The kids like Bernie Maybe Everyone else should listen..

[Indepatriot]

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a30892680/bernie-sanders-youth-vote-new-hampshire-primary/?fbclid=IwAR3YaYNSnPMB0ozA6GVuoU0t9YwzBOvQ8-UohfKFZsutbtWrLjf12_7SP

[Blue_playwright]

1. Little girls love Elizabeth Warren...

Isn't it a joy that we have wonderful people running (not you, Tulsi) who are the kind of people that our children can look up to? My kids loved Barack (My youngest was super tiny when he won, for years she thought we were related to him and called him "Uncle Bama.&quot and my eldest thinks Nancy is a bad ass - but it's so nice to have nice, normal, trustworthy people that you would literally feel okay leaving your kids with? Elizabeth pinky swearing and giggling, Bernie seems like he'd be the sitter who has candy in his pockets and knows a few magic tricks, Pete and Yang are good storytellers, Amy would start building a pillow fort, Biden would sneak them out to run to the ice cream shop, Steyer looks like he'd order pizza and log in to Disney Plus... I don't know, they just seem so accessible compared to the Orange Menace in the White House right now...

[Indepatriot]

4. Wait, are you actually promoting giving kids "pocket food"?....

[Blue_playwright]

112. Grandpa pocket candy is the best!

[relayerbob]

2. Be better if they actually turned out to vote, though

[totodeinhere]

6. Agreed. But I think that Bernie has a better chance of getting them out to vote.

n/t

[relayerbob]

16. Unfortunately

In NH, the rate dropped from 19% to 12% of the vote was from young voters, and in the one college area I heard results from Pete won, and Sanders got 40% fewer votes than 2016. So, as much as I wish, and push, that young people would get out there, I don't think that's actually valid at all. He may get better results than some of the others, but I think most really don't care much for old folks running the show. Nothing new there, and I don't blame them. I really don't want old, grumpy white guys in charge any more, either

[Indepatriot]

75. Sanders got more votes than any other candidate, so by your numbers I guess he isn't

dependent on the kids at all! this means he's even stronger than I thought! Great News!, thanks for making my day! P.S. A big part of him getting 40% less votes probably had something to do with the fact that there were 8 candidates instead of 2...

[cwydro]

19. They didn't show up in NH.

[Indepatriot]

87. So Sanders won without the youth vote?!!! FANTASTIC!

Yet another "elect-ability" trope put to rest!

[ahoysrcsm]

49. The Revolution has been postponed. Maybe when the kids grow up they will show up. n/t

Last edited Thu Feb 13, 2020, 01:59 AM - Edit history (1)

[Indepatriot]

74. There's a whole lot of voting left in this race, Sanders is now the favorite in nearly all polls.

The Revolution is here and now. Join us, there will be strong coffee,cookies, and Medicare for All.

[ahoysrcsm]

78. About that...

I will not be bought off by strong coffee, cookies, and M4A. For that I say Good Day, Sir... I said, Good Day... Could I get a cookie for the road... just asking...

[Indepatriot]

80. I hate to start another debate at this hour, but: "Chocolate Chip or Peanut Butter"?!!!

[hangaleft]

92. Pepperidge Farm Nantuckets, please

Chunky milk chocolate chocolate chip cookies.

Almost as good as mom used to make. They’re *really* good!

(PF also makes dark chocolate chocolate chip with macadamia nuts cookies, they’re not too shabby, either.)

[showblue22]

3. NO!

[Indepatriot]

7. They are the future, so take them for granted at our peril...

[showblue22]

9. I don't believe Bernie can bring them what they want.

I believe people like Amy K, Warren or almost anyone else can bring progressive change faster than Bernie can.

[Indepatriot]

10. So you're saying you know better than they do....that'll win them over for sure.

[showblue22]

12. Yep. That's what I am saying.

I'm 33. Amy K is a bad ass. She has a stellar legislation record. She can get things done. I have not seen Bernie be able to get things done other than he is a great campaigner.

[Indepatriot]

15. Well, I'm 58, cut my campaign teeth knocking doors for Mondale,

So I guess I should give your opinion the same weight you give the future Democrats...duly noted.

[BlueIdaho]

22. And didn't Mondale turn out to be a great President?

No... Wait...

[Indepatriot]

24. I was doing exactly what everyone one here is supposed to do. There's even a rule here about it...

I was supporting the Democratic Candidate for President. Horrible, I know.

[BlueIdaho]

26. No - what's horrible

Is you superior attitude when addressing other members of this forum.

[Indepatriot]

30. So calling you on your assertions of your own judgmental superiority over young Democrats

is somehow being disrespectful to you?....OK...

[BlueIdaho]

32. No me

It’s how you have addressed others in this thread. You can’t hurt my feelings. I’ve been doing this longer than you have.

[Indepatriot]

35. I'm sincerely interested in what you feel I've said on this thread that's disrespectful to anyone.

Please enlighten me so I can refrain from doing so in the future.

[LanternWaste]

110. Ex #1 Consciously casting someone's words as something wholly other than what they

"So you're saying you know better than they do....that'll win them over for sure."




(this is where you rationalize you did something other than what you in fact, did...)

[Indepatriot]

111. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Did you read the response? He answered: Yep!....my casting turned out to be accurate...

[ChubbyStar]

40. So you get your umbrage all puffed up

about how someone has addressed others in this thread and then you proceed to address that person in a condescending fashion. Stellar fucking logic!

[brush]

62. Knowledge of past elections count(McGover), as does experience. Idealistic young voters...

often don't show up, plus, many are naive about Sanders' socialist baggage which repugs will hype 24/7.

[Indepatriot]

64. The Republicans called HRC a socialist, and will absolutely do the same to any Democrat...

Hell, they'd do it to Ronald Reagan if he rose from the dead and ran as a Democrat. Keep calling them naive, and they'll be even less likely to participate. The fierce urgency of NO never motivated anyone.

[brush]

72. Nice try, but it's true with Sanders, and there are many videos.Think i'll go with others with...

more life experience than to fall for too may promises of free programs made—and he's been promising since 2015 yet still hasn't figured out how he'll pay for them.












.

[Indepatriot]

76. Nice try with the talking points, but he isn't promising ( and we don't want )

"FREE" anything. We just want more of our hard-earned tax dollars spent on improving the lives of the working/middle class. and less spent on subsidizing billionaires, corporations, and the Military Industrial Complex. Pretty simple when you reject the right-wing framing and get to the truth.

[brush]

82. Free MFA isn't promising? Oh, wait, it's not free, huge tax increases come with that.

That'll surely go over well.

On the GE campaign trail where he'll surely be pressed to answer how he'll pay for it, which he couldn't during his disastrous 2015 interview with the NY Daily News, what will he say?

It's been five years and he still doesn't have an answer for that.

Call it right-wing framing if you want, but those questions will come up.

Let's stop fooling ourselves.

[Indepatriot]

83. The facts are that the average family of 4 will save thousands with M4A, owing to no deductibles

and no co-pays. Sanders has been answering that question for years. Here's another answer for you. Restore the tax rates on the rich and the giant corporations to the draconian levels that existed under Ronald Reagan, cut military budget by 20% and end subsidizes to the fossil fuel industry. I'll bet a whole lot of voters would get behind that. Again, taxes don't have to go up much, or at all, if we simply prioritize spending to benefit the citizenry over subsidizing the 1%.... time to reign in the excesses of unregulated capitalism. It's the right, and moral, thing to do it's already quite popular, and getting more popular all the time.

[brush]

85. Single-payer is the future, but with Moscow Mitch it's not gonna happen.

Get in office then get it passed if we get the Senate. Announcing it before-hand and allowing repugs to paint him even more red is not smart.

[Indepatriot]

86. I disagree, strategy, wise. Health care is the #1 issue with voters, and big ideas inspire big

turnout. I truly believe that a Sanders ticket would have YUUUUGE coat tails and win the Senate as well. Ever see the FOX town hall where Bernie completely wins over the audience? When they get a chance to hear his actual proposals, not Hannity's version of them, they love the guy. Can't tell you how many Republican clients I've had who say that although they disagree with him on policy, they love him for his honesty and integrity. People are hungry for a real public servant. I'm not saying we should court Republican votes, but I am saying if we stand for what we believe in we'll bring some of them along. Bernie is the one. Peace.

[brush]

89. MFA didn't work in 2016 and won't now as Americans still tink it's too expensive.

In 2018 we campaigned on improving te ACA and won. Get in office first to get single-payer passed.

We have to be smart, not just passionate about getting it passed.

[Rilgin]

90. huh

You do know that Hillary in 2016 ran AGAINST. Medicaire for all. Its easy to look up. Juat search for never never single payer and Hillary. Not an undercurrent but a big part of the election strategy.

I would post a link but am on my phone and no idea how to do it

However, you have it completely backwards which hopefully may cause you to question your conclusions since your assumptions are bsckwards.

[brush]

115. What does that have to do with 2018's bluewave victor which emphasized healthcare...

but not MFA?

[Rilgin]

116. Your quote

It is not my language. You said M4A didn't work in 2016. M4A was not the Democratic Party policy in 2016. In fact, our presidential candidate explicitly campaigned against it. It is hard to understand how there is a claim that it didn't work in 2016. Here you go, here is a link to the Democratic Party Platform in 2016. Try to find M4A in it. So the platform didn't have it and the candidate ran against it but somehow you want to say it didn't work in 2016.

https://democrats.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/2016_DNC_Platform.pdf

In 2018 there was a large movement towards candidates supporting M4A. Not all but it was part of the actual national debate with a lot of candidates adopting or supporting the policy (including in 2018 Pete Buttigieg). There are many arguments on the affect of that support on the election but it was run on in 2018 and not in 2016. Factually you have it backwards and thus your conclusion is wrong. You can certainly be against it and can even claim it is an electoral loser but basing it on a claim that it didn't work in as an electoral strategy in 2016 is just factually wrong.

[brush]

117. It didn't work for Sanders. He lost to Clinton.

[Rilgin]

118. I see

You just want to refight the 2016 primary which coincidently is against the policies of this website. I just assumed you were mistaken about the actual electoral history and assumed democrats lost to Trump in 2016 and you thought we lost because Hillary ran on M4A. Obviously this was not true.

Now it is clear that you do not want to discuss if it will help us or hurt us in the actual election. Which is not against the policies of this website and is something we should all be reflecting on with honesty.

However, it seems to me that it is more likely that all you want to do is bash one candidate. Good day to you.

[brush]

119. Not re-fighting anything. Just stating that MFA is a little too far left for most of the country now

Single-payer is the future though when the country is read for it. Getting trump out is the most important thing right now, making the 2020 election a referendum on MFA/socialism is not.

[Rilgin]

120. That is a fair argument. I dont agree but fair and can be argued. I corrected you on 2016. (NT)

[showblue22]

37. This is still primary time isn't it?

I have not made up my mind yet on who I am supporting.

[Indepatriot]

39. That's fine, of course. I just feel that your cavalier dismissal of young Democratic voters

is a big, big mistake. They are the future and the last thing they want is someone telling them they are naive know nothings.

[showblue22]

42. I haven't told them anything.

I am one of them kind of... Are you saying not supporting Bernie is somehow a unjust act against young people?

[Indepatriot]

46. post #22 in response to my question,"Are you saying you know better than them?"

your reply: "Yep" Support whomever you please, but asserting that the future members of the Democratic party are somehow naive or uninformed is nothing but counterproductive.

[showblue22]

50. If they want Bernie, they better get up and go vote for Bernie.

I'm not voting for him in the primary. I get the feeling you want people to coalesce around Bernie right now. Do you? It's too early for that. That really shouldn't happen until mid summer.

[Indepatriot]

53. I want people to vote for whomever they please, without it being implied they are somehow

naive, or uninformed simply because of their age. I very much hope they get out and vote, and become lifetime progressive voters. Regarding the "coalescing", I'd obviously prefer it happens for Sanders, as soon as possible, but believe that healthy, honest debate of the issues will produce a better candidate in the end. No hurry to see that happen.

[ehrnst]

108. One can't control what other people do or do not "imply," or what your impression of "implied" is.

And I don't think that someone making a comment on DU is going to suppress the youth vote. IF someone rolling their eyes on DU is enough for someone in that demographic to refuse to vote, then they weren't that interested in it as a civic responsibility to begin with.

There are actual, real voter suppression efforts going on right now, that are actually really keeping people from voting.

Perhaps the GOP is a more appropriate target for your outrage about people not voting.

Just a thought.

[ChubbyStar]

13. You are right, I am an older single Mom

I have an 18 year old, these kids are independent thinkers, and they are not taking any more shit. My 2 cents from the inner hive.

[cwydro]

20. At 18, just exactly what "shit" have they had to take?

Lol.

[Indepatriot]

27. If you honestly believe an 18-25 year-old doesn't have to take any shit

You must have lived a charmed life. I guarantee there are millions of them who've dealt with more adversity than you have.

[showblue22]

45. Well, they better get up and go vote!

The young people need to get up and vote if they don't want to be disappointed. You're not asking me to vote the way they want me to regardless of what I believe is right are you?

[ChubbyStar]

28. Interesting that you ask

It is kind of like jazz, if you have to have somebody explain it, it is obvious you just don't get it. Have a great night.

[jr1118x]

41. Amy K? Really?

I could maybe see an argument for Warren, but there is no way Amy K is a progressive. She is a moderate candidate in almost every single issue. Healthcare, Education, act. Not saying she is bad she has a great deal of success and she has been very solid but she is not a progressive on most of the key platforms.

[showblue22]

48. I'm not into labels

I don't really understand them. I believe Amy K can move the ball forward and get more people covered under health care than Bernie can. Is that progressive? Getting progress done? I don't think Bernie's ideas can even get out of committee but Amy K... I believe she can get millions covered who are not covered today.

[progressoid]

51. No, getting progress done is not progressive.

The anti-abortion people have been getting legislation done in states across the country. That doesn't make them progressive.

[showblue22]

56. I'm talking about health care

Getting more people covered, lowering the price of drugs etc... I believe Amy can get us further than Bernie.

[calguy]

55. I remember when I was a kid

I would have supported Bernie if he had ran in 1972 when I worked as a volunteer for McGovern. I didn't know it and no one could tell me, I had a lot to learn about the American voter. I was under a spell that the whole country wanted the revolution McGovern was leading. I learned my lesson the hard way when my God sent candidate went down in flames on election night. Nixon won 49 states that night. I've never forgotten that lesson.

[Indepatriot]

61. This is not 1972, Sanders isn't McGovern...

And the Democratic Party is no longer a party that has a large contingent of racists that would support a vile segregationist like George Wallace. Times have changed. And polls show Sanders every bit as strong in the GE as any other Democrat, stronger than most.

[totodeinhere]

5. And DU skews very old so maybe that's why we don't see as much support for Bernie here.

DU does NOT represent today's Democratic Party.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

31. Neither does Bernie.

He's declared war on the Democratic "establishment," which actually represents most Democrats. Especially the ones who vote in large numbers. The kids don't.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

44. Bernie is going to need the support of the so-called "establishment."

It's not such a great idea to shit on all the real Democrats who are supporting other candidates.

[jr1118x]

57. Would they really support him?

They won't support him, have you seen how the party and big names have been on the attack since it looks like he might actually have a chance. The mainstream establishment news has been hit piece after hit piece.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

58. If they don't support him he won't win anything.

[BlueWI]

67. That would be true of all candidates. eom

[Indepatriot]

68. If he is the nominee and they don't support him, they will be responsible for a second Trump term.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

70. He won't be the nominee without the help of the "establishment."

Of course, how a guy who's been an elective official for 40 years or so can claim not to be a member of the establishment himself is kind of puzzling.

[Indepatriot]

73. If he wins the support of the majority of voters, and the DNC still doesn't support him,

they will ensure Trump's second term, and they will have no one to blame but themselves.

[ehrnst]

104. So, both the DNC and the "mainstream establishment news" are "out to get Bernie?"

Because "it looks like he might actually have a chance?"

Why do you think the DNC and "the mainstream establishment media" wouldn't want the actual choice of Democrats to be the nominee?


This makes no sense.

[Indepatriot]

71. If he's speaking untruth's he's shitting on them, if he's truth-telling, it's debate.

Big, big difference.

[BlueWI]

66. Ya think?

Every other news story about the campaign is some party functionary or elected official throwing shade on Sanders.

It's inexcusable, IMO. Let the voters vote, and everyone is needed this time around for this pivotal election.

We're a big tent party until we're not.

[msongs]

34. repeat after me, 75% of voters in Iowa and NH chose NOT bernie lol nt

[totodeinhere]

60. That's what you get with a crowded filed like this. n/t

[Zolorp]

8. No thank you.

No Sanders for me right now. I've had my fill of that stuff.

[krissey]

11. The ones that do not go vote, just make a lot of noise?

[Duppers]

14. THIS ⬆⬆

This is what I tell my 33yo Bernie-supporting son. Do your friends VOTE?
.
.
.
The ones I know, don't.

[MontanaMama]

29. THIS.

I’ll start to take 18-30 year olds seriously when they show up to the polls. I employ folks in this age group...I offer to pay them for the time it takes to vote...all they have to do is put their I Voted sticker on their time card. The can’t be bothered more often than not.

[krissey]

36. But, good for you doing that. I love that idea. Yea you.

[Kurt V.]

52. voter turn out 18 - 29 y.o. up 79% since 2014 in presidential elections.

the electorate is changing.
https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/04/behind-2018-united-states-midterm-election-turnout.html

[jcmaine72]

17. Bernie is a man of the people and a man with a cause.....

Justice and equality for all.

It's not surprising that his message resonates with young people, especially the young people of today who grew up during the Obama years and have seen their nation subsequently slip down a shit-caked sewer pipe under Dotard. The young tend to be more idealistic and community-oriented. Bernie is idealistic and community-oriented. It's a natural fit.

[JudyM]

18. Those faces intently watching him are concerned more than just about their student loans.

They are lined up with a leader who is concerned with fighting corruption and creating meaningful compassionate change.

Someone who’s speaking truth to power, power that has gotten way out of hand.

[Indepatriot]

21. Seems many just can't get behind that kind of commitment

I think it's mostly fear. We've been sold an agenda of cynical lowered expectations for the last 30 years, and many don't actually believe that a government of justice and compassion is possible. Terrible, terrible state of affairs.

[JudyM]

23. Right. Corruption isn't inevitable.

We’re paying their damned salaries while they line their own pockets and slack off the people’s *real* business.

It’d help a lot, too, if congress had the same insider trading restrictions as the rest of the country; it’s unbelievable that they had the gall to exempt themselves.

[ehrnst]

94. Who exactly has "sold us an agenda of cynical lowered expectations for the last 30 years?"

[Uncle Joe]

25. This is a good read.

Thanks for the thread Indepatriot.

[Indepatriot]

33. Your welcome! Esquire is one of the better sources of actual serious journalism these days...

Not that there's a lot of competition...

[Codeine]

38. If they want him they'll turn out

and he will win the nomination, then the rest of us will vote for him. They failed to accomplish this last time. Perhaps they’ll do better this time.

[brooklynite]

47. The kids don't vote in large enough numbers.

[Kurt V.]

54. check this.

https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2019/04/behind-2018-united-states-midterm-election-turnout.html

[NoMoreRepugs]

59. When Sanders says things like we will see a movement, the people

will get behind/force this and that change to happen (I’m obviously paraphrasing here) I have a tremendous disconnect. Too many Americans have practically no attention span and need instant gratification - THEY are going to rise up in a great groundswell and demand/force change? Gotta ask, what planet did that notion come from???

[Indepatriot]

63. Couldn't disagree more. Lack of faith and participation in our political system is what got us

President Trump, and a motivated, engaged electorate is exactly what we need to get us out of this mess.

[betsuni]

65. Couldn't agree more.

[myohmy2]

69. I'm listening...

...and I'm hearing loud and clear...

...BERNIE...

[pnwmom]

77. About half as many people voted for Bernie as last time. They could have stuck with him,

but they picked someone else instead.

It appears that he's already hit his ceiling.

[Indepatriot]

79. He got more votes than any of the 8 other candidates.

In 16 there were 2 candidates on the ballot, I'm not a mathematician, but I do believe that may have had something to do with his smaller winning percentage.

[pnwmom]

81. No, it doesn't explain why so many of his voters preferred someone else this time around.

That didn't happen to Hillary the second time she ran.

There is no mathematical rule that votes need to be evenly divided among candidates. He could have gotten as many votes as last time -- or even more -- and the rest of the votes could have been divided among the large field. Instead, he got about half as many votes in NH as before.

[Indepatriot]

84. To review, in a field of 8, Bernie still got more votes than any other candidate.

He did the same in Iowa.Regarding HRC, she got millions fewer votes than Obama in both the primary and the GE, so I'm not sure she's a helpful example in proving your case. By all means, support the candidate of your choice, but ignoring or minimizing the desires of the future Democrats is surely not a wise long-term strategy.

[pnwmom]

88. So what? He and Biden were by far the most well known. Bernie started off with a big head start

over most of the field -- and yet he had about half the number of voters this time around.

I don't know what relevance the Hillary vs. Obama comparison is supposed to have, but you're wrong. Hillary in 2016 got only about 70K votes fewer nationwide than Obama in the 2012 general -- despite the Supreme Court having dismantled the Voting Rights Act in 2013, which made it much harder for millions to vote.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-election-final-20161209-story.html

Clinton won as many votes as Obama in 2012 ; just not in the states where she needed them most

[ehrnst]

93. ....

[NurseJackie]

91. Older voters are tend to live in the real world and are more realistic...

... about what can actually be accomplished. Mature and sophisticated voters don't fall for empty promises and impossible pie-in-the-sky, lollipops-and-unicorns, sunshine-and-rainbows political theater. Wise voters can easily recognize shameless populism and cynical demagoguery for what it is: a political leader who seeks support by appealing to the desires and prejudices of ordinary people rather than by using rational argument, and rather than having well-thought-out, sustainable, and clearly financed plans.

[Indepatriot]

97. Ever wonder where that whole"OK Boomer" thing started?

Ignore and demean the future of the Democratic Party at our peril. Promote yourself and those who agree with you as somehow more "sophisticated and mature".... Remember MLKs moving words about "the fierce urgency of no."? My bad...it was of course "The fierce urgency of NOW" P.S. Bernie won N.H. and Iowa despite less than stellar youth turnout, I guess not everyone over 30 is as sophisticated as you'd like...

[NurseJackie]

101. We are. There's no shame in being realistic and being willing to compromise...

Ignore and demean the future of the Democratic Party at our peril.

Oh brother!

Promote yourself and those who agree with you as somehow more "sophisticated and mature"

We are. There's no shame in being realistic and being willing to compromise... and being willing to find common ground. Why is it a "peril" to have a better understanding of how government works and to be realistic? What's "demeaning" about being able to tell the truth about funding? Smart people know that politicians can't just snap their fingers and make things magically appear.

It take compromise. That's where progress comes from. Even if it's (horrors) "incremental", it's still progress, no? In contrast, the empty and unrealistic promises that GO NOWHERE aren't progress. It's just pie-in-the-sky. It's a big fat NOTHING. Also in contrast, it's really NOT a "virtue" to refuse to compromise. While it may give young egos a boost when some of them boast and brag about holding-the-line and not-giving-an-inch and never compromising... what exactly are they "proud" of? Coming home with NOTHING? Why is that a something to celebrate? How about coming home with half-a-loaf? Or even a slice of bread would be better than NOTHING!

P.S. Bernie won N.H. and Iowa

No he didn't. Stop it. Who has more delegates?

The real story is how much BS struggled in two states with specific ethnic demographics that are tailor-made to favor his message. It should have been a landslide, but instead it was a "squeaker". Oops.

Beyond those two states, it will be an eye-opening experience for the BS campaign. Stand by.

[Indepatriot]

100. MLK on the futility of incrementalism...

Martin Luther King Jr. on Incrementalism
I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.

In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. But is this a logical assertion? Isn't this like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn't this like condemning Socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided populace in which they made him drink hemlock? Isn't this like condemning Jesus because his unique God consciousness and never ceasing devotion to God's will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must come to see that, as the federal courts have consistently affirmed, it is wrong to urge an individual to cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber. I had also hoped that the white moderate would reject the myth concerning time in relation to the struggle for freedom. I have just received a letter from a white brother in Texas. He writes: "All Christians know that the colored people will receive equal rights eventually, but it is possible that you are in too great a religious hurry. It has taken Christianity almost two thousand years to accomplish what it has. The teachings of Christ take time to come to earth." Such an attitude stems from a tragic misconception of time, from the strangely irrational notion that there is something in the very flow of time that will inevitably cure all ills. Actually, time itself is neutral; it can be used either destructively or constructively. More and more I feel that the people of ill will have used time much more effectively than have the people of good will. We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right. Now is the time to make real the promise of democracy and transform our pending national elegy into a creative psalm of brotherhood. Now is the time to lift our national policy from the quicksand of racial injustice to the solid rock of human dignity.

-MLK

[NurseJackie]

102. Better to compromise and accept half a loaf than to starve ourselves for the sake of vanity & pride.

[Indepatriot]

103. So, changing a corrupt system to make it work for the working class is "vanity and pride"....OK...

And tell me? How has that whole "half a loaf" thin worked out for us so far? Oh, yeah President Trump.

[NurseJackie]

105. That's not what I said, and you know it.

So, changing a corrupt system to make it work for the working class is "vanity and pride"....OK...

That's not what I said, and you know it.

And tell me? How has that whole "half a loaf" thin worked out for us so far?

It's getting us closer to our goals whenever we're able to find common ground. Better than standing still for the sake of vanity and pride. That's the very OPPOSITE of progress. Even small increment progress is still PROGRESS. But boastfully standing still out of stubbornness and an unwillingness to find common ground for the common good... well, that's just maintaining the STATUS QUO!

What good purpose does it serve to maintain the status quo? Stubbornness isn't progress. It's just standing still.

Better to have half a loaf than to starve the most vulnerable among us while waiting for the "perfect" to come along. Better to accept reality and work hard than to believe in fairy tales and empty (unfunded) promises.

[Indepatriot]

107. That is EXACTLY what you said.

Wrapping it in a bow doesn't make the stench any less obvious, even to an unsophisticated voter like me. Thanks for the enlightening discussion.

[NurseJackie]

109. No it's not, and you know it.

That is EXACTLY what you said.

No it's not, and you know it.

Wrapping it in a bow doesn't make the stench any less obvious

Some voters have as much difficulty in accepting the truth as they do in being able to accept the reality that nothing meaningful happens unless we're willing to compromise and find common ground.

even to an unsophisticated voter like me.

Well, I'm not in a position to make that call, but I'll take you at your word.

Thanks for the enlightening discussion.

You're very welcome. I'm glad it was helpful.

[NurseJackie]

113. Oh my! Gone already? Okay, well... see ya!

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

95. Since when did kids get to vote?

Only time that happens is when the 17 year olds get to vote in primaries because they'll be 18 prior to the November general election, which is the case for my son this year. He was not interested in Sanders other than he though he was kind of funny when we watched the last debate. Sanders is pretty funny. I also absolutely love Larry David's spot on impression of Sanders on SNL. It's the best.

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

96. I "think" I am a bit old to be condescendingly called a "kid",

but maybe not. I don't have any grandchildren yet after all. I'm 40 years out of the womb.

Sanders ranks dead last for me because

1. He refuses to register as a Democrat He will not be good leader of our party if he can't even register as a Democrat.
2. I didn't like him in the last election. He gave Hillary Clinton a hard time. He should have given up sooner, but refused to do so. That hurt the Hillary and the Democratic party.
3. I think he is too old. He looks as old as the hills and he recently had a heart attack.
4. I don't care for his attitude overall. He comes across as rather abrasive. He's got the grumpy old man type attitude. I know he cares about other people, but it doesn't come across in the way he communicates. He's not good at showing empathy and hopefulness, IMO. He cares, but he kind acts like "FU" if you don't get completely on broad with him. He's just not someone I think will be good at doing the hard work of trying to unite this country.
5. I do like the idea of health care for all, but I don't think this country is currently at a place where we can implement that. We've got too many social problems to deal with right now. We need to handle the forces in the Republican party that are dragging us toward authoritarianism. Our government is in such disarray right now. I feel like priority number 1 is to recover from that. Health care for all is a big promise that he's not going to be able to deliver on with all those Republicans in office. Promise something smaller than that. We need to take steps in that direction to get people on board. I think the focus should be on protecting and enhancing Obamacare. Stop promising the moon.
6. It's just not smart to apply the word "socialist" to yourself if you are running for office in this country. It's nice that he is trying to take back that word, but it is more important to win against Trump right now than it is to get Americans cool with socialism.

[HarlanPepper]

98. Meh...zero life experience.

I thought I had all the answers 20 years ago, too. Bless their hearts.

[Fresh_Start]

99. no, people should use their brains when the vote

people should do their research when they vote
people should try to analyze the likelihood of candidates goals becoming reality

the last thing people should do is listen to other people who haven't done any factchecking or research

[SharonClark]

106. Bingo

[OliverQ]

114. No Centrist has won the General Election in the 21st Century.

Something to keep in mind.