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

andym

(6,063 posts)
49. the 1972 platform was very progressive --see the economic justice and national healthcare parts
Mon Jun 27, 2016, 09:38 PM
Jun 2016

Here is small selection of it:
note that it is very long-
George McGovern was to the left of nearly every Democrat today and it shows in the Democratic Party platform:

Be surprised!
I'm not sure this year's platform is really as progressive. Go to the link below and read the whole platform. It's amazing.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=29605

Jobs, Income and Dignity

Full employment—a guaranteed job for all—is the primary economic objective of the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is committed to a job for every American who seeks work. Only through full employment can we reduce the burden on working people. We are determined to make economic security a matter of right. This means a job with decent pay and good working conditions for everyone willing and able to work and an adequate income for those unable to work. It means abolition of the present welfare system.

To assure jobs and economic security for all, the next Democratic Administration should support:

A full employment economy, making full use of fiscal and monetary policy to stimulate employment;

Tax reform directed toward equitable distribution of income and wealth and fair sharing of the cost of government;

Full enforcement of all equal employment opportunity laws, including federal contract compliance and federally-regulated industries and giving the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission adequate staff and resources and power to issue cease and desist orders promptly;

Vastly increased efforts to open education at all levels and in all fields to minorities, women and other under-represented groups;

An effective nation-wide job placement system to entrance worker mobility;

Opposition to arbitrarily high standards for entry to jobs;

Overhaul of current manpower programs to assure training-without sex, race or language discrimination for jobs that really exist with continuous skill improvement and the chance for advancement;

Economic development programs to ensure the growth of communities and industry in lagging parts of the nation and the economy;

Use of federal depository funds to reward banks and other financial institutions which invest in socially productive endeavors;

Improved adjustment assistance and job creation for workers and employers hurt by foreign competition, reconversion of defense-oriented companies, rapid technological change and environmental protection activities;

Closing tax loopholes that encourage the export of American jobs by American-controlled multi-national corporations;

Assurance that the needs of society are considered when a decision to close or move an industrial plant is to be made and that income loss to workers and revenue loss to communities does not occur when plants are closed;

Assurance that, whatever else is done in the income security area, the social security system provides a decent income for the elderly, the blind and the disabled and their dependents, with escalators so that benefits keep pace with rising prices and living standards;

Reform of social security and government employment security programs to remove all forms of discrimination by sex; and adequate federal income assistance for those who do not benefit sufficiently from the above measures.

The last is not least, but it is last for good reason. The present welfare system has failed because it has been required to make up for too many other failures. Millions of Americans are forced into public assistance because public policy too often creates no other choice.

The heart of a program of economic security based on earned income must be creating jobs and training people to fill them. Millions of jobs—real jobs, not make-work-need to be provided. Public service employment must be greatly expanded in order to make the government the employer of last resort and guarantee a job for all. Large sections of our cities resemble bombed-out Europe after World War II. Children in Appalachia cannot go to school when the dirt road is a sea of mud. Homes, schools and clinics, roads and mass transit systems need to be built.

Cleaning up our air and water will take skills and people in large numbers. In the school, the police department, the welfare agency or the recreation program, there are new careers to be developed to help ensure that social services reach the people for whom they are intended.

It may cost more, at least initially, to create decent jobs than to perpetuate the hand-out system of present welfare. But the return—in new public facilities and services, in the dignity of bringing a paycheck home and in the taxes that will come back in—far outweigh the cost of the investment.

The next Democratic Administration must end the present welfare system and replace it with an income security program which places cash assistance in an appropriate context with all of the measures outlined above, adding up to an earned income approach to ensure each family an income substantially more than the poverty level ensuring standards of decency and health, as officially defined in the area. Federal income assistance will supplement the income of working poor people and assure an adequate income for those unable to work. With full employment and simpler, fair administration, total costs will go down, and with federal financing the burden on local and state budgets will be eased. The program will protect current benefit goals during the transitional period.

The system of income protection which replaces welfare must he a part of the full employment policy which assures every American a job at a fair wage under conditions which make use of his ability and provide an opportunity for advancement. H.R. 1, and its various amendments, is not humane and does not meet the social and economic objectives that we believe in, and it should be defeated. It perpetuates the coercion of forced work requirements.

Skepticism and cynicism are widespread in America. The people are skeptical of platforms filled with political platitudes—of promises made by opportunistic politicians.

The people are cynical about the idea that a rosy future is just around the corner.

And is it any wonder that the people are skeptical and cynical of the whole political process?

Our traditions, our history, our Constitution, our lives, all say that America belongs to its people.

But the people no longer believe it.

They feel that the government is run for the privileged few rather than for the many-and they are right.

No political party, no President, no government can by itself restore a lost sense of faith. No Administration can provide solutions to all our problems. What we can do is to recognize the doubts of Americans, to speak to those doubts, and to act to begin turning those doubts into hopes.

As Democrats, we know that we share responsibility for that loss of confidence. But we also know, as Democrats that at decisive moments of choice in our past, our party has offered leadership that has tapped the best within our country.

Our party-standing by its ideals of domestic progress and enlightened internationalism--has served America well. We have nominated or elected men of the high calibre of Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, Adlai E. Stevenson, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Lyndon Baines Johnson—and in the last election Hubert Humphrey and Edmund S. Muskie. In that proud tradition we are now prepared to move forward.

We know that our nation cannot tolerate any longer a government that shows no regard for the people's basic needs and no respect for our right to the truth from those who lead us. What do the people want? They want three things:

They want a personal life that makes us all feel that life is worth living;

They want a social environment whose institutions promote the good of all; and

They want a physical environment whose resources are used for the good of all.

They want an opportunity to achieve their aspirations and their dreams for themselves and their children.

We believe in the rights of citizens to achieve to the limit of their talents and energies. We are determined to remove barriers that limit citizens because they are black, brown, young or women; because they never had the chance to gain an education; because there was no possibility of being anything but what they were.

We believe in hard work as a fair measure of our own willingness to achieve. We are determined that millions should not stand idle while work demands to be done. We are determined that the dole should not become a permanent way of life for any. And we are determined that government no longer tax the product of hard work more rigorously than it taxes inherited wealth, or money that is gained simply by having money in the first place.

We believe that the law must apply equally to all, and that it must be an instrument of justice. We are determined that the citizen must be protected in his home and on his streets. We are determined also that the ordinary citizen should not be imprisoned for a crime before we know whether he is guilty or not while those with the right friends and the right connections can break the law without ever facing the consequences of their actions.

We believe that war is a waste of human life. We are determined to end forthwith a war which has cost 50,000 American lives, $150 billion of our resources, that has divided us from each other, drained our national will and inflicted incalculable damage to countless people. We will end that war by a simple plan that need not be kept secret: The immediate total withdrawal of all Americans from Southeast Asia.

We believe in the right of an individual to speak, think, read, write, worship, and live free of official intrusion. We are determined that our government must no longer tap the phones of law-abiding citizens nor spy on those who have broken no law. We are determined that never again shall government seek to censor the newspapers and television. We are determined that the government shall no longer mock the supreme law of the land, while it stands helpless in the face of crime which makes our neighborhoods and communities less and less safe.

Perhaps most fundamentally, we believe that government is the servant, not the master, of the people. We are determined that government should not mean a force so huge, so impersonal, that the complaint of an ordinary citizen goes unheard.

That is not the kind of government America was created to build. Our ancestors did not fight a revolution and sacrifice their lives against tyrants from abroad to leave us a government that does not know how to listen to its own people.

The Democratic Party is proud of its past; but we are honest enough to admit that we are part of the past and share in its mistakes. We want in 1972 to begin the long and difficult task of reviewing existing programs, revising them to make them work and finding new techniques to serve the public need. We want to speak for, and with, the citizens of our country. Our pledge is to be truthful to the people and to ourselves, to tell you when we succeed, but also when we fail or when we are not sure. In 1976, when this nation celebrates its 200th anniversary, we want to tell you simply that we have done our best to give the government to those who formed it—the people of America.

Every election is a choice: In 1972, Americans must decide whether they want their country back again.

Jobs, Income and Dignity

Full employment—a guaranteed job for all—is the primary economic objective of the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is committed to a job for every American who seeks work. Only through full employment can we reduce the burden on working people. We are determined to make economic security a matter of right. This means a job with decent pay and good working conditions for everyone willing and able to work and an adequate income for those unable to work. It means abolition of the present welfare system.

To assure jobs and economic security for all, the next Democratic Administration should support:

A full employment economy, making full use of fiscal and monetary policy to stimulate employment;

Tax reform directed toward equitable distribution of income and wealth and fair sharing of the cost of government;

Full enforcement of all equal employment opportunity laws, including federal contract compliance and federally-regulated industries and giving the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission adequate staff and resources and power to issue cease and desist orders promptly;

Vastly increased efforts to open education at all levels and in all fields to minorities, women and other under-represented groups;

An effective nation-wide job placement system to entrance worker mobility;

Opposition to arbitrarily high standards for entry to jobs;

Overhaul of current manpower programs to assure training-without sex, race or language discrimination for jobs that really exist with continuous skill improvement and the chance for advancement;

Economic development programs to ensure the growth of communities and industry in lagging parts of the nation and the economy;

Use of federal depository funds to reward banks and other financial institutions which invest in socially productive endeavors;

Improved adjustment assistance and job creation for workers and employers hurt by foreign competition, reconversion of defense-oriented companies, rapid technological change and environmental protection activities;

Closing tax loopholes that encourage the export of American jobs by American-controlled multi-national corporations;

Assurance that the needs of society are considered when a decision to close or move an industrial plant is to be made and that income loss to workers and revenue loss to communities does not occur when plants are closed;

Assurance that, whatever else is done in the income security area, the social security system provides a decent income for the elderly, the blind and the disabled and their dependents, with escalators so that benefits keep pace with rising prices and living standards;

Reform of social security and government employment security programs to remove all forms of discrimination by sex; and adequate federal income assistance for those who do not benefit sufficiently from the above measures.

The last is not least, but it is last for good reason. The present welfare system has failed because it has been required to make up for too many other failures. Millions of Americans are forced into public assistance because public policy too often creates no other choice.

The heart of a program of economic security based on earned income must be creating jobs and training people to fill them. Millions of jobs—real jobs, not make-work-need to be provided. Public service employment must be greatly expanded in order to make the government the employer of last resort and guarantee a job for all. Large sections of our cities resemble bombed-out Europe after World War II. Children in Appalachia cannot go to school when the dirt road is a sea of mud. Homes, schools and clinics, roads and mass transit systems need to be built.

Cleaning up our air and water will take skills and people in large numbers. In the school, the police department, the welfare agency or the recreation program, there are new careers to be developed to help ensure that social services reach the people for whom they are intended.

It may cost more, at least initially, to create decent jobs than to perpetuate the hand-out system of present welfare. But the return—in new public facilities and services, in the dignity of bringing a paycheck home and in the taxes that will come back in—far outweigh the cost of the investment.

The next Democratic Administration must end the present welfare system and replace it with an income security program which places cash assistance in an appropriate context with all of the measures outlined above, adding up to an earned income approach to ensure each family an income substantially more than the poverty level ensuring standards of decency and health, as officially defined in the area. Federal income assistance will supplement the income of working poor people and assure an adequate income for those unable to work. With full employment and simpler, fair administration, total costs will go down, and with federal financing the burden on local and state budgets will be eased. The program will protect current benefit goals during the transitional period.

The system of income protection which replaces welfare must he a part of the full employment policy which assures every American a job at a fair wage under conditions which make use of his ability and provide an opportunity for advancement. H.R. 1, and its various amendments, is not humane and does not meet the social and economic objectives that we believe in, and it should be defeated. It perpetuates the coercion of forced work requirements.

Economic Management

The first priority of a Democratic Administration must be eliminating the unfair, bureaucratic Nixon wage and price controls.

When price rises threaten to or do get out of control—as they are now—strong, fair action must be taken to protect family income and savings. The theme of that action should be swift, tough measures to break the wage-price spiral and restore the economy. In that kind of economic emergency, America's working people will support a truly fair stabilization program which affects profits, investment earnings, executive salaries and prices, as well as wages. The Nixon controls do not meet that standard. They have forced the American worker, who suffers most from inflation, to pay the price of trying to end it.

In addition to stabilizing the economy, we propose:

To develop automatic instruments protecting the livelihood of Americans who depend on fixed incomes, such as savings bonds with purchasing power guarantees and cost-of-living escalators in government social security and income support payments;

To create a system of "recession insurance" for states and localities to replace lost local revenues with federal funds in economic downturns, thereby avoiding reduction in public employment or public services;

To establish longer-term budget and fiscal planning; and

To create new mechanisms to stop unwarranted price increases in concentrated industries.

Toward Economic Justice

The Democratic Party deplores the increasing concentration of economic power in fewer and fewer hands. Five per cent of the American people control 90 per cent of our productive national wealth. Less than one per cent of all manufacturers have 88 per cent of the profits. Less than two per cent of the population now owns approximately 80 per cent of the nation's personally-held corporate stock, 90 per cent of the personally-held corporate bonds and nearly 100 per cent of the personally-held municipal bonds. The rest of the population—including all working men and women—pay too much for essential products and services because of national policy and market distortions.

The Democratic Administration should pledge itself to combat factors which tend to concentrate wealth and stimulate higher prices.

To this end, the federal government should:

Develop programs to spread economic growth among the workers, farmers and businessmen;

Help make parts of the economy more efficient such as medical care—where wasteful and inefficient practices now increase prices;

Step up anti-trust action to help competition, with particular regard to laws and enforcement curbing conglomerate mergers which swallow up efficient small business and feed the power of corporate giants;

Strengthen the anti-trust laws so that the divestiture remedy will be used vigorously to break up large conglomerates found to violate the antitrust laws;

Abolish the oil import quota that raises prices for consumers;

Deconcentrate shared monopolies such as auto, steel and tire industries which administer prices, create unemployment through restricted output and stifle technological innovation;

Assure the right of the citizen to recover costs and attorneys fees in all successful suits including class actions involving Constitutionally-guaranteed rights, or rights secured by federal statutes;

Adjust rate-making and regulatory activities, with particular attention to regulations which increase prices for food, transportation and other necessities;

Remove artificial constraints in the job market by better job manpower training and strictly enforcing equal employment opportunity;

Stiffen the civil and criminal statutes to make corporate officers responsible for their actions; and

Establish a temporary national economic commission to study federal chartering of large multi-national and international corporations, concentrated ownership and control in the nation's economy.



Health Care

Good health is the least this society should promise its citizens. The state of health services in this country indicates the failure of government to respond to this fundamental need. Costs skyrocket while the availability of services for all but the rich steadily declines.

We endorse the principle that good health is a right of all Americans.

America has a responsibility to offer to every American family the best in health care whenever they need it, regardless of income or where they live or any other factor.

To achieve this goal the next Democratic Administration should:

Establish a system of universal National Health Insurance which covers all Americans with a comprehensive set of benefits including preventive medicine, mental and emotional disorders, and complete protection against catastrophic costs, and in which the rule of free choice for both provider and consumer is protected. The program should be federally-financed and federally-administered. Every American must know he can afford the cost of health care whether given in a hospital or a doctor's office;

Incorporate in the National Health Insurance System incentives and controls to curb inflation in health care costs and to assure efficient delivery of all services;

Continue and evaluate Health Maintenance Organizations;

Set up incentives to bring health service personnel back to inner-cities and rural areas;

Continue to expand community health centers and availability of early screening diagnosis and treatment;

Provide federal funds to train added health manpower including doctors, nurses, technicians and para-medical workers;

Secure greater consumer participation and control over health care institutions;

Expand federal support for medical research including research in heart disease, hypertension, stroke, cancer, sickle cell anemia, occupational and childhood diseases which threaten millions and in preventive health care;

Eventual replacement of all federal programs of health care by a comprehensive National Health Insurance System;

Take legal and other action to curb soaring prices for vital drugs using anti trust laws as applicable and amending patent laws to end price-raising abuses, and require generic-name labeling of equal-effective drugs; and

Expand federal research and support for drug abuse treatment and education, especially development of non-addictive treatment methods.

Recommendations

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

Thanks to Bernie RobertEarl Jun 2016 #1
Codswallop. And he'd be a terrible VP. Squinch Jun 2016 #2
I see your codswallop mcar Jun 2016 #13
. Squinch Jun 2016 #61
Good one! NastyRiffraff Jun 2016 #128
The Hyde amendment, immigration reform, mass incarceration, KitSileya Jun 2016 #5
No RobertEarl Jun 2016 #6
Indeed Bernie is all wrong, and it's his own fault, he would indeed make the worst VP evah! synergie Jun 2016 #83
Why would Hillary choose someone who won't support or endorse her over someone like Warren Sheepshank Jun 2016 #125
+10000 Hekate Jun 2016 #165
Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #135
Agreed - Bernie would be a horrible choice for VP MaggieD Jun 2016 #12
Unless you wanted someone to deliver votes AgingAmerican Jun 2016 #64
Not necessary MaggieD Jun 2016 #68
You make zero case for your proclaimation AgingAmerican Jun 2016 #69
No, I just don't want to waste my time arguing with you MaggieD Jun 2016 #72
Unlike the objective, peer-reviewed sources you yourself cited in making your allegation, yes? LanternWaste Jun 2016 #127
The 'case' being that he "would be a horrible choice for vp" AgingAmerican Jun 2016 #130
Given that he lost the nomination because of his failure to do such a thing, he's pretty much synergie Jun 2016 #85
Bernie Sanders does not fit Hillary's criteria she KMOD Jun 2016 #25
Eisenhower's tax and antitrust policies were more progressive than Clinton's leveymg Jun 2016 #54
Interesting that my examples weren't economical. KitSileya Jun 2016 #91
If Bernie was nominee, all of those things would STILL be in the platform. He supported all of them Ken Burch Jun 2016 #115
Clinton was there long before Sanders showed up in the party, and she's never bowed to the NRA. lapucelle Jun 2016 #17
Clinton is doing fine RobertEarl Jun 2016 #21
I'm not sure what "discriminate on" lapucelle Jun 2016 #45
She's doing fine because she has the more credible policy positions and millions see that synergie Jun 2016 #86
not larkrake Jun 2016 #108
Your erudite argument does not counter the facts. synergie Jun 2016 #153
+1 MaggieD Jun 2016 #22
It takes an extraordinary person to know when to compromise and when to hold fast. randome Jun 2016 #28
If you go back to her first speeches well before he declared his candidacy, pnwmom Jun 2016 #32
Clinton disagrees with you. Nothing wrong in centrism but words have meaning. George Eliot Jun 2016 #47
Her actual policies place her to the left, not in the center. pnwmom Jun 2016 #52
Exactly. And she knows the American people well. eom BlueCaliDem Jun 2016 #136
So why unfavorables so high? George Eliot Jun 2016 #168
30 years and tens of millions of dollars of lying Republican propaganda, perhaps? BlueCaliDem Jun 2016 #169
Nope. The junior senator lost in a landslide and Beausoir Jun 2016 #70
Bernie doesn't know or care about Hyde or a great many other things, he's done synergie Jun 2016 #82
NO. How could she pick someone who wont even endorse her? Do you know what the role of lunamagica Jun 2016 #90
This message was self-deleted by its author stopbush Jun 2016 #92
Nonsense. She has held the same positions long before Bernie stepped into the race. n/t Lucinda Jun 2016 #95
Thanks to Bernie is right, but no VP larkrake Jun 2016 #107
The DNC should let him write the entire platform - he's one of the few capable of keeping the party Betty Karlson Jun 2016 #121
Um, the voters rejected him, why should he get to write the platform, when the voters synergie Jun 2016 #161
Sore, sore, sore. LexVegas Jun 2016 #124
I think Bernie would be wasted as a V-P. He can do far more for America in the Senate. Cal33 Jun 2016 #132
wait for it greiner3 Jun 2016 #162
He hasn't shown an ability to work with her that would be essential for any VP. pnwmom Jul 2016 #171
Bernie may have help as well awake Jun 2016 #3
K&R! stonecutter357 Jun 2016 #4
Despite the support for the TPP, fracking and Israeli occupation Android3.14 Jun 2016 #7
It could have been awesome ciaobaby Jun 2016 #8
Failing to ban fracking is a crime against the planet and all that dwell on it. peace13 Jun 2016 #9
So very true ! ciaobaby Jun 2016 #10
+10000 nt riderinthestorm Jun 2016 #84
Yes. Kurovski Jun 2016 #133
Agreed! MaggieD Jun 2016 #11
Apparently it's too difficult for some to actually look up Clinton's 2008 platform lapucelle Jun 2016 #18
IKR? MaggieD Jun 2016 #20
Clinton has followed the polls. joshcryer Jun 2016 #14
Oh my god. She is the best!! Hiraeth Jun 2016 #15
Yawn. zappaman Jun 2016 #29
Oh my god. I am ecstatic!! Hiraeth Jun 2016 #43
This message was self-deleted by its author zappaman Jun 2016 #46
Oh my god! you're sooooo clever! zappaman Jun 2016 #56
uh-huh... one_voice Jun 2016 #102
feel better now? Hiraeth Jun 2016 #103
Bit different than the posts prior to the change in TOS, eh?... SidDithers Jun 2016 #60
. Hiraeth Jun 2016 #101
Well... that's pretty creepy... Squinch Jun 2016 #62
close tabs. Hiraeth Jun 2016 #100
No, I mean all those posts ridiculing Hillary supporters. Squinch Jun 2016 #138
you see what you see and I see what I see. Hiraeth Jun 2016 #140
Whatever that's supposed to mean. Squinch Jun 2016 #141
feel the love. Hiraeth Jun 2016 #142
Feel the ignore. Squinch Jun 2016 #143
love love love Hiraeth Jun 2016 #144
Yep. JudyM Jun 2016 #106
love you too Hiraeth Jun 2016 #145
Warm fuzzies. JudyM Jun 2016 #149
Passive aggressive inanity seems to have supplanted impotent rage. I guess it's an improvement. Squinch Jun 2016 #146
Lol! zappaman Jun 2016 #148
Calling it inanity is generous of you. Active disengagement would be preferable but JudyM Jun 2016 #150
HA! SammyWinstonJack Jul 2016 #172
Your 'thanking' the incorrect DEM... HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #16
For what? MaggieD Jun 2016 #19
the current DEM platform wouldn't be as progressive if it weren't for Bernie and his influence HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #23
The party platform resembles the issues Hillary has fought for her entire career MaggieD Jun 2016 #24
You're avoiding the actual historical facts by posting that... HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #37
Damn she kicked butt in that debate! ismnotwasm Jun 2016 #39
and yet my point still stands about the platform and HRC's history on not suppthose platoform issues HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #44
I'm sorry? ismnotwasm Jun 2016 #50
it's not ok... the platform battle and paying attention to the facts matters... HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #63
The facts are it's her platform MaggieD Jun 2016 #67
you're mistaken, yet again... it's the DEM platform HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #71
You go with that MaggieD Jun 2016 #73
Facts... HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #74
I didn't see any facts in your post MaggieD Jun 2016 #78
ahhh... HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #87
Fact are, the platform has been written. Hillary will run on it and that is that. leftofcool Jun 2016 #105
..until and through convention... HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #119
No way, it is the party platform, far from hers larkrake Jun 2016 #110
You're missing nuance if you don't understand Clinton's position on the minimum wage, lapucelle Jun 2016 #53
and after all that we got home foreclosures, less wealth, fewer jobs. Thanks. George Eliot Jun 2016 #65
'before you start'... HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #66
Bernie voted for the CFMA MaggieD Jun 2016 #76
Well let's dig into that 'vote' shall we? Facts matter do they not? HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #80
He has creative excuses for all his hypocritical votes MaggieD Jun 2016 #81
...one... HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #94
"Other side" MissB Jun 2016 #166
DEM party and the ideology it began under HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #167
By your reasoning, Sanders should have fought harder and held out for single payer in 2009 lapucelle Jun 2016 #126
...fought harder... HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #155
Wow, two good posts.. +1 times 2 mountain grammy Jun 2016 #163
Not really! leftofcool Jun 2016 #30
absolutely for real... HumanityExperiment Jun 2016 #35
K & R KMOD Jun 2016 #26
Quite funny. Moreover... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #27
Democratic Primary voters were convinced. KMOD Jun 2016 #34
Tellingly, though, Independents outnumber Democrats... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #41
When even sane Republicans are jumping ship, KMOD Jun 2016 #51
So, because Independants who DemonGoddess Jun 2016 #55
Not anymore. TwilightZone Jun 2016 #77
false, since the primaries began, Indies joined up for Bernie and are flocking back to indy larkrake Jun 2016 #116
One should be looking at NOT ALL POLLS... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #123
Indy's don't settle, they go 3rd party and do their homework. Best concentrate working to get larkrake Jun 2016 #113
of the 39% (as of 2015) Indies, at least 30% of those lean right Sheepshank Jun 2016 #129
disagree. The 34% guess{high} are repugs that cannot tolerate Trump in the first place.They wont go larkrake Jul 2016 #170
Pro TPP, pro fracking, anti livable wage = not very progressive. DamnYankeeInHouston Jun 2016 #31
Not pro TPP in it's current state. KMOD Jun 2016 #36
very nuanced. Minimum should start at 15 and go up to 25 in places where the cost of living is high larkrake Jun 2016 #117
Natural gas is retrieved by fracking. KMOD Jun 2016 #118
about half of US oil and half of US natural gas is extracted via fracking AntiBank Jun 2016 #139
Excellent post, KitSileya! brer cat Jun 2016 #33
She's been fighting all her life for progressive values. ismnotwasm Jun 2016 #38
Thanks to Bernie. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2016 #40
You guys sure do love to credit Bernie for things he had nothing to do with. synergie Jun 2016 #88
Didn't he give birth to John Lewis? I think I heard that he did... Squinch Jun 2016 #152
.. KMOD Jun 2016 #154
. Squinch Jun 2016 #156
There seems to be some interesting notions of time travel going around in synergie Jun 2016 #159
Thread win! mcar Jun 2016 #160
Kudos to Hillary postatomic Jun 2016 #42
Indeed! nt Maru Kitteh Jun 2016 #89
Yes KitSileya, that is AWESOME and so is Hillary! UtahLib Jun 2016 #48
the 1972 platform was very progressive --see the economic justice and national healthcare parts andym Jun 2016 #49
Good memories. +10 840high Jun 2016 #57
Excellent point. N/T Chathamization Jun 2016 #79
Except the DNC is rejecting anti-fracking, TPP Roland99 Jun 2016 #58
Credit where credit due. Note "immigration" paragraph. George Eliot Jun 2016 #59
Yes it is! K&R! DesertRat Jun 2016 #75
i think that may wrong in two ways SoLeftIAmRight Jun 2016 #93
Then explain in what ways you think that may be wrong. KitSileya Jun 2016 #96
several threads suggest looking at the 72 platform SoLeftIAmRight Jun 2016 #98
What is passive aggressive is to use a thread praising the platform Ken Burch Jun 2016 #111
The runner-up was not even mentioned in the OP KMOD Jun 2016 #151
I think he originaly was, and in any case the wording there was an attack on the arguments Ken Burch Jun 2016 #164
Disappointed in her lack of knowledge about marijuana legalization. Nt Logical Jun 2016 #97
I think Bernie deserves some of the credit too democrattotheend Jun 2016 #99
Actually, a lot. George Eliot Jun 2016 #104
He deserves more influence over the platform. Betty Karlson Jun 2016 #122
It's equally thanks to both sides. Ken Burch Jun 2016 #109
I'm...sorry choie Jun 2016 #112
Protecting the water supply Eric J in MN Jun 2016 #114
K&R Jamaal510 Jun 2016 #120
Big K&R! NastyRiffraff Jun 2016 #131
Hillary sees the big picture and she always has upaloopa Jun 2016 #134
Kudos to andym #49 Uponthegears Jun 2016 #137
Thanks to her being willing to make room for something more progressive. Orsino Jun 2016 #147
Message auto-removed Name removed Jun 2016 #157
No, I'm not. KitSileya Jun 2016 #158
Lol Katashi_itto Jul 2016 #173
Uh-huh. Fracking is soooo progressive. Tierra_y_Libertad Jul 2016 #174
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Thanks to Hillary we have...»Reply #49