SOMETHING BERNIE SANDERS CAN LEARN FROM-and Help his followers

[JCanete]

80. His supporters did by and large support the Democratic nominee. For that matter, some of his

Last edited Mon Mar 26, 2018, 07:11 AM - Edit history (2)

supporters may have been disaffected Republicans or independents who had been drawn to his campaign but would never ever have voted for Clinton in the first place. Nothing Sanders could have said would have changed that.


The hold-outs and Stein voters were far less of a factor than so many other factors that weighed into Trump's win, and by and large, they had nothing to do with Sanders, since, again, you cannot point to his own supporters turnout as evidence of this point, since they came out for Clinton.

What is divisive, given that reality, is trying to pretend that instead, it was Sanders who soured far-left voters on Clinton. That just isn't true. Frankly, he helped give her and the party the inpetus to present a far more liberal platform, and I can at least speak to one anecdotal case where that made a difference.

Do you have any actual evidence that suggests Clinton would have done better among independents and far-left democrats had Sanders never entered this race?

As to what will and will not be embraced....that's defeatest rhetoric up front. You have no idea what will or will not be accepted by republican voters. You have no idea what might change their mind about being republican voters. Somehow you think a watered down, apologetic agenda that is wishy washy and starts negotiating from the middle and does not take the fight to industry and the rich who are hording it all is better than a no holds barred dramatic proposal of change that people can understand the direct benefits from in an imaginable, tangible form. I disagree with you that what inspires people to flip or come out at all, are the Manchin's of the world.

What a strawman to say that sanders has forgotten that Republicans will not enact his legislation. What? How exactly was that delusion arrived at? Clearly he didn't think a Republican Presidency was a good idea. He supported Clinton after the primary. Clearly he knows Republicans are bought and paid for and have no interest in enacting the will of the people. He's going TO THE PEOPLE. He's trying to get them to realize what their Republican leaders are doing to them. He's trying to get democrats to vote for the most progressive candidate in the Democratic primaries.

And no, the best way to move forward is not simply to support the democratic party, it is to influence the democratic party through at the very least, voting in the primary, if not volunteering for candidates you believe in, contributing financially to them, etc. Take ownership of what the party looks like, and then knowing that your voice is also a factor(even if your candidate didn't emerge as victorious), knowing that you are counted here, go vote for the Democratic candidate. But hell no, don't simply support the D without weighing in on what that D stands for.


Also, nothing about what Sanders is doing is putting him further behind in getting his ideals realized, if you remove the ridiculous conclusion that he somehow cost the democrats the election. Rather, his visibility has already affected campaigns and the democratic platform in ways we haven't seen in 30 years. It isn't because he's straddling the fence that this is happening, its because he isn't straddling any fence. Its because he's calling it like he sees it, which is his privilege as somebody not beholden to go down with every miststep of any single democratic Senator. You can't call the Republicans out on corruption if you pretend money only influences Republican politics. That's a fucking lie. Its an absurd one that makes you look like a tool and diminishes your credibility.

You could choose door number two, which is the one soo many politicians choose, and simply not call out corruptiion because that might endanger people on your side of the aisle, but what a way to make yourself impotent when it comes to actually doing something about absurd levels of financial influence in our politics. Which, by the way is why we can't have single payer. Not because there's no good way to do it and we don't have brilliant minds in Washington who could figure it out. No. Its because even our democratic leaders don't want it. Hell, maybe they don't believe in it, but then, that's kind of why these industries believe in them. That's kind of why they percolate to the top of the ticket, and are so entrenched once they get there.