Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Catherina
Catherina's Journal
Catherina's Journal
November 8, 2015
The Atlantic: Don't Underestimate Bernie's Brand
Don't Underestimate Bernie's Brand
Sanders displays the classic strengths of new entrants taking on dominant players—and the world of marketing sheds light on his path to success.
Nigel Hollis 8:01 AM ET
Like many new and different brands, Bernie Sanders has a message that resonates with supporters. But just as big brand managers make the mistake of dismissing new competition, the media has discounted Sanders’s chances of nomination. Indoctrinated by years of “business as usual” both groups assume that history will repeat itself; they assume that the frontrunner has the upper hand; they assume that the parameters of success are fixed and what has worked in the past will work in the future. The real challenge when forecasting future success—for brands or politicians—is to test existing assumptions, not simply to accept them at face value.
Detractors of Sanders’s campaign often write off his early popularity by contending that his supporters are little more than a grumbling and ultimately powerless economic minority. This group, according to critics, may make a lot of noise in the beginning, but it has neither the staying power nor the voter turnout to truly impact an election. But Sanders’s early success is far more indicative of a serious disillusionment with the American Dream and a discredited political mainstream. The cultural and economic context does not merely allow for Sanders’s popularity; rather; it gives grounds to his resonance.
Sanders’s message of economic and social fairness is resonating with Americans in exactly the same way that many successful brands do—by addressing societal tensions. Sanders, for example, tapped into a public that felt trapped after the Great Recession. Similarly, Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty succeeded by addressing the idealized portrayal of female beauty in popular culture that many women found unobtainable and demeaning. IBM has found success with its promise of making the world a Smarter Planet through technology, and Chipotle is appealing to those who may not agree with the practices of big agriculture.
On a recent NPR segment, David Brooks of The New York Times questioned why Sanders did not challenge Hillary Clinton during the Democratic debate if he truly wanted to be president, suggesting that he had raised the white flag of surrender by not using Clinton’s email controversy against her. His statement reflects a mindset indoctrinated by decades of increasingly aggressive political debate. But Americans are looking for a president who has a clear sense of purpose—an ideology, if you will—rather than one who merely indulges in character assassination to win power. Sanders’s message and tone are so different that they simply do not compute for pundits—but they resonate with voters.
...
The media is flummoxed by the forces that are fueling Sanders’s widespread and growing support simply because it cannot see that it is not business as usual, just as executives at Nokia wrote off the threat of the iPhone by seizing on its apparent weaknesses and ignoring its inherent appeal.
The evidence suggests that, like other successful brands, Sanders has already built up a loyal following. Now, Sanders’s big challenge is to take his message and make it meaningful and salient to as many voters as possible. It’s a difficult task, but it may not be as insurmountable as the media would have us believe.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/what-marketing-trends-say-about-bernie-sanderss-success/413959/
Sanders displays the classic strengths of new entrants taking on dominant players—and the world of marketing sheds light on his path to success.
Nigel Hollis 8:01 AM ET
Like many new and different brands, Bernie Sanders has a message that resonates with supporters. But just as big brand managers make the mistake of dismissing new competition, the media has discounted Sanders’s chances of nomination. Indoctrinated by years of “business as usual” both groups assume that history will repeat itself; they assume that the frontrunner has the upper hand; they assume that the parameters of success are fixed and what has worked in the past will work in the future. The real challenge when forecasting future success—for brands or politicians—is to test existing assumptions, not simply to accept them at face value.
Detractors of Sanders’s campaign often write off his early popularity by contending that his supporters are little more than a grumbling and ultimately powerless economic minority. This group, according to critics, may make a lot of noise in the beginning, but it has neither the staying power nor the voter turnout to truly impact an election. But Sanders’s early success is far more indicative of a serious disillusionment with the American Dream and a discredited political mainstream. The cultural and economic context does not merely allow for Sanders’s popularity; rather; it gives grounds to his resonance.
Sanders’s message of economic and social fairness is resonating with Americans in exactly the same way that many successful brands do—by addressing societal tensions. Sanders, for example, tapped into a public that felt trapped after the Great Recession. Similarly, Dove’s Campaign for Real Beauty succeeded by addressing the idealized portrayal of female beauty in popular culture that many women found unobtainable and demeaning. IBM has found success with its promise of making the world a Smarter Planet through technology, and Chipotle is appealing to those who may not agree with the practices of big agriculture.
On a recent NPR segment, David Brooks of The New York Times questioned why Sanders did not challenge Hillary Clinton during the Democratic debate if he truly wanted to be president, suggesting that he had raised the white flag of surrender by not using Clinton’s email controversy against her. His statement reflects a mindset indoctrinated by decades of increasingly aggressive political debate. But Americans are looking for a president who has a clear sense of purpose—an ideology, if you will—rather than one who merely indulges in character assassination to win power. Sanders’s message and tone are so different that they simply do not compute for pundits—but they resonate with voters.
...
The media is flummoxed by the forces that are fueling Sanders’s widespread and growing support simply because it cannot see that it is not business as usual, just as executives at Nokia wrote off the threat of the iPhone by seizing on its apparent weaknesses and ignoring its inherent appeal.
The evidence suggests that, like other successful brands, Sanders has already built up a loyal following. Now, Sanders’s big challenge is to take his message and make it meaningful and salient to as many voters as possible. It’s a difficult task, but it may not be as insurmountable as the media would have us believe.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/what-marketing-trends-say-about-bernie-sanderss-success/413959/
November 8, 2015
Direct link to the poll: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/poll-hillary-2016#56789
A New MSNBC Poll Shows Hillary Clinton Isn’t So Popular- And This Is Why (Video)
A New MSNBC Poll Shows Hillary Clinton Isn’t So Popular- And This Is Why (Video)
November 7, 2015
An independent poll created on MSNBC’s website, showed that Hillary Clinton may not have the support of voters that she will need to beat Bernie Sanders.
Dan Berger created a user poll that asked “Do you plan on voting for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016?”
So far 123,000 people have cast their votes, and it’s looking pretty grim for Hillary.
Of the 123,000, only 16,000 have said they do plan to vote for Hillary in 2016, and about 3,000 said they were still undecided.
An overwhelming amount of the people polled, 104,000 to be exact, said they were not voting for Hillary.
Can you really blame them though?
...
http://aattp.org/a-new-msnbc-poll-shows-hillary-clinton-isnt-so-popular-and-this-is-why-video/
November 7, 2015
An independent poll created on MSNBC’s website, showed that Hillary Clinton may not have the support of voters that she will need to beat Bernie Sanders.
Dan Berger created a user poll that asked “Do you plan on voting for Hillary Clinton for president in 2016?”
So far 123,000 people have cast their votes, and it’s looking pretty grim for Hillary.
Of the 123,000, only 16,000 have said they do plan to vote for Hillary in 2016, and about 3,000 said they were still undecided.
An overwhelming amount of the people polled, 104,000 to be exact, said they were not voting for Hillary.
Can you really blame them though?
...
http://aattp.org/a-new-msnbc-poll-shows-hillary-clinton-isnt-so-popular-and-this-is-why-video/
Direct link to the poll: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/poll-hillary-2016#56789
November 8, 2015
I loved Bernie even more when I read that quote.
Every day :( Exactly what you wrote
I go through life that way, everytime I see a hungry kid, a homeless person, a starving dog. It's torture. You can't fix it all and get to a point sometimes where you just don't want to SEE it for just a few moments, just a brief respite from feeling powerless even though you're trying your hardest.
You can't unsee what you've seen. You can't be one of those people MLK called small-hearted men who are cold and conscienceless, unmoved by suffering, poverty-stricken humanity.
"...capitalism has often left a gulf between superfluous wealth and abject poverty, has created conditions permitting necessities to be taken from the many to give luxuries to the few, and has encouraged small-hearted men to become cold and conscienceless so that, like Dives before Lazarus, they are unmoved by suffering, poverty-stricken humanity."
—Martin Luther King
—Martin Luther King
I loved Bernie even more when I read that quote.
November 8, 2015
My transcript below with thanks to RufusTFirefly for a discrete PM correcting my typos.
Thank you. Pat Peterson who was just speaking has thanked many many people but as usual she forgot to thank herself and Pat in fact has done the bulk of the work in the sister city relationship.
There are times that one wishes one was smarter than one is so that when one looks out at the world and sees the problems one wishes one knew the answers and I don't know the answers. I think sometimes one wishes one was dumber than one is so one doesn't have to look out into the world and see the pain that's out there and the horrible situations that are out there, and not know what to do.
I think what I would want to start off with tonight by saying is that really what is going on in terms of the United States' relationship to Nicaragua of course has nothing to do with Nicaragua. The nature of the conflict that now exists is based on the fact that for the last 150 years or so the United States government in its wisdom has decided that Latin America should be a colony of the United States government and that countries which attempt to stand up and do things for their own people rather than for American corporations are not to be tolerated.
What's going on in Nicaragua, it's not important to get into all the details of whether the Sandinistas are right or wrong on this issue. If we understand that in the last 30 years the United States has overthrown governments in Guatemala, Dominican Republic, they murdered Salvador Allende in Chile. They've overthrown the government of Grenada. They attempted to overthrow the government of Cuba. They overthrew a government in Brazil. And now they're attempting to overthrow the government of Nicaragua.
I think, all of you know that I am no great supporter of the President of the United States, I think one thing that we can say for him is that he's an honest and straightforward man. What he has said to Daniel Ortega and the people of Nicaragua- he's not gotten involved in these wishy washy terms of liberalism or international law, he's been quite upfront about it- and he said before the people of the world that "If you wish to survive as a nation, you can. All that you have to do is get down on your hands and knees and say uncle. That's all."
That's an interesting principle of international relations.
What he has said is that we in the United States are strong and powerful and we can destroy you anytime we want, and all you have to do is get down on your hands and knees or we will send in Rambo and Sylvester Stallone.
The basic crime being committed by the people of Nicaragua today is that the government there has the strange and unusual idea that they should attempt to do something for the people of Nicaragua rather than for the United States' corporations. It's a very strange idea for the independent nation to have. And if the history of the United States' relationship to Latin America for the last 50 years, which is:
Somoza- Yes. Ortega - No.
Batista - Yes. Castro - No.
Pinochet - mass murderer, torturer destroyer of democracy - Yes.
Loans, military money - Yes.
Salvador Allende, democratically elected by the people of Chile, his political party gaining in strength - No. Overthrown by the CIA and murdered. And 30,000 40,000 Chileans killed. Yes Pinochet.
When I was a kid going to school and I'm sure all of you had the same experience, we learned something about American History. And I think many of us are very proud to be Americans- many fantastic things, there's a boldness in this country, there's an energy in this country that doesn't exist elsewhere in the world. But what we didn't learn I think and what we are not proud of and I think what we do not intend to accept is that a relationship can be based on brute bully strength and we are not prepared to accept this nation dominating poor nations and weak nations which are trying to do decent things for their people.
I think if the Sister City relationship means anything, and it means a great deal to me and I know it means a great deal to you, it means that we believe that human beings on a face-to-face level are able to communicate with each other, are able to work out problems based on mutual respect, and that as Americans what we want of our nation, we want our nation to be brave and bold but not with guns and not with machine guns and not with napalm.
I personally, really, am not all that impressed by President Reagan's tough warlike rhetoric. If he wants to do something that's really gutsy and that's really brave, for a guy who does so well on the television, a master of the media- what I would do is challenge him to sit down before the television cameras of the entire world and sit down and talk to Ortega and the other people in Nicaragua and work out the problems based on mutual respect. Does he have the guts to do that? And I'm not sure that he does. I'm not sure that he has the answers to the sharp questions and the challenges the people throughout the Third World would be throwing at him.
You know, we live in a world today, and it really is depressing to think about it, we live in a world today where there are several hundred million people starving to death, they're starving to death right now. We live in a world where my guess is that between all the superpowers and the other nations of the world, close to one trillion dollars are being spent every single year on weapons, on more and more nuclear bombs, on the most sophisticated nerve gases which can wipe people out and paralyze them. And yet with all the brilliance and all the fine technology and all the robots and the great medical research that they do up there in the hospitals, civilization hasn't advanced one bloody iota for the last thousands of years. All that these people can do is still say to each "we're strong, you're weak, you do it our way or we're going to kill you". A very profound, civilized remark.
I think what we're here for today is to show President Reagan and many people who don't have the courage that we have, because what goes on in this country primarily through the television and through the media is that over and over again all that the President of the United States has to say is that Nicaragua is communist, Nicaragua is Marxist-Leninist, and now the new thing is Nicaragua is terrorist. And if you say it over a hundred times it now becomes truthful and then suddenly you see the professional politicians getting less and less bold in saying that maybe the President is wrong. Because you know appealing to people's hatred and their anger and their desire for revenge is very good politics. The truth of the matter is it has always worked and it's probably working today.
And you're going to find many college teachers a little bit less likely to speak out against it. Social workers a little bit less likely to speak out against the imperialism that now goes on. And I think what our task is, here in Burlington Vermont, and in the other communities that have sister-city relations, is to say that we're not afraid of that and that we reject that mentality... that what the real challenge of civilization today is and the challenge of the United States, and it's an enormous challenge and it's a difficult challenge and no one has any easy answers. But the real challenge is, in a world that is economically disintegrating , the conditions in the Third World today are as bad as they have ever ever been, and the challenges, the challenge for tough people (since) Mr Reagan thinks he's tough... the challenge for a tough person and for a tough society is how do we use our resources, our incredible wealth, our energy - not in military adventurism, but in working with people throughout the entire Third World, working with the people in Nicaragua in cooperation and in mutual respect, working with them so that children don't have to starve to death, don't have to die of diseases which these people up there on the hill, in our hospital, know the answers to... where people can learn to read and write, can learn to relate to each other. That's the challenge that we face. And the guns, and the bombs and the Contras are going in exactly the wrong direction.
What the Sister City program is to me is a human way to say to the people of Nicaragua, we're concerned about your problems, we respect you as human beings and we want to work with you cooperatively to build a decent world.
Thank you.
So happy to rec your OP with its great picture!
Another great Bernie quote to go with your exellent OP
"There are times that one wishes one was smarter than one is so that when one looks out at the world and sees the problems one wishes one knew the answers and I don't know the answers. I think sometimes one wishes one was dumber than one is so one doesn't have to look out into the world and see the pain that's out there and the horrible situations that are out there, and not know what to do"
Taken from a talk after making Puerto Cabeza a Sister City in solidarity
My transcript below with thanks to RufusTFirefly for a discrete PM correcting my typos.
Thank you. Pat Peterson who was just speaking has thanked many many people but as usual she forgot to thank herself and Pat in fact has done the bulk of the work in the sister city relationship.
There are times that one wishes one was smarter than one is so that when one looks out at the world and sees the problems one wishes one knew the answers and I don't know the answers. I think sometimes one wishes one was dumber than one is so one doesn't have to look out into the world and see the pain that's out there and the horrible situations that are out there, and not know what to do.
I think what I would want to start off with tonight by saying is that really what is going on in terms of the United States' relationship to Nicaragua of course has nothing to do with Nicaragua. The nature of the conflict that now exists is based on the fact that for the last 150 years or so the United States government in its wisdom has decided that Latin America should be a colony of the United States government and that countries which attempt to stand up and do things for their own people rather than for American corporations are not to be tolerated.
What's going on in Nicaragua, it's not important to get into all the details of whether the Sandinistas are right or wrong on this issue. If we understand that in the last 30 years the United States has overthrown governments in Guatemala, Dominican Republic, they murdered Salvador Allende in Chile. They've overthrown the government of Grenada. They attempted to overthrow the government of Cuba. They overthrew a government in Brazil. And now they're attempting to overthrow the government of Nicaragua.
I think, all of you know that I am no great supporter of the President of the United States, I think one thing that we can say for him is that he's an honest and straightforward man. What he has said to Daniel Ortega and the people of Nicaragua- he's not gotten involved in these wishy washy terms of liberalism or international law, he's been quite upfront about it- and he said before the people of the world that "If you wish to survive as a nation, you can. All that you have to do is get down on your hands and knees and say uncle. That's all."
That's an interesting principle of international relations.
What he has said is that we in the United States are strong and powerful and we can destroy you anytime we want, and all you have to do is get down on your hands and knees or we will send in Rambo and Sylvester Stallone.
The basic crime being committed by the people of Nicaragua today is that the government there has the strange and unusual idea that they should attempt to do something for the people of Nicaragua rather than for the United States' corporations. It's a very strange idea for the independent nation to have. And if the history of the United States' relationship to Latin America for the last 50 years, which is:
Somoza- Yes. Ortega - No.
Batista - Yes. Castro - No.
Pinochet - mass murderer, torturer destroyer of democracy - Yes.
Loans, military money - Yes.
Salvador Allende, democratically elected by the people of Chile, his political party gaining in strength - No. Overthrown by the CIA and murdered. And 30,000 40,000 Chileans killed. Yes Pinochet.
When I was a kid going to school and I'm sure all of you had the same experience, we learned something about American History. And I think many of us are very proud to be Americans- many fantastic things, there's a boldness in this country, there's an energy in this country that doesn't exist elsewhere in the world. But what we didn't learn I think and what we are not proud of and I think what we do not intend to accept is that a relationship can be based on brute bully strength and we are not prepared to accept this nation dominating poor nations and weak nations which are trying to do decent things for their people.
I think if the Sister City relationship means anything, and it means a great deal to me and I know it means a great deal to you, it means that we believe that human beings on a face-to-face level are able to communicate with each other, are able to work out problems based on mutual respect, and that as Americans what we want of our nation, we want our nation to be brave and bold but not with guns and not with machine guns and not with napalm.
I personally, really, am not all that impressed by President Reagan's tough warlike rhetoric. If he wants to do something that's really gutsy and that's really brave, for a guy who does so well on the television, a master of the media- what I would do is challenge him to sit down before the television cameras of the entire world and sit down and talk to Ortega and the other people in Nicaragua and work out the problems based on mutual respect. Does he have the guts to do that? And I'm not sure that he does. I'm not sure that he has the answers to the sharp questions and the challenges the people throughout the Third World would be throwing at him.
You know, we live in a world today, and it really is depressing to think about it, we live in a world today where there are several hundred million people starving to death, they're starving to death right now. We live in a world where my guess is that between all the superpowers and the other nations of the world, close to one trillion dollars are being spent every single year on weapons, on more and more nuclear bombs, on the most sophisticated nerve gases which can wipe people out and paralyze them. And yet with all the brilliance and all the fine technology and all the robots and the great medical research that they do up there in the hospitals, civilization hasn't advanced one bloody iota for the last thousands of years. All that these people can do is still say to each "we're strong, you're weak, you do it our way or we're going to kill you". A very profound, civilized remark.
I think what we're here for today is to show President Reagan and many people who don't have the courage that we have, because what goes on in this country primarily through the television and through the media is that over and over again all that the President of the United States has to say is that Nicaragua is communist, Nicaragua is Marxist-Leninist, and now the new thing is Nicaragua is terrorist. And if you say it over a hundred times it now becomes truthful and then suddenly you see the professional politicians getting less and less bold in saying that maybe the President is wrong. Because you know appealing to people's hatred and their anger and their desire for revenge is very good politics. The truth of the matter is it has always worked and it's probably working today.
And you're going to find many college teachers a little bit less likely to speak out against it. Social workers a little bit less likely to speak out against the imperialism that now goes on. And I think what our task is, here in Burlington Vermont, and in the other communities that have sister-city relations, is to say that we're not afraid of that and that we reject that mentality... that what the real challenge of civilization today is and the challenge of the United States, and it's an enormous challenge and it's a difficult challenge and no one has any easy answers. But the real challenge is, in a world that is economically disintegrating , the conditions in the Third World today are as bad as they have ever ever been, and the challenges, the challenge for tough people (since) Mr Reagan thinks he's tough... the challenge for a tough person and for a tough society is how do we use our resources, our incredible wealth, our energy - not in military adventurism, but in working with people throughout the entire Third World, working with the people in Nicaragua in cooperation and in mutual respect, working with them so that children don't have to starve to death, don't have to die of diseases which these people up there on the hill, in our hospital, know the answers to... where people can learn to read and write, can learn to relate to each other. That's the challenge that we face. And the guns, and the bombs and the Contras are going in exactly the wrong direction.
What the Sister City program is to me is a human way to say to the people of Nicaragua, we're concerned about your problems, we respect you as human beings and we want to work with you cooperatively to build a decent world.
Thank you.
So happy to rec your OP with its great picture!
November 8, 2015
Lol! That's the first thing that came to mind, along with this video
which came across my feed last night along with a shitload of tweets and videos from Black people mocking Hillary and reminding everyone of her dishonest, racist campaign in 2008
Bougie Black Girl @BougieBlackGurl
I'll never forget this from Hillary "Shame on You, Barack Obama"
6:30 AM - 7 Nov 2015
https://twitter.com/BougieBlackGurl/status/663000613886828544
I'll never forget this from Hillary "Shame on You, Barack Obama"
6:30 AM - 7 Nov 2015
https://twitter.com/BougieBlackGurl/status/663000613886828544
November 8, 2015
Personally I thank my alerter for reviving a sinking thread.
I posted it late at night and their alert not only saved me the trouble of kicking it but brought the OP to the attention of some jury members who wouldn't have seen it otherwise.
I don't think any day is a happy day in Hillary land, too much victimhood.
November 8, 2015
I fully expected it but was expecting a more refined complaint
Thanks to a good jury and thanks to you for sharing this. It made my first laugh of the day.
"opening advocating for posters to join MIRT to try and manipulate the process to advocate against the supporters of one candidate instead of dealing with trolls as is appropriate."
Wow. The dishonesty in alerts is getting thick.
November 8, 2015
This video is totally puke-worthy
O'Malley likens that huge Apartheid Wall a "Peace Wall". That's revolting
You know, there's 2-state and then there's 2-state. Saying someone supports a 2-state solution is not enough because officially they all do. Please note I didn't give Sanders a passing grade on this either.
Israeli separation barrier might be called "peace wall"
Governor O'Malley, 50, said it was his third visit to Israel, and that he had brought with him about 50 high-tech executives, Jewish leaders, and Maryland officials for what is essentially a trade mission. After a side trip to Jordan in which he met with Prince Faisal--"What we spoke about was the huge challenge that the ongoing conflict in Syria has for the entire region"--much of his itinerary here is filled with companies that have offices in his home state, including one that makes radar for the vaunted Iron Dome missile defense system.
A reporter pointed out that on his way into Bethlehem, he would see the controversial separation barrier Israel has erected in the West Bank. O'Malley said he had seen something similar in Northern Ireland. "They call it the peace wall," he noted.
Source: N.Y.Times on 2014 Maryland gubernatorial race , Apr 24, 2013
http://www.ontheissues.org/Governor/Martin_O%60Malley_Foreign_Policy.htm
Governor O'Malley, 50, said it was his third visit to Israel, and that he had brought with him about 50 high-tech executives, Jewish leaders, and Maryland officials for what is essentially a trade mission. After a side trip to Jordan in which he met with Prince Faisal--"What we spoke about was the huge challenge that the ongoing conflict in Syria has for the entire region"--much of his itinerary here is filled with companies that have offices in his home state, including one that makes radar for the vaunted Iron Dome missile defense system.
A reporter pointed out that on his way into Bethlehem, he would see the controversial separation barrier Israel has erected in the West Bank. O'Malley said he had seen something similar in Northern Ireland. "They call it the peace wall," he noted.
Source: N.Y.Times on 2014 Maryland gubernatorial race , Apr 24, 2013
http://www.ontheissues.org/Governor/Martin_O%60Malley_Foreign_Policy.htm
This video is totally puke-worthy
November 8, 2015
A search of the Congressional Record reveals very few statements about Israel by Sanders on the floor of the House or the Senate. In 2002, during the debate over the resolution that authorized President George W. Bush to use military force in Iraq, Sanders, then a House member, asked whether an invasion of Iraq would worsen the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. ...
...
Pro-Israel lobbyists have been among those to find Sanders elusive. “He’s someone who’s sort of avoided everyone,” said Ben Chouake, who leads the hawkish pro-Israel group NORPAC. “He’s one of the few offices that, when we try to get an appointment to come talk to him, we just can’t get in… I don’t think he’s antagonistic or anything like that.”
In Vermont, a small group of AIPAC-linked Jewish activists do have Sanders’ ear on Israel-related matters. Yoram Samets, a Burlington businessman and a member of AIPAC’s national council, said that he has been in touch with Sanders for the past decade, but that Sanders does not sign any AIPAC-backed letters. His Vermont colleague Senator Patrick Leahy does not, either.
This relative silence on Israel-related issues, however, seems to have broken during and after the 2014 Gaza conflict, during which 72 Israelis and over 2,100 Palestinians were killed, the majority of them civilians. In an undated statement on his Senate website, Sanders decried “the Israeli attacks that killed hundreds of innocent people – including many women and children,” calling the bombings “disproportionate” and “completely unacceptable.”
In mid-July 2014, Sanders was one of just 21 Senators not to co-sponsor a resolution expressing support for Israel in the conflict with Hamas. The resolution passed on July 17 by unanimous consent, meaning that no roll call vote was taken on the measure.
...
Months after the conflict, in February 2015, Sanders was the first Senator to announce that he would skip Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to a joint session of Congress. ...
...
Sanders did not respond to multiple requests for an interview made through his presidential campaign, nor to a specific request for comment on whether the 2014 Gaza conflict had constituted a turning point in his thinking.
...
For some critics of Israeli policy, though, recent months have raised hopes of a shift for Sanders on Israel. “We’re encouraged by some of what he said during the (2014 Gaza) war,” said Rabbi Joseph Berman, government affairs liaison for Jewish Voice for Peace. “We hope that his work for justice, and bravery to speak out on other issues, will be increasingly reflected in how he speaks about Israel and Palestine.”
...
http://forward.com/news/national/310087/is-bernie-sanders-a-lefty-except-for-israel/
Actually, here is his brother's full tweet:
I think the following is important to know
Bernie's position on Palestine is nothing to crow about however it's miles better than the others. Add to that that Bernie's positions are sincere and not some re-hashing of the status quo. His position on Palestine is why Cornel West took so long to endorse him, why supporters like me hesitated and why others on the Leftist like Chris Hedges refuse to.
One thing Bernie has going for him is that he advocated the 2-state solution before it was fashionable, doesn't have a tight relationship with AIPAC and is the only one running who's called for lifting the blockade on Gaza and has long supported full economic and political rights for Palestine (the others have certainly NOT supported a functioning Palestinian state).
Frankly, I find his position in Israel/Palestine slippery and hope more Pro-Palestinian activists confront him on it but in the current climate of US politics, it's near impossible to find better than a D+ which is the grade I give Bernie on this, based on the homework he turned in and not what I'd like to read into it.
Selective editing follows
Sanders was one of just 21 senators that did not co-sponsor a resolution last year expressing support for Israel to defend itself from “unprovoked” attacks.
“He refused to attend Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress opposing the Iran deal earlier this year,” Samirah added, “and he has called for Israel to end its blockade of Gaza and to stop settlement development on Palestinian land.”
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2015/10/07/the-reason-pro-palestine-boston-students-picked-bernie-sanders-rally-make-statement/DZfCDfcTauIHJKzZrdsw7N/story.html
“He refused to attend Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress opposing the Iran deal earlier this year,” Samirah added, “and he has called for Israel to end its blockade of Gaza and to stop settlement development on Palestinian land.”
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/2015/10/07/the-reason-pro-palestine-boston-students-picked-bernie-sanders-rally-make-statement/DZfCDfcTauIHJKzZrdsw7N/story.html
A search of the Congressional Record reveals very few statements about Israel by Sanders on the floor of the House or the Senate. In 2002, during the debate over the resolution that authorized President George W. Bush to use military force in Iraq, Sanders, then a House member, asked whether an invasion of Iraq would worsen the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. ...
...
Pro-Israel lobbyists have been among those to find Sanders elusive. “He’s someone who’s sort of avoided everyone,” said Ben Chouake, who leads the hawkish pro-Israel group NORPAC. “He’s one of the few offices that, when we try to get an appointment to come talk to him, we just can’t get in… I don’t think he’s antagonistic or anything like that.”
In Vermont, a small group of AIPAC-linked Jewish activists do have Sanders’ ear on Israel-related matters. Yoram Samets, a Burlington businessman and a member of AIPAC’s national council, said that he has been in touch with Sanders for the past decade, but that Sanders does not sign any AIPAC-backed letters. His Vermont colleague Senator Patrick Leahy does not, either.
This relative silence on Israel-related issues, however, seems to have broken during and after the 2014 Gaza conflict, during which 72 Israelis and over 2,100 Palestinians were killed, the majority of them civilians. In an undated statement on his Senate website, Sanders decried “the Israeli attacks that killed hundreds of innocent people – including many women and children,” calling the bombings “disproportionate” and “completely unacceptable.”
In mid-July 2014, Sanders was one of just 21 Senators not to co-sponsor a resolution expressing support for Israel in the conflict with Hamas. The resolution passed on July 17 by unanimous consent, meaning that no roll call vote was taken on the measure.
...
Months after the conflict, in February 2015, Sanders was the first Senator to announce that he would skip Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to a joint session of Congress. ...
...
Sanders did not respond to multiple requests for an interview made through his presidential campaign, nor to a specific request for comment on whether the 2014 Gaza conflict had constituted a turning point in his thinking.
...
For some critics of Israeli policy, though, recent months have raised hopes of a shift for Sanders on Israel. “We’re encouraged by some of what he said during the (2014 Gaza) war,” said Rabbi Joseph Berman, government affairs liaison for Jewish Voice for Peace. “We hope that his work for justice, and bravery to speak out on other issues, will be increasingly reflected in how he speaks about Israel and Palestine.”
...
http://forward.com/news/national/310087/is-bernie-sanders-a-lefty-except-for-israel/
“Palestinians are entitled to a state of their own, and the United States should do what it can to make sure that state has a strong economy. Israel is entitled to live in security, not be attacked. Those are the two guiding principles that I will work for.”
But as Sanders is growing in the polls, so is pressure being increased by progressives and pro-justice groups on the insurgent candidate to adopt a more left-wing approach to Israel and be more vocal about his policy views. He was recently compared to the newly elected UK Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, who has openly supported the BDS movement and is known for his anti-Israel stance.
His brother Larry, who lives in England, revealed in a tweet a few months ago that he supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. “that Israel end occupation of West Bank, siege of Gaza, Palestinians in Israel equal rights. Netanyahu obstacle to peace. BDS yes,” Larry Sanders tweeted on April 20, 2015.
http://www.jewishjournal.com/election2016/article/bernie_sanders_brother_is_a_bds_supporter
But as Sanders is growing in the polls, so is pressure being increased by progressives and pro-justice groups on the insurgent candidate to adopt a more left-wing approach to Israel and be more vocal about his policy views. He was recently compared to the newly elected UK Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, who has openly supported the BDS movement and is known for his anti-Israel stance.
His brother Larry, who lives in England, revealed in a tweet a few months ago that he supports the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel. “that Israel end occupation of West Bank, siege of Gaza, Palestinians in Israel equal rights. Netanyahu obstacle to peace. BDS yes,” Larry Sanders tweeted on April 20, 2015.
@greenoxford @LarrySandersPPC Hi. I haven't yet heard Larry's stance on Israel, Palestinians, BDS, & Netanyahu's Iran warmongering. RSVP
— Glyn Sparkes (@GlynSparkes) April 20, 2015
http://www.jewishjournal.com/election2016/article/bernie_sanders_brother_is_a_bds_supporter
Actually, here is his brother's full tweet:
Larry Sanders: Green ?@LarrySandersPPC Apr 20
@GlynSparkes Israel end occupation of West Bank, siege of Gaza, Palestinians in Israel equal rights. Netanyahu obstacle to peace. BDS yes
https://twitter.com/LarrySandersPPC/status/590276621904519168
Larry Sanders: Green ?@LarrySandersPPC Apr 25
@GlynSparkes I favour the destruction of Israel's WMD and, indeed, universal removal of WMDs.
Larry Sanders, Green candidate Oxford West
https://twitter.com/LarrySandersPPC/status/591931344642580480
Larry Sanders: Green ?@LarrySandersPPC May 1
@IsaacBD I am proud to tears for my brother. We are standing on almost identical platforms, though he is better at speaking, (a little)
https://twitter.com/LarrySandersPPC/status/594071855813754880
@GlynSparkes Israel end occupation of West Bank, siege of Gaza, Palestinians in Israel equal rights. Netanyahu obstacle to peace. BDS yes
https://twitter.com/LarrySandersPPC/status/590276621904519168
Larry Sanders: Green ?@LarrySandersPPC Apr 25
@GlynSparkes I favour the destruction of Israel's WMD and, indeed, universal removal of WMDs.
Larry Sanders, Green candidate Oxford West
https://twitter.com/LarrySandersPPC/status/591931344642580480
Larry Sanders: Green ?@LarrySandersPPC May 1
@IsaacBD I am proud to tears for my brother. We are standing on almost identical platforms, though he is better at speaking, (a little)
https://twitter.com/LarrySandersPPC/status/594071855813754880
November 8, 2015
Bernie's SC Campaign Committee includes BlackLivesMatter, state lawmakers, AFLCIO, and police
and in additional news which has already been posted at DU
Shoutout to the team that made Bernie's SC trip a success
Bernie's SC Campaign Committee includes BlackLivesMatter, state lawmakers, AFLCIO, and police
and in additional news which has already been posted at DU
Three black Democratic SC lawmakers back Bernie Sanders
COLUMBIA
3 Black SC State Reps & committee of 25 endorse #Bernie2016 in South Carolina
Battling for African-American support, Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders announced his South Carolina leadership team Saturday which includes three Democratic African-American state legislators.
State Reps. Terry Alexander of Florence, Wendell Gilliard of Charleston and Robert Williams of Darlington are among more than 25 committee members backing the U.S. senator from Vermont’s bid for the Democratic nomination.
“Sen. Sanders has the feel, the attitude of the common person, folks who are struggling day-by-day who are working everyday and still cannot pay their bills, ... do not have health insurance ... and cannot support their families,” Alexander said, introducing Sanders who met briefly with media Saturday afternoon.
Sanders is “the strongest candidate here for African Americans and he will bring about change,” Alexander added.
Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article43615482.html#storylink=cpy
COLUMBIA
3 Black SC State Reps & committee of 25 endorse #Bernie2016 in South Carolina
Battling for African-American support, Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders announced his South Carolina leadership team Saturday which includes three Democratic African-American state legislators.
State Reps. Terry Alexander of Florence, Wendell Gilliard of Charleston and Robert Williams of Darlington are among more than 25 committee members backing the U.S. senator from Vermont’s bid for the Democratic nomination.
“Sen. Sanders has the feel, the attitude of the common person, folks who are struggling day-by-day who are working everyday and still cannot pay their bills, ... do not have health insurance ... and cannot support their families,” Alexander said, introducing Sanders who met briefly with media Saturday afternoon.
Sanders is “the strongest candidate here for African Americans and he will bring about change,” Alexander added.
Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article43615482.html#storylink=cpy
Profile Information
Name: CatherinaGender: Female
Member since: Mon Mar 3, 2008, 03:08 PM
Number of posts: 35,568
