation"? Look no further than your leader's execrable, endless diatribe last evening.

[AgingAmerican]

215. Translation: Nobody knows hillarys positions on issues

But everyone knows Sanders positions.

[840high]

228. Speaking of blindly devoted.....

[GeorgeGist]

175. Why so bitter?

[Surya Gayatri]

176. Not bitter, just disgusted and disheartened. What a base end to an uplifting beginning.

[noiretextatique]

181. They don't see fond of anything to the left of Clinton

It is the only explanation.

[Demsrule86]

11. If Bernie does not knock this stuff off...

He won't have anyone to work with.

[panader0]

17. Are you kidding me? his clout just jumped up quite a bit from his speech....

[woolldog]

44. The only channel covering the speech was msnbc

and even msnbc cut out in the middle of it. His clout diminishes every day. Every day that passes he looks like more and more of a loser and a bitter, irrelevant old crank.

[elljay]

135. Younger people don't watch tv

The speech was streamed and I expect that most people, including me (hardly a youngster) watched on their phones or computers. Every day people like you are turning off the next generation who showed that they REALLY disagree with your politics. Like it or not, they are the future and if they do not get engaged, the Democratic Party is doomed.

[kaiden]

151. There were 102,000 people watching the podcast.

[pokerfan]

155. It's on YouTube, pops

[Maru Kitteh]

187. It only had 218,000 users live. Pretty sad turnout for a 'revolution'

The LA watch "party" on MSNBC was pretty pathetic too. About a dozen or less attendees, still hoping he gets the nomination.

They were not interested in talking about running for office, just you know, Bernie didn't say he wasn't going to compete for the nomination so, they're still hoping he gets it.

[Lord Magus]

139. It did? How so?

I really don't see how that speech changed anything.

[Demsrule86]

220. It really didn't. nt

[cui bono]

149. If Hillary doesn't incorporate Bernie's ideas she won't have to work with anyone.

Cuz she won't have a job.

.

[Demsrule86]

174. Why should the winner have to incorporate the loser's ideas? nt

[immoderate]

177. Because they are better ideas.

--imm

[Demsrule86]

221. says you

If they were so great why didn't he win?

[SMC22307]

233. Because a great number of voters were duped into believing...

only Hillary can beat Trump.

[onyxw]

184. The winner's going to need more voters in the general.

Because the winner would probably like to have the loser's voters for the general and the easiest way to do that is to find the pieces of the loser's platform that can be amalgamated with her own fairly seamlessly that help to not only improve it to make it a stronger Dem platform but brings on board the causes of the loser to give the loser's voters something to fight for and shows a good faith effort to listen to their concerns.

I mean the winner can hold the line, burn the boats behind them, touchdown dance and rub people's noses in it. Lucky them, they got Trump as the primary alternative so they'd still probably win, but they'd be making it 10X harder than it needs to be and trashing a not insignificant portion of the Dem coalition and prospective new members of the Dem coalition along the way.

[Demsrule86]

191. If the ideas were so great...the loser should have won. I disagree with the idea that

Hil must do everything Sanders demands...let him go home...soon he will be irrelevant anyway.

[bvar22]

193. " If the ideas were so great...the loser should have won."

Then please explain George Bush.

[Demsrule86]

213. The Greens made the argument for months

and Nader...that Bush and Gore were the same...it cost us the election...you get a close election...the GOP will steal it every time. The green traitors and Nader are dead to me. Now if you are talking about McCain...I have no idea...I don't follow GOP politics. I know he lost in Carolina but beyond that, I don't care.

[bvar22]

216. That has been debunked for so long,

....you would be embarrassed to post it here if you had any shame at all.

Nader received a total of 97,000 votes in Florida, of which only about half were Democrats.

George Bush received over 250,000 Democratic votes.

So if you need to blame anyone besides the Supreme Court, it is the conservative Democrats in Florida....You know, the DWS crowd who wouldn't even endorse Democrats in Florida because that would hurt their Republican friends feelings.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251911615

"In the 2000 presidential election in Florida, George W. Bush defeated Al Gore by 537 votes. Nader received 97,421 votes, which led to claims that he was responsible for Gore's defeat.

Nader, both in his book Crashing the Party and on his website, states: "In the year 2000, exit polls reported that 25% of my voters would have voted for Bush, 38% would have voted for Gore and the rest would not have voted at all." (which would net a 13%, 12,665 votes, advantage for Gore over Bush.) When asked about claims of being a spoiler, Nader typically points to the controversial Supreme Court ruling that halted a Florida recount, Gore's loss in his home state of Tennessee, and the "quarter million Democrats who voted for Bush in Florida."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Nader_presidential_campaign,_2000

ALL of which is moot, and does not support your argument that the person with the best ideas wins. After watching politics in the US for over 60 years, your statement is more untrue than true. The person with the best ideas LOSES more times than not.

Al Gore had the best ideas.
Al Gore lost.
Therefore your postulate that the the person with the best ideas wins is FALSE.

[Demsrule86]

225. It has never been debunked...most Democrats will tell you Nader is a spoiler.

And don't give me the winning Tennessee BS...the state changed over the eight years Clinton was in office. The green Traitors with Nader kept saying that Gore and Bush were the same...well time sure proved that was not correct. And of course had Nader not been on the ballot in Florida...Gore would have won...he really did win but the election was stolen...close ones often are. Nader is dead to me as are the green traitors.

[cui bono]

231. Really? Still trying that old and tired meme?

We all know that BushCo stole the election and that Gore actually won. So stuff it.

.

[bvar22]

235. I cite facts and numbers, and links to sources.

You respond with a most people say response.
That is not very convincing, since "most people" are frighteningly ill-informed because we no longer have news agencies or valid Journalism in our country today,
and people are turning away from carefully analysis for infotainment.

Why don't you do some research that supports your claims,
and post your results here instead of the Fox News Version of "most people say".....

[onyxw]

210. Care to argue what was actually in my post?

"I disagree with the idea that Hil must do everything Sanders demands"

Good. Me too. Now how about you disagree with something that was actually from my post.

As Bernie's lost, he no longer needs votes in Nov. Hillary does. There are a number of options she can take to get them. Highlighting Trump's a monster might be enough to squeak by. But it might be nice to have an energized and unified base going into the general to help with down ballot races to help retake the senate (and maybe the house given the Trumpster fire).

Hillary's free to not move an inch and if she thinks her platforms perfect that's fine. As the winner that's her prerogative. Good luck to her. She's hired advisors and they'll do what they think is best to get to 270. But over 10M people didn't think it was a perfect platform and that it could be improved. Might be value to listening and adapting where it makes sense.

[Demsrule86]

212. Platforms rarely matter.

You know this as well as I do...it does not get anyone elected. Although the Palestinian thing could turn off Jewish voters...big Dem constituency. And I don't think any platform will help with uniting the party. Sanders has to concede and endorse...I don't care what else he says or does...it doesn't matter. He can't help with Trump unless he acknowledges he lost and endorses Hillary Clinton. What is he supposed to say...I won't endorse her but you should vote for her? Give me a break. If he does not start helping soon then we cut our losses better than having a convention mess.

[Demsrule86]

222. I don't believe Bernie can deliver any voters for the general

That being said, I am a liberal and do not object to a liberal platform...West however won't get shite. He should not be there. I don't think Bernie should keep refusing to concede and endorse...or he will lose what clout remains.

[cui bono]

230. Because that's how politics works. Because the Dem Party can't afford to say "fuck you"

to 46% of the party. Because this isn't winner take all. Because Dems are supposed to care about people.

Where do you get off thinking Hillary gets to be a dictator now?

Hillary supporters have been saying Bernie doesn't know how to compromise since he got into the race and now look who doesn't care about almost half of what the party thinks. ALMOST HALF OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. We're not talking about batshit crazy Republicans, we're talking about ALMOST HALF OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

Do you really think all those people should have no say? What has happened to you people? I swear you keep adopting more and more Republican traits and it's downright sickening.

The fact that you all keep using the term "loser" says it all really. You show your immaturity and that you simply don't care about anyone but yourselves. It's time to grow up and think about the entire party, then if you can manage it, the entire world.

If you want anything done about climate change, big oil, corporate control of our govt you better hope Bernie's ideas get into the platform cuz Hillary sure as shit isn't going to go to bat for any of those issues. Not on the side of the people anyway.

.

[HubertHeaver]

26. There is time for that, should it be proper, at the convention.

Just let it play out. Harping about it will not help.

[WhiteTara]

91. It needs to happen before the convention

and he if wants a role in the upcoming administration, it is beyond proper.

[HubertHeaver]

144. No, it really does not. It will happen in its own good time. Be patient.

[Demsrule86]

223. Fine with me but no speech if he does not concede and endorse. nt

[4nic8em]

52. Down the rabbit hole again...

I'm sure I'm not the only one, but I watched the words come straight from Hillary's mouth that she encouraged Bernie to stay in the race as long as he wanted to...all the way up to the convention...

[swhisper1]

69. yes she did

[WhiteTara]

93. And isn't she gracious? But he needs to

exhibit a bit of grace.

[4nic8em]

111. Here's a thought...

He doesn't need her permission...wonder why she is being so gracious to Bernie?

I'm fairly certain you know the answer...

[swhisper1]

56. he said he would work with her on social issues, did you not listen?

[WhiteTara]

85. working with her is not

the same thing as supporting her.

[swhisper1]

94. why should he support a corporatist? get real. She is everything he is against

most of her voters will not be supporting her, they will be not supporting Trump

[Scootaloo]

204. You were just complaining that he didn't say he was going to work with her.

Now you're changing that?

[WhiteTara]

207. He isn't the nominee. There is no "working with her"

he is either a supporter or an antagonist. Which is it?

[Scootaloo]

208. You just said he needs to say he will work with her. Post #3

You do understand that you're on the internet, using text as a medium, and that people can scroll up to see what you said, right?

[WhiteTara]

209. Scoots, I just edited my post to reflect

the word "support" her. I was careless in my words and I want them to be concise.

[Scootaloo]

202. He actually did say he's working with clinton to get things done.

Go watch. I know that reflexive vitriol is way easier, but it also makes you look silly.

[LoverOfLiberty]

4. His unwillingness to admit to defeat

reveals a character flaw that tells me he wouldn't make a great president.

I'm not going to accuse him of sexism or trying to hold the party hostage, but it seems to me at least he could admit that Hillary won the primary. It would be the honorable thing to do.

[Happenstance24]

16. This. Not admitting the reality of the situation

is a Donald Trump move. Bernie's supposed to be better than that. And what happens, after the convention when he loses, to all those people he's duped into believing he had a chance? Then he's got 3 months or less to appease a group of people he's intentionally firing up for a lost cause, assuming he even tries to help in the fight against Trump anyway. This makes no damned sense. Bernie is overestimating his influence.

[SpareribSP]

24. What if the people don't care about Bernie

But instead care about his platform?

[tk2kewl]

30. And this person that cares about his platform is eternally grateful for the man and his efforts

[SpareribSP]

36. True, he's the reason why people are still talking about all this!

[deathrind]

54. +1000

Well said!

[840high]

96. Amen.

[WayBeyondBlue]

121. Here's the thing

When folks dis Bernie, they dis his ideas and his supporters. And then to expect his supporters to come vote for Not-Bernie is, how to say, completely unreasonable. The favorite tactic of conservatives is to play upon the fears of voters, so telling Bernie folks that they better vote for Clinton because Trump is the seed of Satan is, yes, a favorite tactic of conservatives.

Bernie implies that folks should reject this appeal to base instincts and rather demand that Clinton adopt at least some of the policies Bernie argued for and that they in turn supported with a vote for Bernie.

So, if this was tl;dr - the Clinton crowd should abandon fear tactics and adopt Progressive policies in order to attract Bernie supporters.

[Happenstance24]

34. Then they

are gonna be real disappointed when they lose out on 90% of what they want and Bernie will end up a foot note swallowed up by his own "revolution". Free College, health care for all and on the cheap no less...I'd love to see that but the numbers don't add up for it. Denying that is as fool-hearty as the Pugs denying science when it comes to climate change. Reality is reality no matter how much we wish differently.

[tk2kewl]

40. Ummm

Bullshit

[Happenstance24]

42. Now that we got the "intellectual" opinion out of the way... -nt-

[tk2kewl]

47. Your flat out denial of the viability of all form of economic progressivism deserves nothing more

[Happenstance24]

50. Is that what I did?

I "Flat out denied the viability of all forms of economic progressevism"?

[brush]

102. How do you get "flat out denial of all forms of viable economic progressivism out of that post?

I'd call that flat out hyper-exaggeration.

[tk2kewl]

109. Any permutation of the "free stuff" argument is bullshit

[brush]

119. Not a good explanation at all. What an inaccurate and overblown charge.

The poster hardly called for rejecting all viable forms of economic progressivism.

Not using the words "any" and "all" in the charges you throw out might give your posts more credibility.

[SpareribSP]

43. This is a very cynical outlook.

Free tuition exists in many places and is honestly less generous than a lot of places. My wife went to college for free and even received a stipend. She lived in Latvia.

Better healthcare exists all over the world and cheaper rates than America. Medicare for all would be great, but you don't have to look far to see better systems than the one we have.

None of this is impossible. It might be hard to do, but we can get there.

[Happenstance24]

49. Maybe, but a realistic one.

Other countries aren't propping up huge sections of the rest of the world militarily and monetarily. Israel gets billions in aid yearly and they aren't alone.Hell, Canada doesn't even really have a military because of us. We could afford the above but we'd have to reduce our role in the world to just looking after our own which would present a host of other problems IMO. Mainly Russia and China filling the void. Cynical but realistic I'm afraid.

[villager]

51. Only if "realistic" means "I've given up on seeing resources allocated for anything but militarism"

If you're already defeated in that regard, then yeah, I guess it's "realistic."

[Happenstance24]

61. Well

Is aid to Israel militarism? What about all the aid to Jordan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt. That's 8 billion this year alone for 5 countries. FYI I'd love to see cuts to the military and for those cuts to be spent on us here at home. Christ you can get cell service 20 feet underground in Japan but we have drop out zones all over the country ABOVE GROUND. That's nuts. But even if we cut the military by 2/3rds it still wouldn't be enough for universal health care for all. I wish it would but again that is fantasy land.

[villager]

63. It's not all or nothing. But yes, militarism drastically rethought (as it will be by mid-century's

coming "empire collapse," in any case...)

And health care could be made vastly more accessible.

[Kentonio]

192. America ALREADY pays more for healthcare than anywhere else for goodness sake!

This isn't new money that's needed, its about directing money that's already being spent into a more efficient and effective direction.

[swhisper1]

64. fine with me to reduce our role in the world. They arent because we do it all for them

I dont care about Russia and China filling the void. I care about getting the US healthy and fed and to hell with wars. Other countries can buy arms from us, food from us, but we do not have to direct the world. We are not an empire

[swhisper1]

77. right !

[Duval]

217. Yes, and it will take TIME.

Why can't we?

[lastone]

45. Sanders has explained

Over and over exactly how his platform positions will be paid for. Stop lying or at least educate yourself before you speak.

[Happenstance24]

53. Yes he has..

but the numbers DO NOT WORK for a country our size and with our commitments abroad. Do the math for yourself. It isn't that hard.

[mythology]

125. And when those plans were analyzed they were found wanting

His original prescription drug plan called for saving more than is currently spent on prescription drugs. That isn't actually possible to do.

[lastone]

137. And you're candidate

Has ruled out single payer as fantasy, my premiums are going up because we still have a broken healthcare system! A friend who is a hospital executive said of the 6 healthcare models used in other industrialized countries we haven't chosen one we have all 6 in some form, insanity! And initial plans often change -'no? Hrc supporters should be really used to that! What's your problem then, lol!

[WayBeyondBlue]

127. You do realize that

in order to pay for this, a couple of golden cows need to get cut back: 1) Defense 2) Wall Street.

Now, if you think we need to keep spending half of every tax dollar on war, and by the way if you happen to enjoy living in Sparta, then by all means keep thinking what you're thinking. I don't even need to comment on Wall Street.

[swhisper1]

97. thats what he's hoping for. I am working for the platform, not a man

[uponit7771]

48. +1

[swhisper1]

57. oh Christ

[peace13]

108. Reality, like sniper fire,is in the eye of the beholder. nt

[LWolf]

23. No.

That's the claim of the short-sighted and confused.

That's the claim of the establishment status-quo, who can only see or accept one set of rituals.

It's the claim of those who either didn't pay attention, or didn't understand.

As he has said in just about every speech in the last 14 months, it's not about him, it's about political revolution. Let me clarify for you: that means that it's not about Clinton, either. He has acknowledged that she will be the nominee.

For those who have supported Clinton, apparently, it's only about Clinton.

For the rest of us, it's about the political revolution, and that's what he was speaking about; about our way forward, about how we continue the fight. He'll do what he can for the Clinton campaign, making the defeat of Trump his first goal. How the hell do you think he's going to do that, if not campaigning for Clinton?

I'm sorry if you are disappointed that he's not going to kiss her ring, shut up, slink back to the Senate and accept the party's neo-liberal overlords.

No, I'm not. I'm not sorry. I'd be sorry if he did.

I'm sorry that so many Clinton supporters care more about electing her than they do about the neo-liberal destruction of our party and our nation; a destruction she has enabled in her march to her own glory.

[Jackilope]

27. +1

[LoverOfLiberty]

28. I reject your revolution

as a word rooted in violence and blood.

I reject your claim that we neither pay attention or understand. We do.
I reject your assertion that for us it is about Clinton. Its not. We would have supported Bernie had he been the nominee
I reject your apology that he won't kiss her ring. She won fair and square. It isn't about kissing rings, it is about being part of a party that nominates a candidate to represent them. Clinton is the nominee.
I reject your accusations of neoliberalism. Just because you say it doesn't make it so.

[LWolf]

32. Clearly.

You can reject all you want.

All you do is paint yourself as either ignorant or a neo-liberal. Either way, that makes you part of the problem, not the solution.

But carry on.

[LoverOfLiberty]

35. You slander

but I don't. So who are you to tell me that I am part of the problem?

I will carry on, for I am a Democrat and we have an election to win.

[brush]

115. What's with the neo-liberal diss? Clinton is not calling for austerity.

Explain pls.

[LWolf]

170. Wow. Okay.

The neo-liberal takeover of the Democratic Party started, at least as I saw it, with Al From, the DLC (a neo-liberal group) and Bill and Hillary Clinton.

On neo-liberalism:

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=376
http://www.globalresearch.ca/neoliberalism-and-the-globalization-of-war-americas-hegemonic-project/5531125

On Clinton's neoliberalism:

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/03/hillary-clinton-womens-rights-feminism/
http://inthesetimes.com/article/18507/hillary-clinton-democratic-debate-neoliberal
http://www.salon.com/2016/03/20/it_is_urgent_that_shes_stopped_hillary_clintons_nightmare_neoliberalism_and_american_exceptionalism_makes_the_world_a_dangerous_place/
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-and-why-market-and-wealthy-win-every-time
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/7/19/1403488/-Anti-Capitalist-Meetup-How-Neoliberal-is-Hillary-Clinton

[brush]

172. Actually I was referring to austerity here in the US.

You posted links of austerity policies of the Obama administration's (not Hillary's administration), in cahoots, I suppose, with the IMF and World Bank?

Just a question, what makes you think Sanders, with his paucity of foreign policy experience, would be able to change about the downhill, out-of-control rampage towards third world countries that is the leviathan of the IMF/World Bank?

[LWolf]

182. Actually, I was referring to neo-liberalism,

which is more than austerity.

You decided to equate the two.

Your question? Sanders would make an effort to oppose global neo-liberalism. Clinton would/will, on the other hand, continue the U.S. spread and enforcement of global neo-liberalism.

Let's see...on the one hand, someone who works to solve the problem; on the other, someone who works to grow the problem.

Solve, or spread?

Not a hard choice.

[brush]

185. I'm not that confident. The debates clearly showed Sanders is not strong in that area.

And what policies of Clinton's can you define as neo-liberalism?

It's easy to throw out charges. Back it up pls.

Her and Sanders are in agreement 93% of the time. Their differences are a matter of degrees.

[LWolf]

186. That's not what I saw nor heard. nt

[swhisper1]

99. the party is dying, we want to save it

[LoverOfLiberty]

116. No, its not dying

you want to kill it?

[WayBeyondBlue]

129. Our point, I think, is that

this TTLorDIE mindset is born of and sustains the shitty system that we have. Time to do something different, 'cause what we've been doing hasn't worked out.

[swhisper1]

78. blinded by the pink

[Duval]

218. +100

[bkkyosemite]

58. No character flaw. A very intelligent man.

[LoverOfLiberty]

62. and yet he can't admit defeat

what's up with that?

[bkkyosemite]

76. You want that from him....but millions don't...I'm sorry

[LoverOfLiberty]

81. You overestimate your numbers

and you being sorry as well is disingenuous.

Most Democrats are ready to move on.

[bkkyosemite]

118. You underestimate ....I am truly sorry.

[TDale313]

130. Millions voted for him. Millions donated to him.

Last edited Fri Jun 17, 2016, 10:35 PM - Edit history (1)

He won the votes of nearly half those who voted in the primaries. I can accept that she won the nomination. But the fact that the 74 year old virtually unknown democratic socialist did this well against a candidate with 100% name recognition and the support of the entire Democratic and media establishment? If you think that's a mandate for business/politics as usual you're delusional.

[LoverOfLiberty]

131. Rereading my response

Nope, didn't use mandate.

Strawman

[bkkyosemite]

224. I am not delusional...such vitriol

[TDale313]

229. Not directed at you in the slightest.

Directed at those who think this primary was some huge mandate for business/politics as usual. It was not.

[Lord Magus]

140. Millions want him to deny reality?

Because he did in fact lose.

[swhisper1]

73. rabies

[Beowulf]

5. Welcome to the Neoliberal Democratic Party.

The home for your cynicism.

[madaboutharry]

6. He is self-righteous.

He could keep young people engaged by leaving the race, endorsing Hillary, and talking directly to young people about the importance of supporting the nominee and advocating for the issues that are important to them. His current approach takes away from the issues that are important to him and his followers and puts the focus on him and on his personality. It makes him look small and petty, diminishing his message.

[oswaldactedalone]

9. +1

Billion

[SpareribSP]

14. Honestly, I don't think that would work.

The young people got engaged not because of the Sanders name, but because of his message. What you're advocating is a complete turnaround from what he's been saying, and polls have shown that people want Bernie to keep fighting for his ideals.

Come the convention Hillary will be the nominee, but I think even then Bernie is going to be fighting however he can to push his agenda. That's also not a bad thing, surveys have shown people want that. I think continuing to energize the base, including those who aren't too thrilled about Clinton, is how you get the huge anti-Trump turnout you need to win not just the presidency, but all the other races as well.

[Lord Magus]

141. No it's not a complete turnaround. He said all along he'd support the nominee.

Reneging on that promise would be a turnaround. And endorsing Hillary would not mean Bernie has to stop fighting for his ideals.

[swhisper1]

74. right

[Autumn]

138. No, what is important is changing the system, endorsing the status quo is accepting

and continuing the failures of the democratic party to engage those young people whose needs are being ignored.

[cui bono]

150. Oh gawd no. That can't happen. He's not going to sell out and endorse someone who represents

what he is fighting against: corporate money in politics/govt, TPP, etc...

You have to change the framework of your thinking to understand what he's doing. This isn't about Bernie vs. Hillary, this isn't about politics as a team sport. This is about getting the Dem Party back to being the party of the people and not the party of corporations/Wall Street.

He is not looking small and petty at all if you look at it from his and his supporter's perspective. Don't look at it as an affront to Hillary, look at it as a fight for the soul of the Dem Party and a fight to save (bring it back is more like it) democracy. He's not doing any of this for himself, he didn't run for president for himself. He's doing it for the good of the country and its working citizens. Our country, the world even, simply cannot survive another four years of the same corporate friendly policies. If the TPP gets passed - which it will if Hillary is elected and not 'forced' to stand against it - that is the end of sovereign govts. That is not hyperbole. It will effectively give corporations power over govts, it will let them rule the world, literally. Thank gawd we have Bernie still bringing it up as an issue! Without him and his stances we're sunk.

.

[pdsimdars]

161. I don't know what made me think of it but how far can someone stuff their head up thier own . . .

[Scootaloo]

205. Only to peopel who never valued the message anyway

If your valuation of what Bernie is saying is wholly dependent on whether he genuflects to your satisfaction, then I think it's safe to say you have no actual interest in what he's been saying anyway. And so any criticism from you on that basis is without merit.

Maybe you ought to focus on whatever Hillary Clinton's message is. Do you even know? Do you even care?

[Demsrule86]

8. No he is not

If had any such interest, he would concede and endorse...I have no idea what he is up to.

[panader0]

19. "I have no idea what he is up to."

You didn't listen to the speech.

[elljay]

136. I get the impression that many of the Hillary acolytes

didn't bother to listen. They still can't understand why so many of us didn't support her.

[Nonhlanhla]

10. The Republicans I know are gleeful about Bernie's behavior.

That should tell you all you need to know about who Bernie is helping with his behavior.

I've lost all patience with the man.

[Demsrule86]

13. Of course they are.

He has to go...if he won't leave on his own then someone needs to push him out and we take our chances.

[panader0]

75. "somebody needs to push him out"... who would that be?

Neither Obama, Biden or HRC has called for "pushing" him out.
Get over yourself.

[swhisper1]

105. not helping trump at all

[Triana]

12. +1000 n/t

[Frustratedlady]

15. At least he's consistent in his wishes and demands.

He stirred up enthusiasm which the Democrats definitely needed.

If DWS is truly gone, I tip my hat to Bernie for getting that done. Maybe I'm wrong, but he has to have had a large part in it.

The millennials were following Bernie because of the free schooling, I would guess. Unlike their parents, they have a mountain of debt ahead of them and have to be disgusted with the entire political process and want it changed. Give them free rein to pursue that change.

If Bernie doesn't continue to be a burr on the butts of some congresscritters, no one else will. I'm sure most politicians are hoping things settle down soon, Trump drops out or is thrown out, and their money-making positions can get back to normal. All the eyes on Congress these days makes a lot of them nervous. I like to see that happening.

[840high]

104. .+1

[Skwmom]

18. A lot of noise and false outrage to distract from the truth of the matter.

[swhisper1]

80. what truth is that?

[2banon]

20. yeah.. that's what they're about, it would seem

It was a FANTASTIC speech.

Every single Democrat should be inspired by that.

There was absolutely nothing in his talk to disparage, it was indeed inspiring and filled with great optimism as well as a strong message to Millennials to take the baton and run for office on every level.

Who could possibly disparage that message except conservatives?

[Trajan]

21. Who's mad ?

Crazy people are mad ? .... I don't see them ...

Why keep ill tempered human beings in your life ? ... it's a waste of your very fixed amount of time ...

Not one tick of the second hand do they get .... not a sliver of one ...

[global1]

22. Agreed - And I Have The Following Observation.....

The responses from Hillary supporters to his speech tonight reminds me of the divide we have in Congress. Two sides of the aisle that don't listen to each other and continually say 'white' when the other side says 'black'.

All of us here on DU complain about that divide in Congress and here we have a similar divide right here on DU between the Hillary supporters (who incidently won the nomination and is the presumptive nominee) and the Bernie supporters that only want to put the Democratic values back into the Democratic Party.

It's really sad that the Hillary supporters see Bernie's ideals as bad, wrong, foreign. He's only sticking up for the 99%'ers and he has people in his own Party criticizing him for it.

I just don't get it.

We need a Bernie in the background to keep those ideals alive and hold those Dems, Repugs and anybody else's feet to the fire and keep them honest.

Hillary is going to be the next President. Yes - she'll be the first women President as well. She - as well as her supporters will achieve their lifelong goals. I think that that is great.

But just like we all supported Obama during his bid for the Presidency against John McCain and Mitch Romney - Obama has done some things that we here at DU criticize from time to time. We do that to keep him honest and on-beam for us and there is nothing wrong with that.

We will need to do the same for Hillary as she becomes President. We're like 'checks and balances'.

And yes - you Hillary supporters - at some time in her Presidency will not agree with her. I was one of the biggest cheerleaders for Obama - but I came to realize that he has strayed from some of his ideals and that was a rude awakening for me to accept.

[YouDig]

38. Did it occur to you that maybe Hillary supporters like Hillary's ideas?

Never crossed your mind? The thing is, Hillary and Bernie aren't really that far apart, but to the extent that they are, the voters chose Hillary. The level of arrogance of Bernie, who just lost, by a big margin, to insist that the Democratic Party needs to embrace his ideas over Hillary's right after the voters just got done embracing Hillary's ideas over his is astounding.

[global1]

41. You Need To Put Your Hate For Bernie To A Better Purpose....

Hillary won - or didn't you hear?

She's running against Trump not Bernie anymore.

You need to channel your energies and hate toward Trump and the Repugs now and get over the Dem Primary.

If all the Hillary supporters - like yourself - channeled their cute quips and cuts about Bernie towards Trump and the Repugs - Hillary will win by a landslide and we can probably give her the Senate and the House to boot.

Get over Bernie - he lost and he knows it.

Put yourself to serving your presumptive nominee now and use your posts hear on DU and in social media to wipe out Trump and the Repugs. Please!!!!!!!

[swhisper1]

86. I didnt hear any ideas or actual policy except war

[2cannan]

39. Great post, thanks. nt

[SpareribSP]

46. +1

[brooklynite]

25. What did he do to "lead them into the Democratic Party"?

[SpareribSP]

33. Besides that his whole speech and the web page he set up

was to urge people to participate in the state and local level in the Democratic party fighting for causes held dear by many in the Democratic party?

[apcalc]

29. I can see your point.

I think both Clinton and Sanders are doing what they need to do to keep people engaged in the process. I also think they talked alot about how to go forward and what will happen.
They each have a role to play.

[YouDig]

31. He needs to endorse Hillary and join forces against Trump.

It's not about him anymore, he lost. The voters chose someone else. He needs to get over his hurt feelings. What matters now is beating Trump, and this ransom stunt of his isn't helping.

[swhisper1]

92. he wont endorse her but will join against Trump

[Demsrule86]

160. If he doesn't endorse than we don't need him.

What is he supposed to say...I lost and won't endorse her but you should vote for her.- on no not I lost but the election was stolen by the Democratic party he would never admit he lost...we don't need his help. Let him go back to the Senate...it is what he is paid to do after all...no endorsement then we muddle through without him. If my any of my kids playing a sport lost and refused to shake hands and admit they lost...I would ground them. Bernie has behaved much the same way. I am done with him. I don't care what he or his supporters do...since he is an active candidate and running against the Democratic nominee, we won't have to hear about him which is a good thing after Monday.

[A Little Weird]

37. I agree!

I can't believe the HRC supporters here could listen to that and come away with a negative reaction. He didn't go after her at all. He said he was going to take it to the convention to fight for a progressive platform (which he has vowed to do all along) and then would be doing whatever he could to defeat Trump. He's trying to build up a new generation of progressive public servants. How can they find fault with that?

[swhisper1]

55. it was flawless and to the point, no promises, just factuals problems in the country and

a renewal of his pledge to the working masses

[bkkyosemite]

60. He did not concede. He did not endorse. He is going to the convention.

[swhisper1]

65. of coarse he is, to present the voice of americans

[NanceGreggs]

59. The only "young people" ...

... Bernie was interested in engaging were those he wanted to vote for HIM, not for Democrats.

He's been telling those "young people" throughout his campaign that the Democratic Party is corrupt, and has labelled anyone who didn't support him as "the Establishment" that needs to be fought against.

Someone should have told Bernie from the outset that you can't suck and blow at the same time. He wanted to run as a Democrat (for the media attention, as he himself said), and then maligned the Party and held himself out as being not like those damned Democrats he was allegedly running for.

It was All About Bernie from the get-go, and never about the Party. And it still is. The fact that many of his supporters don't see that is unfortunate.

[swhisper1]

67. Rabies is still beating down civil discussion here

[SpareribSP]

70. I really don't see that.

This is a convenient narrative but there's really not much to it. Bernie is trying to shift the party towards more progressive values. He could have gone Bernie-or-bust here, and he didn't.

[NanceGreggs]

152. By telling those "new voters" ...

... he allegedly brought to the Democratic Party that the Party was corrupt and only HE could change things, he DID go "Bernie or Bust".

It was "vote for ME" not "vote for Democrats" all along. The fact that you "really don't see that" leads one to believe that you never heard a word he said.

[SpareribSP]

178. He never said only he can change things.

It's vote for progressives, however, that's true. That's why he's advocating for Tim Canova, Russ Feingold, and so on. The whole Bernie-centric thing is projection.

[Jokerman]

188. "All About Bernie from the get-go"

"There are none so blind as those who will not see."

[onecaliberal]

66. He's fight for the working people, poor, students, elderly and veterans.

I'm sorry if that is offensive to you but it's what MOST people want.

[840high]

107. It's what I want. We

have not had that in too many years.

[pansypoo53219]

68. and hill fans put fingers in their ears LA LA LA LA LA LA.

is this a big tent or a GIRL bubble?

[pdsimdars]

162. ^^^^^^^^^^^ Amen! ^^^^^^^^^^^

[litlbilly]

72. You're asking them to be reasonable, just not possible for them.

[LonePirate]

82. Evidently it is unreasonable for losing candidates to concede defeat.

That is just not possible it seems.

[swhisper1]

106. rabies, man its thick in here, all these "can't" ers

[BernieforPres2016]

79. I put them all on Ignore long ago, and add the new ones as I see them

I don't want to have anything to do with them, or her.

[SpareribSP]

89. I don't necessarily just like a pro-Bernie echo chamber also, honestly.

I really try not to put people on ignore, unless they're blatant trolls.

However, the reaction to the speech makes it feel like this sentiment isn't widely shared.

[BernieforPres2016]

98. I am not interested in an echo chamber either

I prefer discussions of ideas, but I have yet to find a Hillary supporter who cares to discuss ideas.

[pdsimdars]

163. Exactly. I prefer discussion, but at SOME point you have to accept reality, and that is

they are not going to discuss anything. They don't want to hear which ideas are best for people or the country, all they want to hear from you is . . "yes, Hillary is my leader, all hail the leader."
Until you repeat that sacred oath, they will knit pick anything you say on a very superficial level.

[swhisper1]

113. I've formed an aversion to yapping dogs. I was going to comment on your patience and tact, you wear

it well. I'm pleased to meet you Sparerib

[dflprincess]

83. The last thing those currently running the party want

is a bunch of new people getting involved and pulling it back to the left.

[swhisper1]

114. this is very true

[Whimsey]

90. He made it all about him

He acts like he is the first (pseudo)democrat to ever work for social justice and fairness. I'm sixty years old and the democrats have always put people first. Including Hillary with her work.

It was the same speech he always gives, and he is the white knight. But he is not. Hillary has done far more in her lifetime working for children, woman and the underclass, but everything before her vote for the Iraq war gets forgotten. And please do not cite me the republican crap used to go after her because she was the first first lady who husband wanted her by his side because he trusted her judgment. She got treated much worse than Michelle Obama did, who was just as accomplished as Hillary.

The real issue is campaign finance reform. A dollar limit on campaigns. Bernie bragging he raised more money in history is not a plus - all that campaign money needs to be spent where it helps people. We need to compress the primary season, limit the dollars spent and have less time between the primary season and the election.

And all the changes Bernie says he wants done at the state level has to be done at the state level. The DNC has no control. I have yet to see his young supporters willing to put their time into changing things at the state level. It requires more than typing on your computer.

[SpareribSP]

100. A couple things.

There has definitely been a shift in the narrative, and I do believe that without Bernie in the race a lot of the issues discussed wouldn't have been fought so strongly, or remained in such focus. The TPP is a good example, and I'll be interested to see where it goes.

Agreed on campaign finance reform, however Hillary's methods are questionable, especially looking at things like the Hillary Victory Fund. Hopefully Clooney is right that he won't have to give again, but I feel like Bernie has been a much stronger voice here. Hillary has done very well in the current system, so it feels like she's a strange choice to dismantle it, but hopefully I'm proven wrong.

Bernie recited the usual issues, but it's the issues people care about. He then did add his call to get people off their asses to go do something, which is what you're complaining about. He's trying to mobilize people, get them up and out and doing things.

[840high]

110. .that^

[Whimsey]

123. Couple more things

I did not vote for Obama in 2008 because he was the first democrat to eschew federal matching funds because he felt he could raise more money on his own. He was right, but he just accelerated the cash race. I'm pretty sure Hillary had federal matching funds in 2008. Now everyone does it. So we need reform that applies to everyone so no one has a competitive disadvantage. That is going to be a lot of work and impossible to get past a republican congress, and maybe even a democratic congress. I have no doubt Hillary would support such legislation - getting it passed is another thing.

What is your concern with the Hillary Victory Fund? I have been a continual small donor to it. Bernie brags about his $27 average donation, but if you look at the amount of his donations and the number of different donors, he has many donors giving large amounts.

And Bernie by and large motivated people who thought they were going to get something - without having to work for it. Political change takes action and inspired supporters. Watching the two young supporter interviewed on MSNBC tonight was gruesome. They were going to support Sanders all the way to the convention, but actually do some work? They were revolutionaries, not serfs. But freebies are always good.

[SpareribSP]

128. I think we agree

About campaign finance being a massive problem. I don't see how Hillary has a plan to approach fixing it, though. Bernie sort of does, in the only way you could pray to to do it with a Republican congress - get the entire country behind it, standing up and demanding it. I don't see another way.

The Victory Fund issue was the reports that it wasn't going to down-ballot candidates as promised, and that the funds were being used in loopholes so that large donations could go to Hillary if at all possible. Not illegal or anything, just questionable ethics, and frustrating when the news came out since at the time the narrative was all about how Bernie wasn't supporting down-ballot candidates. It just sticks in my mind as a particular sore spot.

And if you want proof of people going beyond the usual amount of engagement, just look at his donations and the people who have made so many calls for him. It's a first step. The whole freebies line is a smear, by the way.

[Whimsey]

132. Well I am a pay as you go type of girl

I grew up in the era when elite colleges did not give financial aid, and if you could not pay for it you chose whether to put yourself in debt, so I picked a state university, paid for half of undergrad, graduating in three years while working 20-30 hours a week, and paid for all of law school while still working. So I came out in 81 with $15,000 in loans, which considering minimum wage and the tax rate at the time (which were considerably higher back then) was comparable to students coming out nowadays $40,000 - $50,000 in debt. College students need to have some skin in the game and need to make smart choices. Bernie's idea of making all public colleges free for anyone is idiocy. For one thing, there is limited space.

You know what will happen? There will be a bigger demand from kids coming out of the better high school programs for public universities which will boot out lower income kids. (Housing is about the same at both, but a $20,000-$30,000 savings in tuition will make it even more attractive for the upper echelon whose taxes are going to go up 20%). This happened in Scotland.

I have a daughter who is a Bernie supporter and she made a big deal of the freebies - and we paid for her college. So you can call it a smear, but there is truth in it. As I stated in a prior post, revolutions just result in a different group of haves and have nots, it never results in everyone being a have.

[SpareribSP]

134. I think this is a good discussion!

I'm a younger guy. I graduated six years ago but I've managed to pay off all my debt already, despite graduating with large loans. It's something I'm personally proud of.

I'd be interested to see what the result of Bernie's proposal would be. I agree that some work would have to be put into the infrastructure behind it, but it's not so unreasonable. Many places offer various forms and have various rules. My wife went to school for free in Latvia, and even received a stipend.

I think the revolution here also is just as much to stop the current flow. Income inequality and wealth shifting towards the top, and a blanket rejection of trickle-down economics. Rebuild the middle class. I also don't actually agree with your statement all that much, because not all policies are created equal. Sure, there will always be haves and have nots, but scale and what that means can vastly differ. If it didn't, none of this would matter!

[Whimsey]

142. Real equality

would be putting children's welfare first. That is what Hillary fought for when she was first out of school.

My nephew lives in Prague with his Czech wife and three daughters. She was able to be a stay at home mom and receive a stipend from the government to offset her loss of employment while guaranteed a job back with her employer.

Let's have family friendly policies. All I ever hear is individual worker benefits. I am sorry, but Bernie is a union guy. Unions are important but families are more important. Hillary was one of the first persons working to get health care benefits for all children back in the seventies. She went to work at the Childrens Defense Fund out of law school. She got vilified by the republicans for her "socialist" book "It takes A Village to Raise a Child" years ago.

You know how a society survives? It's next generation. Our children are the most important factor in the survival of this country and Hillary is the only candidate with a history of advocating for our children. If our economic system put children first, I would be thrilled. Find me an economic system that does. It is not socialism.

Income equality constantly shifts. I graduated from law school in 1981. The top marginal rates were 50% for earned income and 70% for unearned income. Reagan's tax cut "ERTA" reduced those to about 40% and I do not remember, and really reduced the estate tax. All of these have continued to be decreased. I have no problem with making these rates more progressive. But what I do not like is Bernie vilifying everyone who has been successful. He has created class warfare which is ugly and unnecessary.

Both of my parents grew up poor, we were solidly middle class, and now I float in and out of the top 1%. My husband was the same. He is a CPA/Attorney, and I gave up my career when I moved to his very small town to be a stay at home mom. He is self-employed, does not advertise, is very good at what he does (no litigation), and gets referrals. So why are we bad people because we are both smart and have been financially successful. That is part of the problem with Bernie's message. He lumps everyone in the same boat based on their income. That is as discriminatory as Trump is.

I am done ranting. I need to go to bed.

[pnwmom]

154. The funds were going back to the DNC to help pay for the database

and the rest of the infrastructure that will benefit the entire party at all levels in the general election.

[pdsimdars]

167. People who take "talking points" as if they are facts are pretty clueless.

[pnwmom]

153. Millions fewer people agree with Bernie's positions on the issues than with Hillary's.

Bernie and his supporters want to ignore the very large and diverse group of Hillary supporters who have a different take on the issues.

For example, Bernie proposes a plan to make public colleges free for all students -- but requires each state to provide 1/3 of the funding. Republican governors already rejected Medicaid expansion, even though it would have been free for three years, and then required the states to pay for only 10%. Bernie's college tuition plan is unrealistic and unachievable.

Hillary's plan would expand the existing financial aid system, so that students with need would get grants to cover tuition costs instead of loans. And loans they took for living expenses would be at lower rates than are being charged now; the government would no longer be able to profit from them. Also, she would reduce the rates being charged to people who are already carrying student debt. Hillary's plan, like Bernie's, would have to get through Congress -- but it wouldn't ALSO have to get through Republican governors.

Both Bernie and Hillary want to make college affordable, but they're approaching that goal in two different ways. Bernie's way isn't better simply because he thinks it's so.

[swhisper1]

117. oh please, revisionist history does not sell here, try elsewhere for an audience

[Whimsey]

124. Revisionist how?

A title does not make an argument. Too lazy to present a counterargument?

[pdsimdars]

164. That is just an empty talking point. He said it wasn't about him and all of his supporters

know it isn't about him. It is about his IDEAS.
The only people pushing this stupid narrative are those who want to find something to complain about and harp on, no one else is confused, just those who want to be.

[SMC22307]

234. "she was the first first lady who husband wanted her by his side because he trusted her judgment"

Rethink that statement. Seriously.

[villager]

126. The rightwingers posting -- and posing -- here as "Undergrounders" have no other gear

They are incapable of responding to content, ideas, actual discussion points, etc.

[Dem2]

145. I think he could help and probably isn't hurting

Doesn't really bother me what difference does it make anyway? Let the man say what he wants, he earned it

[baldguy]

158. Except he's not leading them into the Democratic Party.

[Sunsky]

159. This young person

is with Her, majority of my friends are with Her and I'll be doing my part to GOTV for HER and defeat Trump. #FlReadyforHer

[pdsimdars]

168. then what are you doint here typing? Get out there on the streets and talk to people!

[Doctor_J]

165. Clinton supporters care only about Mrs Clinton

Sanders is keeping the coronation from happening, so they're very angry.

[pdsimdars]

169. Here you go, . .. . .the visual

[randome]

171. Sanders talks AT people instead of WITH them.

It's why he has never accomplished much after 25 years in the Senate. It's why he had only 1 Senate endorsement. It's why people are turned off by him and voted for Clinton instead.

No one likes to be treated like a means to an end, and that's how Sanders comes across to me.

[noiretextatique]

180. A speech is a pretty one-sided affair

What a petty complaint.

[randome]

183. It explains his lack of success other than at the margins during 25 years in the Senate.

Elizabeth Warren has had more success than Sanders. There is a reason for that. She knows how to work with others and not preach to them.

[bvar22]

194. "Elizabeth Warren has had more success than Sanders." ???

More "success" than the Amendment King?

Please document your claim.

[randome]

195. It's in the eye of the beholder, of course. Not everything can be quantified.

I overstated the issue. And as someone pointed out to me recently, Sanders has not been in the Senate for 25 years, he's been a Congressman for 25 years and a Senator for only 9 years.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/06/07/contra-trump-elizabeth-warren-one-most-effective-senators/SOiAYippio2rybOEQZqqVL/story.html

Last March, Warren introduced an amendment expanding Social Security to a Senate budget resolution. It failed, since Republicans have a Senate majority. But it forced Democrats to vote on expansion, and 42 voted “yes.”

Among those voting “yes” was Bernie Sanders, who launched his presidential campaign a week later. Expansion became one of the issues dividing the liberal Vermont senator from the centrist Hillary Clinton, who didn’t support it. As Sanders’ campaign caught fire, pressure on Clinton intensified. A few days before his blowout win in New Hampshire, he called on Clinton to “loudly and clearly” renounce Social Security cuts. Finally, she did.

By April, Clinton had co-opted the idea. “We should expand Social Security, not cut or privatize it,” she announced on the night she won the Pennsylvania primary. It was now certain that the next Democratic nominee would favor expansion. Obama’s speech last week ratified this as the formal position of the Democratic Party.

Of course the article above is only one writer's opinion but I think it bears out that she is having more of an effect on her coworkers than Sanders does with his incessant preaching. Sanders talks AT people. Warren talks WITH them.

Again, my opinion only.

[bvar22]

197. ...and my opinion differs.

Maybe given another 10 - 20 years in the Senate, Warren can begin to match Sanders legislative success.
Warren did have one big achievement:
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB),
which, if I remember correctly, was an amendment added to Barney-FRank,
the same way that Bernie achieved most of his successes.

[noiretextatique]

179. They are mad just because it's Bernie

Paul Ryan endorsed Hillary. Perhaps that will cheer them up.

[vintx]

211. OMG really? Ugh...

[SheenaR]

190. The most level-headed Clinton supporters

did not go and bash the speech last night.

Imagine a Democrat (or anyone for that matter) speaking out for Economic, Social, Racial and Environmental Justice AND encouraging people to become part of the process and we treat that with scorn?? Incredible.

The man was spot on last night. The Party does need a transformation from the ground up. It doesn't need to be blown up. It needs to be brought back to being the party of the people.

And note he mentioned helping improve the DEMOCRATIC PARTY several times last night. Crazy for a "non-Democrat" no?

[SpareribSP]

200. Right, Bernie made it clear

That he wanted to change and strengthen the party from the inside, and wasn't looking to pull away from it. You would think people would be talking about that.

[cui bono]

232. +1

[zappaman]

196. what revolution?

[MichiganVote]

198. Yeah sure. And that would be why Bernie supporters threaten non support. Makes sense. Not.

[SpareribSP]

199. This has nothing to do with his speech?

[WhiteTara]

203. Personally, I've asked many Bernie supporters

about their plans for public service as candidates for local elections and the various boards in their counties and my most favorite response was "I'm mostly an adviser."

Yep, he's engaging those people for sure. I think that by not endorsing the presumptive nominee he is confusing his people about what will happen. Clinton will be nominated and hopefully will then be president; but Bernie will still be a senator and won't have much clout anywhere because he wants to go it alone.

[riderinthestorm]

226. I'm an active participant in my local environmental group.

We're involved in stopping fracking locally and state wide.

We also have subcommittees dedicated to educating our community on soil erosion, organic farming etc.

I was involved before Bernie and its why I was attracted to his message. He's speaking my language. Personally 3 people from my local Bernie group will be starting the process to run for public office.

Bernie is inspirational!

[WhiteTara]

227. Activism is really great

but the real power lies in the political arena. There you can shape laws on a broader scale. I applaud your friends for their courage to step out like that and hope they win their races. I lost my last one, but I may run again.

[pat_k]

214. Many of the people denigrating the course he is taking now...

... are the same people who have been denigrating him throughout the campaign.

For some, Sanders is a terrible, self-obsessed, acerbic, greedy, grandiose, racist, misogynistic, insane, quixotic, raging, and generally repulsive, human being. (Or some combination of these characteristics along with various other characteristics being bandied about.) For these folks the fact that supporters cannot be convinced to see Sanders as they do is so infuriating they seem to be going off the rails a little bit.

Of course, since Sanders is such a horrible man, the course hie is taking is necessarily a horrible one.

It takes an objective look at the dynamics currently at play to acknowledge that there may be benefits -- both long term and short term -- to the course he is taking.

I think most people "out there" in the real world have a much more mixed view of the course Sanders is taking then we see here. After the extreme black and white "debate" here on DU, it's refreshing to see some decent articles that examine both the potential upsides, and potential downsides.