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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Democrats divide on Bernie's 2020 plans [View all]
Demsrule86
(71,542 posts)148. I hate to read posts like yours because it is not true.
We barely lost 2016, and if you are right which I don't think you are...why didn't Feingold win? Also, it is not unusual for the president's party to lose the presidency after eight years...in fact it happens more often than not...this was a perfect storm of circumstance, and I doubt it will be repeated again. The idea that we had such a horrible loss...why we must do xyz...run left, accept abortion in Democrats (no 1000 times), move right, adjust so we can get the Trump supporters..blah blah is simply not true...no we need to stay focused on 18 and let Trump help us take the house...the contrast could not be more bleak...and we run on saving health care period...not a specific plan. WE do use a 50 state strategy which means Ossoff should have been endorsed by all party leaders...why wasn't he?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
161 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
That is the problem, when you put out a Medicare For All Bill, that we of course ALL
Eliot Rosewater
May 2017
#2
whether it passes or not, it gets the issue out there, and makes Dems being corrupted by insurance
yurbud
May 2017
#4
But he trashes Dems for being pragmatic and then eventually gets around to it himself...
bettyellen
May 2017
#8
"pragmatic" is too often a euphemism for corrupt. Is it confusing because you want a candidate who
yurbud
May 2017
#15
the broadbrushing of anyone who takes campaign contributions as "corrupt" is bullshit.
bettyellen
May 2017
#23
outside the beltway, taking money and after office, taking JOBS from industries they served
yurbud
May 2017
#136
Is throwing women's control of their own bodies under the bus not corrupt then?
Steven Maurer
May 2017
#29
considering how Democrats got their asses handed to them at nearly all levels in 2016...
yurbud
May 2017
#17
how many governorships and state legislatures do they control? How did they do in House & Senate?
yurbud
May 2017
#49
I think Obamacare was overall positive, but it was complicated enough that most people couldn't tell
yurbud
May 2017
#141
That is untrue...Hillary won more votes...and we made gains in the Senate...and
Demsrule86
May 2017
#109
and harder to elect them and electing more GOP instead which is what happens in purple states
Eliot Rosewater
May 2017
#10
wow. people in purple and red states don't like Medicare? and LOVE private insurance?
yurbud
May 2017
#21
Then how do you explain Joe Manchin and several others in similar situations?
Eliot Rosewater
May 2017
#43
if you have a real economic agenda for them, they might put that in the backseat like some did
yurbud
May 2017
#45
We actually DID get the "economically anxious" voters. We just need more who don't hate us as the
bettyellen
May 2017
#63
More people still have employer insurance...and those who oppose it would throw everything but the
Demsrule86
May 2017
#110
Oh please spare me...the fact is unless we have a super majority and probably not even then,
Demsrule86
May 2017
#137
I agree about gradually lowering the age of Medicare...that should have been built into ACA
yurbud
May 2017
#138
It is the easiest least dangerous way to keep our elected...and I wonder if it can be done
Demsrule86
May 2017
#150
I don't think anyone noticed the single payer bill outside of already committed Democrats.
Demsrule86
May 2017
#149
Arguably, one way to save single payer is to tell Republicans, "You fuck up ACA, you've set us up...
yurbud
May 2017
#153
They won't believe you...they know how unlikely we will have the power to do that.
Demsrule86
May 2017
#158
I would argue that Democrats should have (& still could) use that to rein in insurance co. greed
yurbud
May 2017
#154
If Dems win strictly on being not Trump, they can say they have a mandate to do A,B, & C instead of
yurbud
May 2017
#159
No it makes the ACA a little less safe and since everyone knows single payer is a non-starter for
Demsrule86
May 2017
#108
you don't generate enthusiasm by calling the base of party activists stupid...also, repealing ACA...
yurbud
May 2017
#155
I am a liberal Democrat who has had to pay out $16,000 in medical in the last two years who would
Demsrule86
May 2017
#156
if we can do wars and trade deals and privatize public education at the same time...
yurbud
May 2017
#160
but it hurts our whole product..it hurts our whole brand. If we are more consistent
JCanete
May 2017
#131
I don't think age should disqualify either Sanders or Biden. My two favorite candidates are
StevieM
May 2017
#12
I like Xavier Becerra a lot too!! I had wanted him to be HRC's running mate in 2016.
StevieM
May 2017
#18
i would rather have a good president for a year or two than a shitty one for eight
yurbud
May 2017
#47
Since Sanders is not a Dem we don't have to worry. He's certainly not going to be allowed to...
brush
May 2017
#31
if Democrats try that, they could find themselves coming in third in a presidential election
yurbud
May 2017
#44
Not a chance. His diviseness and campaigh-long attacks on the party helped trump to get in
brush
May 2017
#66
some people were leery of Hillary without Bernie in the picture. As an educator, I didn't look
yurbud
May 2017
#67
No one cares about party labels. DLC/centrists have tarnished the Democratic brand by buying into
yurbud
May 2017
#68
That is not true about Democrats; that is true of all Republicans & most Libertarians/Indies.
SunSeeker
May 2017
#100
that is assuming issues don't matter. Sanders didn't get as far as he did on charm and looks
yurbud
May 2017
#46
Making an issue of a candidate's age is showing a prejudice which is simply wrong
Samantha
May 2017
#122
He's using the unity tour to build up another list he won't share? It's quite a one way street
bettyellen
May 2017
#6
Sanders doesn't need to change a thing in order to easily win the next primary.
NCTraveler
May 2017
#11
Bet you one thing, he won't be invited to run as a Dem. Plus he'll be looking at 80.
brush
May 2017
#80
Well, a lot of Democrats care. And no one is looking forward to voting for someone who's looking...
brush
May 2017
#119
That is exactly right. I don't know who is proliferating these stories, or even if Sanders is
still_one
May 2017
#27
"he tends to dismiss the discussion about 2020 as dumb" Bernie is right nt
geek tragedy
May 2017
#19
funniest line in that article: "The fact that Tom Perez has given Sanders a platform..."
yurbud
May 2017
#20
Politico must be laughing their ass off when they publish these kinds of articles...
Trial_By_Fire
May 2017
#52
I wouldn't mind having Warren in the mix, but agree with the rest ofit.
Warren DeMontague
May 2017
#62
"planning to drag out his decision on whether to run."?? It's may of 2017, for fuck's sake.
Warren DeMontague
May 2017
#61
I don't think it will be Sanders next time around, but what ideas would you like to hear?
JCanete
May 2017
#118
Who is trying to move the country back half a century? I have a feeling that when it comes to civil
JCanete
May 2017
#123
lol he's going to lose in 2020 for the same reasons he lost in 2016
La Lioness Priyanka
May 2017
#124
Fun fact: Sanders narrowly won African Americans below the age of 30 in the primaries.
redgreenandblue
May 2017
#142