2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSo Bernie declared he's an independent huh? Watch full interview
But if you only want what people are up in arms about. Go to 7:35 and 14:38 it sounds like he's a democratic to me and can't change his party until he runs again.
People love to jump to conclusions without the facts at hand.
madamesilverspurs
(15,801 posts)NWCorona
(8,541 posts)When asked, he said that he always grabs a Dem ballot and that when he runs again that it will be a D and not an I.
politicaljunkie41910
(3,335 posts)remain an Independent until his term is up. Watch the whole thing.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)He says he can't change it until the end of his term.
LongtimeAZDem
(4,494 posts)Is there a new law there that prevents it?
politicaljunkie41910
(3,335 posts)If he really was a Democrat, this is a non-issue. It's not like the Senate has some Hall Monitor that going to report him.
We've only got one Independent in the Senate to keep track of so whose the Party Monitor whose going to say that you can't claim to be a Democrat when you ran as an Independent 4 years ago but you're running for President as a Democrat.
We all know that he ran as a Democrat. WE just want to know that he really is a Democrat before he starts making changes to OUR Party. Wolf asked him twice and both times he sputtered to come up with an answer. If he were a Democrat, he could easily have said that. Instead he said that in my state, we don't register....we just ask for a ballot....I always ask for the Democratic ballot. It's either yes or no. Than at the end, when asked a second time, he again plays coy. Uh, uh, uh. So Wolf asks what will the letter be I or D and then he goes into this convoluted explanation about he ran as an Independent but he can't change it, so he's an Independent but he'll change it when he runs again. Bullhockey. He's always been an Independent and he has no intention of changing.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts).... even as he claimed to be running "as a Democrat" for president. So I gotta call BS on Bernie's claim there.
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/344/201510160200258344/201510160200258344.pdf
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)I'll look into that Doc. Thanks!
floriduck
(2,262 posts)to vote against Trump? It's an easy either/or question. Because if he has to act like Hillary did in 2008, you won't see that from Bernie.
I just don't get the vitriol by so many on this site to tear down a man who has been good for attracting voters.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)He has spent a year repeating the lie that the Democratic party is corrupt.
floriduck
(2,262 posts)Either that is true or someone is throwing around road apples. You can't have it both ways. It will never work that way.
Bernie never got credit for down playing the email scandal early in the debates by Clinton supporters but now they criticize him for not addressing Comey's decision. He'll never satisfy a Clinton fan. Thus raises the question, Why try???
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Including throughout this campaign. There is no debating that.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)the only Senate member of that caucus. He voted with the Democrats a majority of the time, and with a minority of the Democrats when the majority was so very wrong on legislation such as DOMA which most of the Democrats voted for while talking about how super Godly they were. It was a disgusting spectacle and Bernie voted with the righteous few.
These are enumerated facts and not unsubstantiated opinion.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)JCanete
(5,272 posts)powerful interests doesn't leave a lot of room to not be corrupt. Is it as corrupt as it has to be to do some good? Could be, and I think that would be a more sensible argument to make. To say it isn't corrupted by the influence of money is a pretty astonishing claim that flies in the face of the evidence that money buys influence, hence why it keeps being thrown around in Washington like confetti.
I suppose your other option would be to say that the democratic establishment isn't corrupted, it's ideology just happens to align comfortably with big money and corporate interests, but that is both unfortunate, and would still have to account for the fact that it is those very beliefs, if genuine, that allowed those politicians to percolate to the top of the party with the help of big financial backing.
So, no I don't think it's a lie at all. You are just okay with it, either because it's your team or because you think its what it takes to be in the game(which I largely agree with) and that any little and incremental change in the left direction is positive. This is an area where both wings of the democratic party could have a constructive conversation, because its worth debating whether or not the democratic party has moved us to the left in the last 40 years, and I think there are valid points on both sides of this argument, but please with the 'D party is above corruption and it can touch money without getting its hands dirty' nonsense.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)...by helping to make the party platform more attractive to the disenfranchised left and demonstrating to them that the Democratic party is worth engaging.
Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)And when has he bee good for attracting voters?
Response to MaggieD (Reply #3)
benny05 This message was self-deleted by its author.
ContinentalOp
(5,356 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)And he has been an Independent ever since.