2016 Postmortem

bvar22

(39,909 posts)

109. Frederick Douglas explained it well:

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:25 PM

May 2016

“Those who profess to favor freedom, yet deprecate agitation,
are men who want crops without plowing up the ground.

They want rain without thunder and lightening.

They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.

This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle.

Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.”

---- Frederick Douglas

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

120 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I have not seen ONE sign that the Democratic Party is WILLING to change. [View all] Skwmom May 2016 OP

K&R emsimon33 May 2016 #1

Right, the establishment is not willing to change; elleng May 2016 #2

I don't find it at all remarkable that they're here. merrily May 2016 #36

The point is they lie. Baobab May 2016 #61

They lost the debate and will be taking their just rewards (HRC) with them eventually nolabels May 2016 #85

OK, I'll give you that, 'tools,' elleng May 2016 #97

The Democratic establishment is very willing to change LondonReign2 May 2016 #86

Change or become irrelevant Baobab May 2016 #89

Others have noticed this Mike__M May 2016 #3

We shouldnt have to start a new party when we already have one. Baobab May 2016 #63

I thought that too, but it is clear that, after last week, the Democratic Party is so far gone JimDandy May 2016 #76

If that were the plan Old Codger May 2016 #4

I haven't seen one reason why we should change. NNadir May 2016 #5

I am from a family of lifelong Democrats. Skwmom May 2016 #7

So what? NNadir May 2016 #9

This message was self-deleted by its author TM99 May 2016 #11

Well said!!! n/t RKP5637 May 2016 #29

Better a party loyalist for the Democratic Party... randome May 2016 #30

Better for what? merrily May 2016 #35

Better for making progress on actual issues. randome May 2016 #48

Um, no. Bernie did very well in the House and Senate. Formed the Progressive merrily May 2016 #49

I said he's a great man. I should have said he's a great Senator, too. randome May 2016 #53

Yeah, crippling shyness. I've always suspected that. ret5hd May 2016 #68

A "lone wolf" doesn't get it done. Bernie does. Proof of that. But loyalty trumps facts every time. snowy owl May 2016 #81

I'm sure as hell not 'loyal' to Clinton. I don't even like her. randome May 2016 #83

This message was self-deleted by its author TM99 May 2016 #108

I'm not the one demanding that other people change to suit me. That would be the Sanderistas... NNadir May 2016 #111

This message was self-deleted by its author TM99 May 2016 #112

I offer a specific objection, and you offer a set of platitudes and then complain about being... NNadir May 2016 #116

This message was self-deleted by its author TM99 May 2016 #117

+1. Well said. n/t FSogol May 2016 #64

Your posts are absolute gold in this thread. + a freaking million Number23 May 2016 #114

And I ashamed for your relatives that you think that constitutes an argument. nt anigbrowl May 2016 #90

Arguing policy is fine. OnionPatch May 2016 #71

And what you said about Bernie is totally untrue and of his supporters. We want the issues bkkyosemite May 2016 #80

Nope - you shouldn't. Stick to your guns dana_b May 2016 #99

Be sure, during the Trump Presidency, to announce it's all Hillary Clinton's fault. NNadir May 2016 #118

ralph Nader is "poorly educated"? dana_b May 2016 #119

Yes. I am a scientist and his comments on any issue related to science were frankly nonsense. NNadir May 2016 #120

You made it clear that being beholding to Big Banks and Large Coprporations w/SuperPacs... bvar22 May 2016 #100

Good LiberalFighter May 2016 #106

2.5 million American children homeless, 16 million American children living in poverty, another rhett o rick May 2016 #115

The Democratic Establishment jamese777 May 2016 #6

How long have insurance companies, cliffordu May 2016 #12

Since around 1980. Why do you ask? merrily May 2016 #34

Just want to add that fact to her bonafides. cliffordu May 2016 #74

ok nt merrily May 2016 #79

oh, lord... chervilant May 2016 #73

This message was self-deleted by its author silvershadow May 2016 #8

Kicked and recommended! I agree 100% Enthusiast May 2016 #10

More scary propaganda from you. Trust me, with tactics like this BootinUp May 2016 #13

+1 JoePhilly May 2016 #23

Thank you! NurseJackie May 2016 #113

We may have to pry the corporate money dreamnightwind May 2016 #14

The current dominate two party system in the US is obsolete and in a rut as a supply RKP5637 May 2016 #37

We have a progressive caucus which has for the most part embraced the corporatist wing Skwmom May 2016 #43

Exactly, that's why it would need eligibility rules dreamnightwind May 2016 #110

During the Obama presidency jamese777 May 2016 #15

Why are you focused only on Wall Street's well-being? stillwaiting May 2016 #21

Well said!!! n/t RKP5637 May 2016 #41

While the working class continues to get bent over. Lizzie Poppet May 2016 #52

Corporate Profits up by 144%...Stock Market UP 154%, but this lavish prosperity is NOT.. bvar22 May 2016 #105

They have to unite the party or fold PATRICK May 2016 #16

So be it. 99Forever May 2016 #17

K&R Spot On! B Calm May 2016 #18

"If the Democratic Party would ... Scuba May 2016 #19

The ruling class didn't put all their eggs in one party basket. Skwmom May 2016 #20

You are free to leave the party anytime you want. JoePhilly May 2016 #22

They are free to stay and piss in and out of the tent too. TheKentuckian May 2016 #25

Who are you trashing? merrily May 2016 #31

I did not demand they leave, I simply JoePhilly May 2016 #38

Uh huh. Did you read the last few lines of the Opening Post? OP seems very aware of it. merrily May 2016 #40

You know JoePhilly, this Party used to be less than inclusive of minorities, over the years the Bluenorthwest May 2016 #67

^^^ This ^^^ progressoid May 2016 #92

When there is really only one viable liberal party... tom-servo May 2016 #39

Like any of us have much say anyway... BillZBubb May 2016 #54

Yeah, no direct say... tom-servo May 2016 #93

Let the Republicans who are fed up with their corporatist members deal with their own problem. Skwmom May 2016 #44

When you lose, you don't get your way nt firebrand80 May 2016 #24

You don't seem to know much about our system of government. bvar22 May 2016 #107

I think the changes are relatively recent maybe done without much fanfare the last 6 years. gordianot May 2016 #26

Without much fanfare is an understatement, but it began in 1985, merrily May 2016 #28

Rove thought the one party would be his in a thousand year Reich. gordianot May 2016 #45

So, appointing Warren the Party's liasion to its own left did not impress you much? merrily May 2016 #27

Over the last 6 Presidential Election cycles the Democratic Party has won the popular vote 5 times SFnomad May 2016 #32

Maybe if you get directly in their face a scream at the top of your lungs Dem2 May 2016 #33

The country needs a true progressive party... tom-servo May 2016 #42

Many of those threatening to leave the party were MineralMan May 2016 #46

I have not seen ONE sign that Sanders supporters can work as part of a team. randome May 2016 #47

Translation: Those pesky Bernie supporters can't be brought to heel. BillZBubb May 2016 #55

DWS is likely going to be out as head of the DNC. randome May 2016 #58

You've given the main reason why the Democratic Party won't change with your "The Democratic Party Cal33 May 2016 #50

Are they supposed to give Bernie the majority, when he doesn't have the majority of votes? CrowCityDem May 2016 #51

Then you can't see the forest for the trees. IADEMO2004 May 2016 #56

Me either. tazkcmo May 2016 #57

I'm going unenrolled if she get the nomination. Cobalt Violet May 2016 #59

Like John Travolta said to Samuel Jackson in Pulp Fiction: randome May 2016 #60

um no. I'm still going to vote progressively. Cobalt Violet May 2016 #65

Why would be want to "help" enact Third Way policies? LondonReign2 May 2016 #87

You're not helping push her further to the left if you simply sit on the sidelines. randome May 2016 #88

I'm only stayng enrolled so that I can keep voting for progressives in primaries. DookDook May 2016 #70

I can't wait for all the DINOs to GTFO! workinclasszero May 2016 #62

You might want to take "Sanders" out of the equation just leave liberals or progressives GTFO. gordianot May 2016 #69

The Democratic Party will EVOLVE, not be taken over by a revolution. nt BootinUp May 2016 #66

Except for the two you mentioned. Orsino May 2016 #72

So, the loser of the primaries should get the majority of seats on the platform committee? TwilightZone May 2016 #75

Who asked for majority? snowy owl May 2016 #82

Yes. Personally I've had enough. Arugula Latte May 2016 #77

Here's a sign they're willing to change: Lizzie Poppet May 2016 #78

I don't think it was to destroy the party. trudyco May 2016 #84

They are too busy dividing and conquering. Skwmom May 2016 #91

that, and.... Triana May 2016 #94

+1,000 Skwmom May 2016 #95

I was so stupid. I thought the Party I worked for and gave hours to glinda May 2016 #96

Did you miss the title of this website? CBHagman May 2016 #98

After everything you done, all your efforts? I'd be upset too. The_Casual_Observer May 2016 #101

Change because Bernie Sanders said so? Nothing will be changed from the outside... asuhornets May 2016 #102

Bernie's hostile takeover of the democratic party failed workinclasszero May 2016 #103

Of course it's not going to change of its own accord. It's already too interpenetrated with bjo59 May 2016 #104

Frederick Douglas explained it well: bvar22 May 2016 #109