This is why I believe Bernie Sanders will prevail over Hillary Clinton as our next president:

[Cal33]

Although Hillary is the favorite in the polls right now -- especially after her last
(and 7th) Republican House Investigation of her role in Benghazi -- it isn't going
to remain so forever. The first Dem. Primary will be on Feb. 1, 2016 in Iowa, and
the last on June 14, 2016 in Hawaii. There is a lot of time between now and then.
Bernie is a fighter. He doesn't give up. And wherever he has given speeches, he
has been drawing crowds far larger than that of any other candidate of either Party.
He will prevail.

A lot of Dems. haven't even heard of him yet, and the MSM does its best to keep them
uninformed. Repubs. want Hillary to win because they think they can easily beat her in
the General Election. She carries so much political baggage that the Repubs. can point
their finger to. There will be no end of material that they will be blowing up and
exaggerating on about her. Hillary is the perfect target for Republicans in an election

On the other hand, Bernie carries no political baggage. Republicans will have
nothing negative to say about him at all. They'll have to INVENT lies to tell about him,
and inventions are easier to be proven false. They are trying to prevent Bernie from
winning the Dem. Primaries because he will be bringing in real change to our government.
It will be a government of, for, and by the people, which was written by our forefathers,
and which the Repubs. have long since deviated from.

The Repubs. are afraid of the above. They are afraid of Bernie, and are doing all they can
to make sure that he loses in the Dem. Primaries.

Even if Hillary should win the presidency, it will mean the status quo. It will mean more
of the same as what we are having now. And more of the same means that the Repubs.
will be continuing to gain -- but only at a slower rate. I think with a Repub. elected as
president in 2016, a Fascist Dictatorship will have taken over.

Many don't see how dangerous this fire is. We shouldn't be playing with it. It needs to
be put out. And Bernie is the one to do it -- Hillary can't. How could she? She has one
foot on each side of the fence.

I would still vote for her if she should win the Dem. Primaries, because this will buy some
time for us to elect a real Progressive Democrat in the future elections.

[NCTraveler]

1. "Bernie carries no political baggage."

Most Sanders supporters disagree with that.

I do agree this isn't over and that Sanders has a path forward.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=751349

[Cal33]

4. Okay. Whatever political baggage Bernie may have would only be a tiny iota of the amount that

Hillary carries. The main reason why he chose to be an Independent right from the beginning of
his political career some 35 years ago, was that he saw how powerful the dirty and wretched
influence and hold Corporate America had and still does have on both our two main Political
Parties.

Bernie would have none of it. He has done and is still doing his best to keep free from it. He
is a man of integrity and dedication. He inspires trust. If the MSM had given him the publicity
that he deserves -- instead of deliberately keeping him in the dark because of their Republican
owners' fear of him -- Bernie might have already been the leading Democratic presidential
candidate right now.

He does have a great deal of negatives coming at him from the outside, because they are afraid
of him, but he is also the type of fighter who will overcome them. We should back him up as
much as we can -- each of us in any way we know how.

[MADem]

27. I am not in the mood to re-hash his baggage, but I disagree vociferously with that assessment.

Hillary's baggage has been rifled through incessantly. Everyone knows what's packed away in there.

Sanders has some unusual baggage that puts him outside the mainstream in many regards. It has nothing to do with his "integrity and dedication," but politics is the art of the PERSONAL--people like to know personal details about candidates, and they do make judgments based on those details.

[Armstead]

40. The biggest personal knock against him is that he is boring and has a bad temper

His temper is on full display in his speeches. Some people love him for it, some not so much. Just as Hillary's personality and hr own temper is on display....etc.

He hasn't been going around having illicit relations with interns, or going on drunken binges. He's focused on his work and his homelife, isn't into partying or mingling with the flashy set. Personally boring perhaps, but hardly "baggage."

Yes he wrote at least one stupid little sexual satire when he was young. So, who hasn't written said or done some embarrassing things in their life. And he wrote it for a publication, so it's not like he was keeping some persevere behind closed doors.

Yes he has an illegitimate son -- who now drives him around on his campaign, so he must have been a halfway decent Dad. nd these who doesn't know single parents these days?

He made a record that revealed he has a bad singing voice.

He visited Russia. Send that Commie to Jail. He visited Nicaragua and praised them and they seemed to like him. Well, Ollie North and G Gordon won't like that, but hardly a hot button these days.

Some hard core lefties in Vermont believe he moved too much to the mainstream politically.....Okay, not exactly a liability with the mainstream. He had some professional relationships with a military contractor to get jobs in Vermont. Whooooo boy that's really going to anger those middle Americans.

Oh he s a lousy carpenter. That'll sink him for sure.

[MADem]

42. Boring/temper are personality quirks--if he could inject some humor into his presentations he could

mitigate that to some extent.

He didn't just write one "sexual satire," he has done a LOT of writing, and some of it is, to put it charitably, flaky as hell. Some of it is open to interpretation that could be very unkind. Other passages read so absurdly that you could use the stuff as material for a pompous Will Ferrell comedy--that's how idiotic it sounds. I think he may have been paid by the word, but some of the stuff he created would be relegated to creative speculation here on this board. A lot of it is available on the web--I will bet there's even more out there that hasn't been scanned.

The "illegitimate son" (I don't think kids are illegitimate, but that's just me) bit is less of thing nowadays. A few will cluck, but Grover Cleveland got over it, so it's not the end of the world. What is a problem is how he fudged the child's parentage in his personal biography. That goes more to his mindset than anything else. That's where the pick might strike, if they go for that as an issue. The timing of the (now a very mature adult) kid's birth is at issue, too--just in time to change his draft status. That whole end of things could be, well not RE-hashed, but hashed--he's never faced any scrutiny over that time in his life at all. You can insist that "No one will care" but look at the crap that John Kerry endured--and he was a highly decorated war hero who served in some of the shittiest combat during that war.

The Russia visit will only resonate with the fringers. The Nicaragua one, though--that might catch and hold.

Look how the GOP ate their own in South Carolina (McCain has a black baby!). Don't think Sanders won't get the full force and flavor of their stylings, and don't think for a second that everyone will just say "Oh, that's just framing, and Youthful Indiscretion." If he makes it to the general, he will have to defend himself against charges that he is a draft-dodging, pervy weirdo who has some crazy ideas about what cures cancer. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

The 'lousy carpenter' bit is not a sustainable knock, but if an enterprising investigator were able to find out how much "work" he actually did, and how much time he spent unemployed/on the dole, the right could make something of it with charges that he's not actually held a job for any sustainable amount of time that didn't involve a check from the taxpayers.

Don't shoot the messenger, here. There's more and I'm sure you've seen at least some of it. If not, it's not hard to find.

[Armstead]

44. I'm sure the right wing and the MSM will make hay out of things.

They'll make hay out of anything from any Democratic candidate. As you pointed out, they smeared Kerry as a coward, and President Obama is an Islamic Socialist SDS member who is the member of a cult led by an America hating preacher, and he didnlt even grow up in America.

And, I'll behave, there's a lot regarding Hillary's overall history -- and Bill's fidelity -- that will undoubtedly be brought up in both the respectable and not-so-responsible MSM and shadow campaigns.

Bernie has his share of shit too, as does anyone. And some of it may be uncomfortable. But his period of "finding himself" is pretty standard fare, or at least was for his generation. (Unfortunately, younger generations haven't had that opportunity quite so much.) The things like his son and the shadows around that are well known in Vermont, and it hasn't hurt him there.

And if the voters were willing to overlook the chickenhawk history of GWB and Cheney and reelect them, and overlook Bill Clinton's history in that department .....Bernie's CO efforts aren't much out of the norm either.

As for his writings, well that will depends on how crazy they are I suppose. But all the GOP has to do is dig out his old appearances on CSPAN from before he went to Washington for fodder for the right-wing to go after him as a crazy.

A lot of that is going to depend on his willingness to stand up and acknowledge it. I assume they're ready for oppo research.

[MADem]

48. Bill's infidelity is OLD news. We even know all about the details of the guy's penis, for goodness

sake! We know every woman he's ever schtupped, we know the Secret Service had to pull Hillary off him after she hit him with a lamp, we KNOW he was a horndog/hard dawg to keep on the porch. Monica has filled us in with every salacious detail. About the only thing we haven't seen re: Bill is his most recent colonoscopy video. Everything with him is "Asked and Answered." Same with HRC. They are INOCULATED in that regard.

It's like having a weird auntie who has old episodes of the TV show DYNASTY on VHS tape, and wants you to be enthused about watching them with her. You don't want to watch those damn fool tapes. You'll sit through one or two, but it's torture.

I don't know how good Sanders' oppo team is or even if he has one, I kinda think he doesn't, that he's using his money in other ways--I suspect they haven't spent a dime investigating themselves yet, and that is the first step. Hell, the papers found his first wife and badgered her in the supermarket parking lot--she'll have to go into hibernation while all her friends are hectored for details. And some of the stuff could be spun in such a way that a simple acknowledgement wouldn't begin to cover it.

[Armstead]

46. PS I did look up his wrtings...

Flaky, a little embarrassing but pretty much in line with a lot of the Pop Psycholgy/New Age/Left Wing stuff floating around at that time, and tame compared to the zeitgeist of today.

Maybe he'll appeal to the 50 Shades of Grey crowd. (I'm joking.)

[MADem]

49. Some of it could be taken the wrong way--easily. Without a lot of spin-effort by the right,

either. And some of it is just ghastly, stupid BAD science. That cancer theory was total snake oil.

I know you're joking--but expect the GOP to take it seriously. The ads write themselves, with the candidate's OWN words....ewwww!

[Cal33]

68. If he were boring, would he have been drawing the largest crowds of any presidential

candidates, wherever he spoke?

[VanillaRhapsody]

30. Being a Socialist not a socialist Democrat

Sure is a trunkload

[procon]

2. Republicans have Sanders at a disadvantage from the start.

You forgot that he comes preloaded with some significant baggage, and they will tar him as one of those scary "Communist-Socialist-Marxist" libruls out to overthrow god and country. The terror of the Red Menace tactic is hardwired into every Republican's DNA, it's in the Top Ten of their all time favorite fright fests. There's no way around it. If that isn't enough, Republicans are building their own oppo research that will magnify any of the lightweight charges that the Clinton camp has leveled at Sanders.

But before Sanders even reaches that stage, how will he get enough superdelegates to win the nomination at the Democratic National Convention next July? There are 747 are superdelegates and Bloomberg estimates Clinton already has secured well over 500 commitments. Sanders has 2 (two). The math is not in his favor.

[procon]

8. Oh, it's still an active bugaboo.

Don't forget that Republicans are still portraying Obama as one of those scary "ists" everyday of the week, labeling him, his appointees and his staff as Communists one day and Marxists/Socialists the next. Unfortunately for us Dems, a lot of our younger voters don't show up on election day. The middle aged and senior voters, however, do show up. Of course, Republicans will be trying to remind voters of what they were taught in school by linking Sanders-the-socialist with those fearful days of the Cold War brinksmanship and the evils of communism and socialism.

[Fla Dem]

17. No it isn't the 1950 0r 1960, but a large segment of the voting public grew up in those times.

While many of us have evolved, many haven't and still see socialism as a boogeyman. Especially now with Putin acting like a gun packing idiot.

[MADem]

29. Sorry--the Cold War got resurrected, and we're fighting it out in Syria. Didn't you get the memo? nt

[Cal33]

11. The "Communist-Socialist-Marxist" libruls and other slogans have been deliberately invented and

given false and dirty meanings by the Corporate Right-Wingers, who are afraid of their possible
appeal to the American masses, if not stopped. The Right-Wingers have been working mightily
and long in their fight against "Socialism" and "Socialism" has become a dirty word in America.

I'd say that in most Americans' minds the word "Socialism" has the dirty meaning that was
re-invented and defined by the Right-Wingers. As a result most Americans have a false
understanding of it.

Hitler also used the word falsely when he called his NAZI Party the "National Socialistic Party."
And so did Stalin: "USSR" stands for "United Soviet Socialistic Republics." Both of these
dictators wanted to sound right and good. It was meant to fool their people.

As a result the word "Socialism" as been misused and lied about, and has become associated
in the minds of Americans with something dirty and evil.

Bernie has said that he will soon be giving a speech on "Socialism." I am looking forward to
hear what he will have to say what "Socialism" really stands for. Maybe it will be the first time
that Americans will be hearing the TRUTH on this topic.

Maybe we will learn to stop lock-stepping in our ways of thinking in slogans invented by our
Right-Wing propagandists, and start thinking for ourselves -- for a change

[procon]

20. Change is slow in coming.

Republicans use labels to effectively beat down their opponents, but I suspicion that for altogether too many Democrats, labels are just laziness. Pick up any standardized trope, applied to the subject of your ire and move on. Its so easy to just toss out the first throwaway denunciation that comes to mind without even giving lip service to a minimal exercise in critical thinking skills.

Most people don't want to hear any truths but their own, but any honest and realistic discussion on extent of socialism we already have in America would probably come as a shock. Socialism is interwoven into the fabric of American life, but its remains a hidden benefit whose name shall not be uttered in the land that capitalism made.

Wealth redistribution? We haz it too, but you wouldn't know it. In the past it was much better for working class people than it is now where the system is clanking along in reverse. It took the GOP a long time to convince the population that redistributing wealth upwards was good for them. Thanks to a massive (and quite effective) propaganda campaign, Republicans played the long game to successfully rebrand the wealthy from the greedy and oppressive takers they are, to the benevolent and generous makers of today.

[sabrina 1]

32. The 'red' thing hasn't resonated with a majority of people. They tried that right from the

beginning forgetting that his is a new century and people are not as ignorant today about what Democratic Socialism means.

The ONLY people likely to be 'horrified' by that word are Far Right Wingers, see Fox et al who would never vote for a Democrat to begin with.

They used it against Obama too. That is history, 7 out of 10 young people today WANT a Democratic Socialist Govt.

Which is why Hillary's Campaign who tried it for a while shamefully, dropped it.

The right of course live in the past, Bernie doesn't need those votes so let them stew in their hatred, they will anyhow.

[newfie11]

5. #FeelTheBern2016

He's got this seniors vote along with all my senior friends!

[willvotesdem]

6. IMHO it's the Corporations that won't allow Bernie to win.

ALL other realistic candidates from the major political parties are corporate shills and are pre-approved.

[DCBob]

7. "buy some time for us to elect a real Progressive Democrat in the future elections"

Good point and I totally agree.

The way I see it the country is not ready for someone like Bernie Sanders.. but it could be heading that way. What I fear the most is a totally controlled Republican government.. one can only imagine the damage they could do.

Lets see who emerges as "real progressive Democrat" in next few years. I suspect Hillary may decide to retire after 4 years which would give that person or persons an opportunity to run.

[lunamagica]

9. First of all, it's time to retire the "people don't know Bernie" meme

"A lot of Dems. haven't even heard of him yet, and the MSM does its best to keep them
uninformed."

Really? Bernie seems to be on TV all the time. He was even on the cove of TIME magazines. not many unknowns make it there.

He's been on a debate. And it helped Hillary.

"Repubs want Hillary to win because they think they can easily beat her in
the General Election."

As you point out, Hillary has had 7 Republican House Investigation of her role in Benghazi. How does that translate into them wanting Hillary to win?

The last hearing lasted for 11 hours. They want to destroy her NOW, because they fear her as the nominee. This is not speculation, The GOP wouldn't be spending so much time and money to stop her in the primaries if they didn't see her as a formidable contender. They know she's a survivor, one that they haven't been able to destroy after 20 years + of attacks. If anything, she seems to always come out stronger.

I believe she will prevail, win and be a great POTUS

[zalinda]

10. As great as she was as SOS?

Libya, "We came, we saw, he died." and with a gleeful laugh. No thanks.

Z

[lunamagica]

12. Feature Hillary Clinton's 9 most memorable moments as secretary of state

1. The liberation of Libya
Clinton was among a group of administration officials urging Obama in 2011 to help Libyan rebels overthrow longtime dictator Moammar Gadhafi, over objections from Defense Secretary Roberts Gates and others. However, while Gadhafi was successfully ousted with zero American casualties, the rebels' victory has led to an uncertain future and widespread instability, the clearest example of which, for Americans, was the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi that killed four U.S. citizens. Below, Clinton and Obama greet the arrival of the slain Americans at Dover Air Force Base.

2. The opening-up of Myanmar
In 2012, Clinton became the first secretary of state in 50 years to make an official visit to Myanmar, part of the Obama administration's efforts to reward the ruling military junta for taking concrete steps toward a freer society. Clinton met with Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi (pictured), a pro-democracy activist who had been recently released from house arrest. Clinton's visit to Myanmar also fell under the Obama administration's much-publicized pivot to Asia, following years of perceived neglect of the region under President Bush, whose foreign policy agenda was largely absorbed by terrorism and the Iraq War.

3. Playing peacemaker in the Middle East
In late 2012, Clinton brought all her diplomatic resources to bear during a bloody outbreak of violence between Israel and Arab militants in the Gaza Strip, performing a whirlwind tour of the region that many credited with helping prevent an all-out war. Clinton reportedly spent hours negotiating with Egypt's newly elected Islamist president, Mohamed Morsi (pictured), to cement the deal, which had the added benefit of reaffirming Egypt's continued support for a peace treaty with Israel.

4. Freeing a Chinese dissident
Clinton's May 2012 visit to China, ostensibly about mutual economic and security concerns, was ensnared in a full-blown diplomatic emergency, after human-rights dissident Chen Guangcheng escaped house arrest and took refuge at the U.S. Embassy. For the benefit of her media-sensitive hosts, Clinton continued to meet then-Chinese President Hu Jintao (pictured) and to perform other duties as if nothing were amiss, while she and her team negotiated Chen's release behind the scenes.

5. Killing Osama bin Laden
Clinton was not intimately involved in the clandestine operation to kill Osama bin Laden in 2011, but she will be indelibly linked to the moment, thanks to a photograph showing her real-time response to the operation in the White House Situation Room.

6. Tightening sanctions on Iran
Clinton, seen here in 2011 announcing new sanctions on Iran with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, played an important role in the U.S.'s efforts to win international support to isolate Iran economically. The sanctions have been the most severe Iran has ever dealt with, and have taken a heavy toll on the country's economy. But they have yet to curb its suspected progress in developing a nuclear weapon, which many analysts would count as a stain on Clinton's legacy.

7. Isolating Syria's Assad
Clinton, seen here in 2012 condemning atrocities committed by the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, has played a central role in the administration's efforts to corral international support against the regime. However, like Iran, Syria remains an unfinished story: Assad is in a bloody stalemate with the rebels, the United Nations has proved impotent in stopping the bloodshed, and atrocities continue apace.

8. Fighting for women's rights
One of Clinton's main initiatives as secretary of state was to champion the cause of gender equality, one of the hallmarks of her political career that stretches back to her days as First Lady. Clinton, pictured here winning an award from the New York Women's Foundation in 2012, made women's rights a focal point in speeches, interviews, and town halls across the world, from China to Pakistan.

9. Becoming a pop icon
Being the fodder for numerous internet memes may seem like the most ephemeral of achievements, but Clinton's ascendancy in the world of pop culture must be counted as a victory for a politician who was once widely viewed as calculating and heartless. Indeed, Clinton's new image as a tough, effective leader, as evidenced by the popular "Texts From Hillary" tumblr, may herald a positive development for women everywhere.

http://theweek.com/articles/468265/hillary-clintons-9-most-memorable-moments-secretary-state

[jomin41]

15. Weak list!

[zalinda]

16. Sorry, but her history has already been written

"She stood by her man." Everyone knows about the Clinton years and ask about her accomplishments from the average person and it will be all about the Clinton.

1. She stood by her man.

2. She failed miserably to get health care for the country.

3. She was on the board of Walmart.

4. She doesn't bake cookies.

5. The right wing conspiracy is out to get her and Bill.

6. Wants to be President.

7. Carpetbagger for New York Senate, she should have gone back to Arkansas

8. Lost to Obama in 2008.

9. Untrustworthy.

I don't think many people even knows that she was SOS. And, Libya, Syria and the Middle East are big messes, so she didn't accomplish much in that area, any way. I've heard her speak and she doesn't sound like any kind of diplomat. I can't see her getting anything done as POTUS. I really think if she wins the primary, she'll lose the GE.

Z

[Orrex]

25. Versus:

1. Mayor of a demographically uniform town in the far northeast and smaller than Altoona
2. US Representative of a demographically uniform state in the far northeast with a population close to that of Tucson
3. Senator of the second smallest constituency in the country, incidentally in the far northeast
4. Zero foreign policy experience
5. Carpetbagger for the Democratic party; if he's Independent, he should run as an Independent
6. Still largely anonymous among voters outside of the northeast or who don't follow politics as a hobby
7. Untested by national media scrutiny, unlike his opponent, who has weathered decades of it

Look, I don't care what you want to say about Clinton, as long as you vote for her in 2016. I'll certainly vote for Sanders if he miraculously wins the primary, but otherwise anyone who scowls and vows to stay home, or to vote for Sanders as a write-in, is simply voting for the Republicans.

[zalinda]

26. Bull

All these new Democrats are signing up for Bernie, and could care less about the Democratic party. They won't vote for Hillary, period. To a lot of them Trump is the lesser of two evils.

Z

[Orrex]

31. Numbers, please

Sounds like you're making stuff up. Please provide documentation of these "new Democrats" who think "that "Trump is the lesser of two evils."

I know that this is an article of faith among Sanders' acolytes, but I've seen no data to support it. Please disclose your sources. Thanks!

[MADem]

33. And I'm sure you have a link to that considered analysis...or is that just your opinion? nt

[riversedge]

52. Looks like a RW hit list.

[Maedhros]

59. "Liberation" of Libya?

That's offensive. Plunging the innocent civilian population of Libya into an ongoing nightmare of violence and suffering is not "liberating" them.

[bvar22]

67. The "rebels" have imposed Sharia Law.

Under Qaddafi, Libya had the highest standard of living in North Africa, was liberalizing the restrictions on women, and was using Oil Money to block the IMF and World Banks from making their usurious "loans" to less than trustworthy dictators in North Africa,

Qaddafi was a committed "Pan-African", which means,
Africa is for Africans, not American Banks!

” For all his dictatorial megalomania, Gaddafi is a committed pan-African - a fierce defender of African unity. Libya was not in debt to international bankers. It did not borrow cash from the International Monetary Fund for any "structural adjustment". It used oil money for social services - including the Great Man Made River project, and investment/aid to sub-Saharan countries. Its independent central bank was not manipulated by the Western financial system. All in all a very bad example for the developing world.”

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MD27Ak01.html

The US Disaster Capitalists piggy-backed on the legitimate Arab Spring to inject our support for the radical militant Islamic (Al-Qaeda) side in an ongoing tribal civil war.
But the last blocks to American Style Capitalism has been removed from North Africa. All of North Africa is now open for pillaging by Western Banks and the IMF.

Thanks to OUR"intervention", Libya has regressed several hundred years, and NOW has Sharia Law.

Everything we touch in the Middle East turns to shit. Way past time to just walk away.

[Cal33]

47. Didn't you notice the huge jump in the polls for Hillary right after the House Investigation? She

looked so much at ease and made some of her prosecutors look foolish. She looked great.

I've seen a post whose author thought that the whole investigation was cooked up to make
Hillary look good. And she did look good. After all, she had already been investigated by the
same committee 6 times before, what else new could there have been for them to learn?

Hillary wants to win to become president. The Repubs. want her to win because they think
she would be easy to beat. I think they are wrong. I don't think she would be easy to beat.
And I will vote for her should she win the Primaries.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

13. " it will mean the status quo"

This is what I do not understand. - Why do people vote against their best interest?

[Nonhlanhla]

14. Socialism

Those of us who are informed about politics, know very well that socialism is not the big bogeyman it's been made out to be, and we also know that Bernie's brand of it is different from outright socialism anyway, being democratic socialism. But his success in the polls would depend on his ability to educate the American public about that, all while the GOP would launch a massive attack on him depicting him as to the left of Stalin. The rabid right wingers would not be the problem, since they believe that all Democrats are Communists anyway. It's the mushy middle, the very people who are often least informed about politics, and who actually decide elections, that could easily be swayed by "concerns" about Bernie's supposed socialism. Put him against a baby face like Rubio, who appears moderate (even though he obviously isn't), and we'll be toast.

Hillary has drawbacks for the general, but the assumption that Bernie would not, is wishful thinking.

[Joe Chi Minh]

18. DU ought to draw up a list of who posters thought

Bernie would get hammered, wouldget well beaten, would lose, would win, would win handsomely and would hammer the opposition.

'Hillary has drawbacks for the general, but the assumption that Bernie would not, is wishful thinking.'

I agree.

As it is, DUers can spout, as if predicting with complete authority, and may well be talking bilge.

[Cal33]

19. Bernie would be offering the Americans a clear and definite choice: Do you want a government of,

for and by the people, or do you want a government of, for and by Big Business Corporations?

And he has a knack (as does Elizabeth Warren) of spelling things out so that people can
and do easily understand. That's why they both draw out the crowds.

Don't worry about Bernie, just leave things up to him. He knows how to do them in the
correct way. All he needs is the chance to do them.

[procon]

23. Since the president is only 1/3 of the government,

how will an imaginary President Sanders implement his policies when the Republicans control the House and Senate? It's possible the Dems might regain the Senate, but Democrats will have no compunction to support him, but even so, how can he accomplish anymore than past presidents under similar circumstances?

He can't change the Supreme Court's rulings on massive, unchecked political donations, he can't eliminate lobbying, so how do you propose that he is going to live up to all these wondrously unfounded claims of derring do?

[Cal33]

38. I don't expect much can be done by Bernie or anyone else in the first term. Bernie, like

Elizabeth, is the type to say it out, loud and clear, each time that the Republicans would
block the Democrats from enacting a bill, for instance. He would spell it out what blocking
each and every Democratic attempt at legislation would be doing to the American people,
how it will be harming them, which corporations would be benefitting from the blockage,
which congressmen are helping to bring about the blockage, what effects it would have
in time upon our entire nation, in the short term and the long term, ... etc ...

Remember the Republicans filibustered 400+ bills proposed by the Democrats during
Obama's first term alone? Few Democrats ever said much. Obama was amazingly quiet
about it, too. The MSM, of course, said nothing.

Well, you can expect Sanders to be different. He's going to talk about this loud and
often -- each and every time it happens. More and more Americans will become aware
of what is happening, and who is for the American people, and who is for the profit of
Big Business corporations only. This will greatly offset the quietness of the MSM and the
lies of media like Fox News.

The result will be that more and more people will finally realize that they have been
deliberately misinformed in the past. They will get to know the truth and start voting for
Progressive candidates in larger numbers by 2018. And by 2020, I expect not only the
Senate to have become heavily Democratic, but the House, too. It never ceases to
amaze me how come Obama has been so quiet in this area all these years! Doesn't he
know that the MSM is 90% Republican owned? And what about all the personal lies
they told about him? What about the stupid lies, like he was born in Kenya, he wasn't
even an American citizen, he was a Muslim, etc...? Yes, he did have his birth certificate
shown on TV, but the Republicans continued to lie. And Obama never did anything about
attacking the Republicans for their lies. Was defending himself alone enough?

The Republicans provided an opportunity for Democrats to attack them each time they
lied, and the Democrats had the evidence to destroy that lie. But the Democrats
never used those opportunities -- all those LOST GOLDEN OPPORTUNITIES. Is there
something masochistic about us Democrats?!

Well, Bernie and Elizabeth are not masochists!! They know how to attack, and attack
very appropriately!! That's what helps them to draw such large numbers of followers.
In our subconscious minds there has to be a deep anger at the apparent helplessness
of our chosen leaders. Why the hell are they behaving so meekly and helplessly like
victims so much of the time? That is a sure way of losing more members in Congress
come each election time. Speaking up, loud and clear, with the truth is a sure-fire way
of attracting more people. Bernie and Elizabeth are living examples of this. They are
helping to get people to let out the deep anger that has been burning within themselves
for so long -- an anger that they are only dimly aware of! It does one good to know
how to let off steam appropriately, instead of keeping it all in! And it's about time!

I've been talking about the individuals in government only so far. We, the people, can
be doing our bit by word of mouth, through the internet, etc... each according to
his/her own capacity.

[George II]

21. I think its time to stop saying that many Democrats haven't heard of Sanders or...

...that the "MSM" is keeping them uninformed. He's been all over the news programs on broadcast networks, cable networks, talk shows, etc. He's even been on the cover of Time Magazine recently.

So saying that many people haven't heard of him is is very old.

[Cal33]

22. How about the poor, many of whom don't get to watch TV, listen to the news or own computers? These

are the ones who would almost all vote for Bernie, if they only knew that he existed? And the poor form
a large bloc of our society, and their numbers, unfortunately, are growing by the day. And Bernie wants
to help them become middle class.

[Orrex]

28. Don't put your eggs in that basket

How about the poor, many of whom don't get to watch TV, listen to the news or own computers?

Then all that they've heard of Sanders, and all that they'll hear from him, will likely come from media sources that Sanders' supporters have preemptively dismissed as being in Clinton's pocket (or vice versa).

These are the ones who would almost all vote for Bernie, if they only knew that he existed?

That's an enormous leap of faith, and you're staking Sanders' campaign on the hope that people don't know who he is.

How will Sanders spread his message to these out-of-touch voters? When will he do it? How will he ensure that they vote in the primaries? How will he ensure that they get to the polls at all? And how will he ensure that they receive his message before some other message-monger gets to them?

[PosterChild]

24. "No political baggage" - not true...

Bernie carries no political baggage. Republicans will have..... to INVENT lies to tell about him, and inventions are easier to be proven false.

Not true. Bernie is a self proclamed socialiist. That's significant , deligitmizing political baggage . And repubicans didn't invent it... it isn't a lie.... he did it to himself.

[MADem]

34. He also has a lot of personal baggage, and the finger waggers will have a field day with it.

If the right wing did get their wish, and see Sanders instead of Clinton as the Democratic nominee, I would expect the GOP to make hay with that personal baggage, and it's enough, I think, to obscure a lot of the "issues-oriented" conversation. Sanders would get testy and angered were he forced to repeatedly answer questions about his draft exemption, his request for CO status, his first wife, his ex-girlfriend, his many essays on a wide range of topics, etc., and, if they really wanted to give him the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy Treatment, the problems his wife had to deal with during her abbreviated tenure at that college she was running.

And they would "go there," in pretty much every candidate match-up situation save a run against Trump (who has as much if not more baggage than Sanders has).

[PosterChild]

35. RE his many essays on a wide range of topics...

.... i shudder to think what they might find there.

[Cal33]

43. You don't think that the Republican candidates might also have some kind of "personal"

baggage, too? I think everybody does. Even FDR who, many think, is the best
president that ever lived -- so far.

Now, the history of the present-day Republican Party's voting record is something
else. It is peculiar to the Republican Party itself -- and no one else. Let me name
some of them:

1. Their efforts to bring down Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.
2. Their successful efforts at cutting down benefits to veterans, especially during the
Bush Jr. years as president. The attitude of the Neo-Con Republican seems to
have been, when a soldier has been wounded and was let out of the service.
"You're on your own, buddy!" Dem. congressmen fought it as best they could
and managed to retain something for the vets.
3. Executives of Corporate America pay a lower tax rate than their secretaries.
4. The nationwide scandal of large banks making crooked deals that caused millions
of American citizens lose their homes, etc.... (Dems. never even tried to have
them prosecuted in court).
5. They have always actively fought against Health Coverage for all citizens. America
is the only advanced country in the world that does not have universal coverage
for all its citizens. And "Obamacare" is a system very much watered down from
its original intention. Much leaves to be desired. As a result, Americans pay much
more for health than the next best country, and get far less service for what they
pay than citizens of those countries do.

I could go on and on ad infinitum, but the above examples are enough to show that
we Americans are being screwed by the Republican Party, which is the lap-dog of
Corporate America.

Surprisingly enough, a high number of those who vote Republican have never even
heard of the above. Or if they did, it was presented to them as something good
(Right-Wing lies), and which they have swallowed, hook line and sinker. Just talk
to some Republicans. What they honestly believe might come as a shock to any
thinking person.

Bernie or any other Progressive Democrat would sock the above to the Republicans
-- with evidence and proof. ( Please also see my Post #38, a few posts above in this
thread). But Dems. must get the truth out in order to have things changed. Dems.
have the truth on side, but few Dem. leaders say much about it. This is a definite
disadvantage, since the Pubs. control 90% of the news media.

[MADem]

45. Do you think that laundry list will captivate voters who voted for George W. Bush because

they thought the teetotaling alcoholic would be more fun than Al Gore to "have a beer with?" They weren't voting on "issues." They preferred the fun, joking, ha-ha-ha frat boy to the wonk. Even though the wonk was way smarter and probably would have kept us out of war.

You think those Once Every Four Years voters will even look at your list? Or will they go with the candidate that makes them """""feeeeeel"""" best? As an example, you can't tell me that "everyone" on our side of the aisle is in love with Obamacare--we had one very well known DUer call Obama a portion of excrement purveyor of vintage conveyances because he was having trouble understanding his coverage because some "friend" gave him bad advice, or something. So you see, some of the issues you are articulating are not strictly left-right. Some of them are rich-poor, or middle class-poor. And some people don't want to help the poor if it will cost them anything.

I also wouldn't count on the GOP--or even some virulently anti-war lefties-- to give a fuck about veterans in the privacy of the voting booth, especially if caring about them will cost them more tax dollars. They'll maybe do the lip service, sure, but some will say "They spun the wheel of fortune and took their chances." People are NOT always nice and altruistic--I've learned this over my long life. They are often selfish and are more concerned with getting THEIRS than helping their fellow humans.

The biggest "problem" with Democrats is that we are loath to go at them in the same manner that they go after us. This is why people like James Carville are so useful--he has a Marine's mindset and Marine's killer instinct. He can lash out, strike his target, and kill it dead. Many of us tend to get a bit queasy if called to do that kind of thing.

If Sanders gets "framed" by the GOP, he'll have a hard time being heard over them. That's, of course, if he can pass the Dem primary gauntlet, and I still think that is a real long shot. I would expect, if he got the nomination, that he would lose and we'd suffer under a GOP president for the subsequent four years. I think a lot of energy would go from the POTUS campaign into taking back the Senate and trying to make a few gains in the House. Our chance to effect real change by putting sane people on the Supremes would pass us by, and we'd only be able to mitigate the worst of the damage through the bulwark of the Senate.

It would not be a good time in America.

[Cal33]

55. What do you think made Elizabeth and Bernie so attractive to so many people, and in such a

short period of time? Just look at the topics they talked about and are still talking about:
They are issues that affect Americans in the present, or past issues that are still affecting
Americans today - one way or another. In one short sentence: The ways in which
Americans have been used and abused by the corporate world.

There is a good deal of anger and rage -- much of it subconscious -- in the guts of
Americans because they have been used and abused by Big Business corporations.
Elizabeth and Bernie are talking about these issues. This helps to bring into awareness
the abuse they have been or are still going through, and the resultant anger and rage
that many people do not even know was present in them. What they experience is a
constant and steady unhappiness, uneasiness and general dissatisfaction, for which they
often do not know the cause. In talking about these issues Elizabeth and Bernie make
them more aware of that anger and its cause, and this brings about some release, which
makes them feel good.

That, I think, is one main reason for the ability of Elizabeth and Bernie to draw such
crowds wherever they speak. The issues they talk about hit right home!

[PosterChild]

61. Nobody on this site would disagreee...

.... including Hillary suporters. Why do you think ralling against repugs is an effective argument for bernie vs clinton? This doesn't seem relevent.

[Cal33]

66. Letting the poor and the middle-class know who the real cause of their misery and suffering is,

and how Bernie will change things as President, will help to get more Democrats to vote for him.
That is his primary goal.

Bernie said early in his campaign that he would avoid negativities against his competitors, and
he kept his word. But since Hillary started making negative statements about Bernie first, it
would be foolish of him to just take them lying down. Unlike some of our present Democratic
leaders, he's not the type to take things lying down. He fights back, when attacked.

I also believe that the one to start making negative statements about competitors first, is
probably the one who has the most fears about not winning.

[pinebox]

36. However

people also know that Bernie isn't marching in the Red Army. Remember, millennials also have a better view of socialism than they do capitalism when compared to their elders https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/05/11/one-third-millennials-like-socialism/ That being said. Bernie isn't a true socialist, but Seattle's Kshama Sawant is and was elected on her platform http://www.democracynow.org/2014/1/6/a_socialist_elected_in_seattle_kshama

[PosterChild]

37. Great! We can always point out that..

.... our candidate definitely DID NOT march in the Red Army! What a relief!

How's this for a campaign slogan? Bernie Sandars - Making America NORWEGIAN again!

[pinebox]

39. I'm down

That sounds great to me, having lived in Germany for 10 years being married to a German.

Free health care.
Paid 30 days vacation.
An entrenched social system with pensions
Saw no homeless people in cities as big as major American cities
Free education and no student loans
Living wages


Pretty darn awesome!

How's this for a campaign slogan?

Bernie Sanders---Fighting FOR the American people, not entrenched politicians, the status quo and corporate America!

[PosterChild]

41. Great! We can count on your vote! Only . ...

..... only 150,000,000 to go!

[pinebox]

56. Not hard

when you're bringing a coalition that stretches across the divide!

[PosterChild]

62. I'm not sure what....

.....divide you are referring to, but anyone who thinks repugs are going to vote for sanders is intoxicated on fairy dust.

[pinebox]

65. Anybody who thinks otherwise

obviously isn't informed. Who do you think helped got him elected in VT?
Welcome to the real deal. I suggest you get busy Googling because you have some reading up to do.

[VanillaRhapsody]

58. Exactly....I have been trying to get this through his supporters noggins

America is just not going to get behind THAT!

And at any time....Bernie could have called himself a Socialist Democrat.....particularly when he IS running in THEIR primary.....and yet.....he just cannot bring himself to do that! Funny.....some see him as a savior....but he just won't do THAT...."even for the sake of America!"

:lol

[MohRokTah]

50. BWAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

[orpupilofnature57]

60. NICE VISUALS, DO THEY HAVE A VOICE COACH ?

[orpupilofnature57]

51. Bernie runs more like he's interested in the truth than the Job, that's why he has my total

support . And that's why a few simple questions like who supports him and who does he support, when asked about ANY other candidate, Bernie stands alone among candidates, senators, and presidents .

[MADem]

53. I still wonder if he is serving as a stalking horse in exchange for a cabinet position.

I should think that LABOR would be a portfolio that he might be interested in.

[orpupilofnature57]

54. I think Megalomaniac Trump might have ulterior motives,, but not Bernie, the truth .

I think he's running because of a sense of duty, instead of a legacy or trophy .

[PosterChild]

63. I don't think that....

....Idelogical puritans make for good politicians, either in the running or in office.

[orpupilofnature57]

64. Your right .

[VanillaRhapsody]

57. Democratic Socialist

that's a big ol' trunkload right there...