Bernie's 2020 Campaign: August 2016 - At least through April, apparently
GL2 said:
This guy puts it quite well:
The problem, if you’re a diehard Sanders supporter, is that the compromise always seems to go only one way. (There are reasons for this, including an insufficient show of force at the ballot box, as Sanders himself acknowledged this week. But still.) Decades go by without the progress that you believe is desperately needed, with every election described as more critical than the last one and too important to abandon the nominee. At some point you decide that enough is enough, that you — or, more accurately, underserved Americans — can’t wait any longer.
Klinker and nan have regularly posted comments along these lines. If others are looking for the logic, as Jim seemed to yesterday, that’d be my stab at it.
GL2 said:
The Democratic "establishment" has moved as far to the left as it can while still appealing to center-left, moderate, and center-right people. Credit the progs. They done good in moving the party.
The first sentence may be true, but if I’m a Sanders diehard, I’m not buying the idea that the party has been tangibly moved.
DaveSchmidt said:
The problem, if you’re a diehard Sanders supporter, is that the compromise always seems to go only one way. (There are reasons for this, including an insufficient show of force at the ballot box, as Sanders himself acknowledged this week. But still.) Decades go by without the progress that you believe is desperately needed, with every election described as more critical than the last one and too important to abandon the nominee. At some point you decide that enough is enough, that you — or, more accurately, underserved Americans — can’t wait any longer.
Klinker and nan have regularly posted comments along these lines. If others are looking for the logic, as Jim seemed to yesterday, that’d be my stab at it.
it seems pretty logical to me. I'm voting, but I've already expressed my frustration that not only are a lot of problems not addressed, not many people with influence even introduce them into the debate.
And I've written this before, but Republicans voters don't give a damn if their nominees are too extreme, or too unelectable. And they enforce ideological purity like nobody's business. And they won the White House, the Senate, and their nominees control the SCOTUS. And part of it is because they push those extreme positions hard, consistently, with the result that those extreme positions become immutable truths to their voters.
The Sanders/Warren/AOC message hasn't become a truth to Democratic voters because the donors don't want it to, the DNC doesn't want it to, the pundrity doesn't want it to, and the older voters and the more affluent voters who make up the Democratic primary electorate in the end don't want it to either.
When a lot of us are dead, the next generation will have to figure out what to do with major cities under water, while they struggle with debts incurred getting degrees, paying out of pocket health care costs, etc. We can blame them for not coming out to vote, sure. But does that really absolve our generation from selfishly refusing to address the problems that are going to beset this country after we're gone?
ml1 said:
We can blame them for not coming out to vote, sure. But does that really absolve our generation from selfishly refusing to address the problems that are going to beset this country after we're gone?
I don't think it's about absolution. It's also a matter of standing together.
There was great turnout among young Americans in 2008 which helped propel Barack Obama to the presidency. But turnout dropped precipitously for 2010, and this contributed to the House of Representatives flip to the Republicans. What happened to these folks? The ACA had just directly benefited the age group, both with the existing conditions feature as well as allowing people to stay on their parents' insurance until they were 26. If Obama had had a Democrat controlled House and Senate from 2010-2012, what could they have done to improve the ACA? What other Progressive policies could they have pursued to improve the economy?
We'll never know. Instead we got six years of Republican obstructionism, including Merrick Garland. I don't understand how Obama's policies could be to blame when he barely got a chance to enact any of them.
In a Michael Tomasky essay in NYRB, he quotes AOC as saying about Biden’s potential election, “In any other country, Joe Biden and I would not be in the same party, but in America we are.” And she makes a good point: they wouldn’t be in the same party in some European parliamentary government. And that’s the problem with some of the Bernies - they don’t realize that, for better or worse, there are only two viable parties here. And that’s the reality. Ya gotta fit Joe Manchin and AOC in the same party.
DaveSchmidt said:
GL2 said:
The Democratic "establishment" has moved as far to the left as it can while still appealing to center-left, moderate, and center-right people. Credit the progs. They done good in moving the party.
The first sentence may be true, but if I’m a Sanders diehard, I’m not buying the idea that the party has been tangibly moved.
Of course this sounds self-serving, but I'll say this: after all the frustration, maybe it's time to work for a new party. How many times ya gonna beat yer head against the wall? There's a ton of merit in progressive ideas. But they ain't gonna fly in either of the two huge parties. But, in the absence of an alternative party, one's closer to your thinking than the other. And let's be real here: you can't run for the nomination in a party of which you are not a member and expect to lead it. Influence it, yes. But not lead it.
GL2 said:
DaveSchmidt said:
GL2 said:
The Democratic "establishment" has moved as far to the left as it can while still appealing to center-left, moderate, and center-right people. Credit the progs. They done good in moving the party.
The first sentence may be true, but if I’m a Sanders diehard, I’m not buying the idea that the party has been tangibly moved.
Of course this sounds self-serving, but I'll say this: after all the frustration, maybe it's time to work for a new party. How many times ya gonna beat yer head against the wall? There's a ton of merit in progressive ideas. But they ain't gonna fly in either of the two huge parties. But, in the absence of an alternative party, one's closer to your thinking than the other. And let's be real here: you can't run for the nomination in a party of which you are not a member and expect to lead it. Influence it, yes. But not lead it.
I'd bet cash money that DaveSchmidt didn't write that last section.
"It does not seem to me too alarmist to wonder if the Democrats can survive all this; if 2020 will be to the Democrats as 1852 was to the Whigs - a schismatic turning point that proved that the divisions were beyond bridging." Tomasky
(you need a subscription)
ml1 said:
GL2 said:
DaveSchmidt said:
GL2 said:
The Democratic "establishment" has moved as far to the left as it can while still appealing to center-left, moderate, and center-right people. Credit the progs. They done good in moving the party.
The first sentence may be true, but if I’m a Sanders diehard, I’m not buying the idea that the party has been tangibly moved.
Of course this sounds self-serving, but I'll say this: after all the frustration, maybe it's time to work for a new party. How many times ya gonna beat yer head against the wall? There's a ton of merit in progressive ideas. But they ain't gonna fly in either of the two huge parties. But, in the absence of an alternative party, one's closer to your thinking than the other. And let's be real here: you can't run for the nomination in a party of which you are not a member and expect to lead it. Influence it, yes. But not lead it.
I'd bet cash money that DaveSchmidt didn't write that last section.
I wrote that last part...sorry it was green.
ml1 said:
I do not want Bernie to drop out. I want him to debate Biden until Biden has mathematically clinched the nomination. Then Bernie can drop out.
I do. Because we need the Democratic party to unite and focus on removing the existential threat on our health and welfare that is presently occupying the White House. We no loner have the luxury of affording Bernie's rancor and divisiveness. We need to focus now.
If you think Trump is not an existential threat, then think again. The mishandled six week delay in testing should make it obvious.
BG9 said:
I do. Because we need the Democratic party to unite and focus on removing the existential threat on our health and welfare that is presently occupying the White House. We no loner have the luxury of affording Bernie's rancor and divisiveness. We need to focus now.
If you think Trump is not an existential threat, then think again. The mishandled six week delay in testing should make it obvious.
why do we need to focus now, as opposed to two weeks from now?
BG9 said:
I do. Because we need the Democratic party to unite and focus on removing the existential threat on our health and welfare that is presently occupying the White House. We no loner have the luxury of affording Bernie's rancor and divisiveness. We need to focus now.
If you think Trump is not an existential threat, then think again. The mishandled six week delay in testing should make it obvious.
I think if we don't see the primary process play out fully there is less chance of bringing a lot of Progressives along if Biden wins.
I think the more centrists pick up the "Sanders Should Drop Out" banner, the less chance of bringing a lot of Progressives along if Biden wins.
I think the more people write off Sanders as done, the less chance of bringing a lot of Progressives along if Biden wins. He may have a steeper hill to climb, but he's not mathematically out of it.
nan said:
ridski said:
Told y'all Trump's gonna win, didn't I?
You did. You were right and I'm ready to invest heavily in dystopian fiction. This might help your career.
Cool.
https://www.amazon.com/Ready-Player-One-Ernest-Cline/dp/0307887448
https://www.amazon.com/Windup-Girl-Paolo-Bacigalupi/dp/1597801585
https://www.amazon.com/Year-Rat-Ridley-McIntyre/dp/0998426504/
https://www.amazon.com/Neuromancer-William-Gibson/dp/0441569595
https://www.amazon.com/Shockwave-Rider-John-Brunner/dp/0345467175
https://www.amazon.com/Mindplayers-Pat-Cadigan/dp/0553265857
ridski said:
nan said:
ridski said:
Told y'all Trump's gonna win, didn't I?
You did. You were right and I'm ready to invest heavily in dystopian fiction. This might help your career.
Cool.
https://www.amazon.com/Ready-Player-One-Ernest-Cline/dp/0307887448
https://www.amazon.com/Windup-Girl-Paolo-Bacigalupi/dp/1597801585
https://www.amazon.com/Year-Rat-Ridley-McIntyre/dp/0998426504/
https://www.amazon.com/Neuromancer-William-Gibson/dp/0441569595
https://www.amazon.com/Shockwave-Rider-John-Brunner/dp/0345467175
https://www.amazon.com/Mindplayers-Pat-Cadigan/dp/0553265857
Also, headlines from any given year since 2016. Though some might complain those require too much suspension of disbelief to make satisfying reading.
GL2 said:
In a Michael Tomasky essay in NYRB, he quotes AOC as saying about Biden’s potential election, “In any other country, Joe Biden and I would not be in the same party, but in America we are.” And she makes a good point: they wouldn’t be in the same party in some European parliamentary government.
They'd probably be in the same coalition, though. AOC's party would be too small to ever be the senior party in that coalition, but would probably have enough seats to extract meaningful concessions from Biden's party -- probably more influence than the progressive wing has in our actual Democratic party, as counting seats translates to political power much easier than trying to gauge something as malleable as voter sentiment.
PVW said:
Also, headlines from any given year since 2016. Though some might complain those require too much suspension of disbelief to make satisfying reading.
Oh, I have a whole thing for real world dystopian scenarios. This isn't the place, though. I'll go post them on mtierney's thread.
mrincredible said:
I think if we don't see the primary process play out fully there is less chance of bringing a lot of Progressives along if Biden wins.
I think the more centrists pick up the "Sanders Should Drop Out" banner, the less chance of bringing a lot of Progressives along if Biden wins.
I think the more people write off Sanders as done, the less chance of bringing a lot of Progressives along if Biden wins. He may have a steeper hill to climb, but he's not mathematically out of it.
I also believe another debate or two might help Biden. He's been pretty dismal in the debates so far. And maybe with fewer people on the stage he might not yell his answers when it's his turn. Of course another debate performance like his previous may prompt an "oh, ****" moment from Democratic voters realizing Joe might not have been the strongest candidate in the field.
nohero said:
And, here we go -
Ms. Krystal Ball, who has been cited on MOL as an authority, won't vote for the Democratic nominee if it's not Bernie.
And so Cenk Uygur of all people winds up sounding like a voice of reason as a result.
Wow, nohero is now watching TYT and posting videos from independent media!!!! Ha!
Krystal Ball makes some very good points, and that might be painful for some of you to hear. Treating people like sh*t does not make them so eager to vote for you and allowing that to happen means they feel they can just do anything and you will fall in line.
This is the second election the establishment has united to destroy Sanders and, this time they have done it by coalescing around a senile guy who will most likely lose to Trump. A candidate that is even worse than HIllary Clinton. They have made it clear that they would rather lose than let Bernie Sanders, the guy who wants us all to have healthcare and to save the planet win.
Maybe it's time to stop playing this game. I know after 2016, I was following the DNC "reforms" closely and started a thread, and there was zero interest from people watching the same people who lost continue to pull the strings. Now the chickens have come home to roost and they are fine with replaying 2016. I'm not going to do this again and I think I will have lots of company. Joe Biden will probably lose to Trump whether I vote for him or not and I will be blamed for his loss whether I vote for him or not. Sometimes you need to just leave an abusive relationship.
Here is the full version of Krystal's remarks. I hope some of you take the time to listen and think about it from the other side.
GL2 said:
The Democratic "establishment" has moved as far to the left as it can while still appealing to center-left, moderate, and center-right people. Credit the progs. They done good in moving the party. Now it's time for winning and not whining. Purity doesn't win elections. The voters who matter are not in CA, NY, or MA. Here's who matters:
WI 10
VA 13
PA 20
OH18
NC 15
NH 4
NV 6
MN 10
MI 16
Me 4
IA 6
GA 16
FL 29
CO 9
AZ 11
Ok, you have made the case that the moderates are who win. Good luck, because that's all you might get. Good luck with rallying around senile Joe.
Even Jake Tapper is starting to have second thoughts.
nan said:
nohero said:
And, here we go -
Ms. Krystal Ball, who has been cited on MOL as an authority, won't vote for the Democratic nominee if it's not Bernie.
And so Cenk Uygur of all people winds up sounding like a voice of reason as a result.
Wow, nohero is now watching TYT and posting videos from independent media!!!! Ha!
Krystal Ball makes some very good points, and that might be painful for some of you to hear. Treating people like sh*t does not make them so eager to vote for you and allowing that to happen means they feel they can just do anything and you will fall in line.
Bernie treats the Democratic Party like siht....reason why we’re not so eager to vote for him. Give it a rest. You are all sore miserable losers. Go form your own party. Crazy!
The evidence seems to suggest that Progressives could absolutely take the reins of the party, or at least make it a tighter race, if they would show up to vote. But young voters who overwhelmingly support Sanders seem to be staying away from the polls in droves.
Jaytee said:
Bernie treats the Democratic Party like siht....reason why we’re not so eager to vote for him. Give it a rest. You are all sore miserable losers. Go form your own party. Crazy!
I don't want Sanders supporters to go form their own party. We have a lot of the same goals and that would guarantee a Trump win. I don't care for the fact that he has rejected joining the party he wants to be elected by, but overall I would have no trouble voting for him in the general. And i would try to convince more conservative Democrats not to fear his "socialist" self-description. And that he is a good man who cares about the USA who would make an good president.
He would NOT make a good president. He has never demonstrated that he has the ability to work with people, help to build an undercard or to compromise on anything. He would be a lousy president.
ml1 said:
BG9 said:
I do. Because we need the Democratic party to unite and focus on removing the existential threat on our health and welfare that is presently occupying the White House. We no loner have the luxury of affording Bernie's rancor and divisiveness. We need to focus now.
If you think Trump is not an existential threat, then think again. The mishandled six week delay in testing should make it obvious.
why do we need to focus now, as opposed to two weeks from now?
Two weeks from now. And then what? Two more weeks from then?
Trump is the problem. Lets spend resources on defeating Trump, not on each other. What will two weeks gain us? We already know Sanders's and Biden's positions. How often do we need repeats of "Joe gets money from 60 billionaires" or "Bernie's M4A is unaffordable."
mrincredible said:
I think if we don't see the primary process play out fully there is less chance of bringing a lot of Progressives along if Biden wins.
I think the more centrists pick up the "Sanders Should Drop Out" banner, the less chance of bringing a lot of Progressives along if Biden wins.
I think the more people write off Sanders as done, the less chance of bringing a lot of Progressives along if Biden wins. He may have a steeper hill to climb, but he's not mathematically out of it.
We can bring a lot of progressives along if Sanders has the grace to say "Hey, we fought the hard fight. I'm disappointed we didn't win this time but we'll continue our fight for change. I'm suspending my campaign and I want everyone to support Joe because what counts is getting Trump out."
Or will we see Sanders continue to his bitter end and then pout and reluctantly support Biden with the undertone of I didn't get the nomination because the corporatist establishment ganged up on me?
Yeah, seems to me Bernie should have a talk with Biden to make a deal for Bernie's drop out and support. Once Bernie drops, Warren is likely to support Biden, and we can get to the main task here.
Not sure what Bernie's end game is here.
drummerboy said:
Yeah, seems to me Bernie should have a talk with Biden to make a deal for Bernie's drop out and support. Once Bernie drops, Warren is likely to support Biden, and we can get to the main task here.
Not sure what Bernie's end game is here.
Bernie wants to debate Biden. To try and humiliate him. That is the megalomaniac that Bernie is. After this he is toast. He wants one last stand alone with Biden to embarrass the Democratic establishment on live tv. Crazy sicko
Jaytee said:
drummerboy said:
Yeah, seems to me Bernie should have a talk with Biden to make a deal for Bernie's drop out and support. Once Bernie drops, Warren is likely to support Biden, and we can get to the main task here.
Not sure what Bernie's end game is here.
Bernie wants to debate Biden. To try and humiliate him. That is the megalomaniac that Bernie is. After this he is toast. He wants one last stand alone with Biden to embarrass the Democratic establishment on live tv. Crazy sicko
mebbe. Not so sure Bernie is that evil though.
Just read an interesting tweet, suggesting that instead of a debate, they should have a sit down session just talking about how they should go about solving various issues, and where they could find areas of agreement. Just two old, experienced pols trying to hash stuff out.
Will never happen. Too good of an idea.
For Sale
-
REVO luggage $100
More info
Garage Sales
-
House Contents Sale - Rain or Shine Sale Date: May 18, 2024
More info
Free Items
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
Advertisement
The Democratic "establishment" has moved as far to the left as it can while still appealing to center-left, moderate, and center-right people. Credit the progs. They done good in moving the party. Now it's time for winning and not whining. Purity doesn't win elections. The voters who matter are not in CA, NY, or MA. Here's who matters:
WI 10
VA 13
PA 20
OH18
NC 15
NH 4
NV 6
MN 10
MI 16
Me 4
IA 6
GA 16
FL 29
CO 9
AZ 11