Opinion Democratic Party Leadership Is Moving Away From Bernie Sanders

[Fawlty]

I agree with this in principle, but it's not even like Bernie is out of step with everyone else, and he's certainly not a corrupt, unqualified boob like Trump. It's just another primary and he's just another candidate. But he has a few very online fans who are completely clueless about politics and fill in the gaps of their knowledge with cynicism and CTs, and they're exploited by sleazes with opposing goals (who manipulate them into working against their own interests).

bolded: yeah and that seems to be picking up again. I hope it doesn't go full Ron Paul this time.

But as far as him being just another candidate...Bernie himself is a fine candidate and all, like we've always said despite our (caps lock) corporate masterrrrrrs instructing us to destroy him. But I think it's also defensible that the party would defend itself. Bernie's growing support pushed the party a little in the progressive direction even in defeat, so it's not as if he wasn't a challenge to the party. There were good reasons to feel that the push from the fartherish-left was risky, and the result was a nudge, which is optimal and in the end justifies the defense of the party. In other words, the challenge and the defense had a good result, and we should be happy about the whole thing. Maybe I'm drunk but that's a fair look I think.

 

[IGIT]

There's been a perception since the election that the Sanders wing has gained influence. The messaging of the party has been much further left than it previously had been (for example, with increasing support for single payer or a job guarantee). I don't know how much that reflects Sanders' influence or how much is just a natural tendency for out-of-power parties to be bolder. Compromise (and thus disappointment for the hardcores) is inevitable when the rubber hits the road, but when there is no concern for that, everyone can be an idealist.

ahoy Jack V Savage, Happy New Year,

i think some of it does reflect the success of Senator Sanders' messaging in his primary challenge to Mrs. Clinton two years ago ( ie - Senator Gillibrand and her careening trajectory deep into Bernie-land with her universal jobs guarantee).

as to the bolded, aye to that*.

- IGIT

* - i wanted to qualify that with this; not all hardcores are equal. i mean, i feel sort of hardcore about single payer. but that makes me a hardcore fiscally reasonable fellow.

someone who feels hardcore about cutting taxes for the wealthy and redistributing wealth upwards? that's a hardcore schmuck, and i can't see the reason in compromising with that kind of individual.

 

[IGIT]

I agree that Bernie is far more calculating then agressive. I personally want that quality in a statesman, it's not an MMA fight.

It's funny really. I was getting quite frustrated with Sanders, for exactly what you describe. I'm starting to see the method to his madness though. You got to remember, this is the guy who called glass-steagal, this is the guy who called the Iraq war, this is the guy who called the Patriot Act.

I agree with that he lacks agression. I disagree that it isn't tactical, and revolving around a long road, world veiw.

heya Viva my friend!

agreed with most of what you said, 'cept for the bolded.

i found Bernie to be a pretty aggressive speaker, and a cagey politician. the contrasts he drew between his platform and Mrs. Clinton's were devastating.

Mr. Sanders was definitely on the attack in the 2016 campaign.

did he stand and point at Mrs. Clinton and call her a triangulating, neoliberal who was awash in a flotilla of conflict of interest due to the Clinton Foundation? did he point at her ankles and wince?

no, lets leave that kind of stuff to Mr. Trump.

happy new year, Viva!

- IGIT

 

[Jack V Savage]

* - i wanted to qualify that with this; not all hardcores are equal. i mean, i feel sort of hardcore about single payer. but that makes me a hardcore fiscally reasonable fellow.

someone who feels hardcore about cutting taxes for the wealthy and redistributing wealth upwards? that's a hardcore schmuck, and i can't see the reason in compromising with that kind of individual.

Disagree on your first point. And the reason compromise is inevitable isn't that you necessarily agree; it's that other people also have power and can stop progress. For example, with Republicans fully united to stop anything under Obama, Democrats needed every single vote and thus the most conservative members in Congress had veto power over the whole program. That's normal, or what's abnormal is even being able to make that kind of change. The idea that that means that everyone in the party then agrees with the result is dumb, just based on not understanding anything about politics.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

3-4 year old data? lol, math

Yeah I figured you would just blame the evil Democrats for unfairing the Bernie or whatever. Not interested in your spastic nonsense on that. It's getting to be like dealing with Ron Paul fans. We'll see how things stand when there's actually a field of candidates, and also more data on the racial breakdown. I'm not buying a reversal of all of the reality of the 2016 election based on an April 17 poll. I hope it's true, but we'll have to wait and see.

Way to fall back on misdirection rather than own up to the fact that you're using old data to shit on Sanders while defending the Democratic party; yikes what a fail.

And how about September 2018?
How about that reality for you?

Inb4 goal posts get moved.

 

[Philo-Publius]

It really feels like Bernie is becoming more an more irrelevant as the party is moving away from his more progressive ideas on healthcare, education and wealth disparity. He looks less and less like a leader on these issues going into the 2018 and 2020 election cycle. It looks like the DNC been working on this for sometime slowly pushing Bernie into the sidelines and he looks like he is running out of steam trying to get his message out.



Denver Post
"
Their movements reflect competing strategies for establishing their reputations and shaping a party that lacks a clear leader and consistent message in the Trump era"


https://www.denverpost.com/2018/05/20/what-election-2018-means-2020/

No one wants to give their hard earned dollars away to a bunch of ANTIFA drones who have been taught they shouldn't have to earn their own shit.

 

[King in the North]

Establishment Dems support global corporatism in lockstep with the GOP. We will never find common ground as long as they continue to support that agenda.

You’re probably right about this point (at least for the most part), but are you willing to disregard the drastic differences in opinion, in regards to virtually everything, on the domestic level between the two parties?

That doesn’t make any sense to me. Not attacking you just genuinely want your opinion on it.

FDR told capitalists they were going to pay for social programs

Obama asked

Get your head out of your ass

FDR was elected during the Great Depression and faced considerable opposition when he first took office. It wasn’t until ~1937 that the Supreme Court stopped striking down his congress’ legislation, and that was only because of his Court-packing plan. Of course he eventually gets everything he wants, but it wasn’t like that initially.

I’m not trying to give you a history lesson and you probably know more about FDR than me, because I’m an idiot, but it’s not really fair to compare his situation to Obama’s. Could you imagine if Obama would’ve announced something comparable to FDR’s court-packing plan? He wore a tan suit and half the country was outraged. He didn’t really have the luxury to tell the capitalists to do anything. Better to get something than nothing, I suppose.

Interesting thread. A lot of good points. It’s a shame the right can’t be this hostile towards one another lol.

 

[King in the North]

I tend to disagree with the characterization: they have widely adopted policies resembling Sanders' viewpoints. However, it's a giant party based on coalitionism, and you cannot realistically expect every one of its members to be amenable to social democracy: complete homogeneity is only possible if your party is completely devoid of principle (see: The Republican Party).

Best post in this thread

 

[Liquid Smoke]

He's a white male. Why should they give him a voice?

 

[King in the North]

He's a white male. Why should they give him a voice?

Because a push towards general equality and fair representation in government isn’t actually discrimination like many white male Trump supporters have convinced themselves.

He’s a big player now. Of course he has a voice.

 

[franklinstower]

He's a white male. Why should they give him a voice?

Agreed man!!!! Kamala Harris is the only real choice. As a female dual minority she is THE FACE of the democratic party.

 

[Liquid Smoke]

Because a push towards general equality and fair representation in government isn’t actually discrimination like many white male Trump supporters have convinced themselves.

He’s a big player now. Of course he has a voice.

Check your privilege white boy.

Agreed man!!!! Kamala Harris is the only real choice. As a female dual minority she is THE FACE of the democratic party.

This guy gets it.

 

[IGIT]

Disagree on your first point. And the reason compromise is inevitable isn't that you necessarily agree; it's that other people also have power and can stop progress. For example, with Republicans fully united to stop anything under Obama, Democrats needed every single vote and thus the most conservative members in Congress had veto power over the whole program. That's normal, or what's abnormal is even being able to make that kind of change. The idea that that means that everyone in the party then agrees with the result is dumb, just based on not understanding anything about politics.

hio Jack V Savage,

was there compromise in President W Bush's decision to engage in a two front war, and then oversee a particularly haphazard "reconstruction" period in Iraq?

was there compromise in the GOP's tax overhaul? you could say that there was a little bit of compromise between the Freedom Caucus and GOP mainstream leadership (the FC was opposed to the higher taxes that would hit blue states) - but that's about it.

when the GOP congress blocked the nomination of Merrick Garland, was there compromise going on there?

i mean, sometimes there's compromise, sometimes there's a tiny bone thrown to the other side, and sometimes there isn't much compromise going on at all, aye?

- IGIT

 

[Hollywood Jack]

BULLSHIT

GRADE A CORPORATE MEDIA PROPAGANDA BULLSHIT

I favor Bernie over Hillary, but he's yet to turn that into minority votes in primaries, which are all important these days. I'm not necessarily saying he can't, but he hasn't yet, and there's no guarantee he will. I wish him luck, though.

 

[IGIT]

The anti-Sanders propaganda campaign has begun.

hey there AUR old friend!

yep, it sure has.

Jonathan Chait, Ed Kilgore and the NYmag apparatus has resumed full attack mode on Senator Sanders.

its depressing, really.

- IGIT

 

[VivaRevolution]

hey there AUR old friend!

yep, it sure has.

Jonathan Chait, Ed Kilgore and the NYmag apparatus has resumed full attack mode on Senator Sanders.

its depressing, really.

- IGIT

I love it. These idiots don't understand how their attacks help Sanders.

 

[IGIT]

I love it. These idiots don't understand how their attacks help Sanders.

hello again Viva,

its a real turn-off to me.

maybe this is how the President's loyalists feel about "never-Trumpers".

it ticks me off. makes me pre-disposed to hate on candidates like Kirsten Gillibrand.

- IGIT

 

[franklinstower]

I love it. These idiots don't understand how their attacks help Sanders.

Man I really hope you are right. It is tough to have 60% of the entire country wanting the exact same policies as the most honest and true candidate in america fights for and believes in AND not have the DNC or corporate media backing him

 

[VivaRevolution]

hello again Viva,

its a real turn-off to me.

maybe this is how the President's loyalists feel about "never-Trumpers".

it ticks me off. makes me pre-disposed to hate on candidates like Kirsten Gillibrand.

- IGIT

You and millions more like us.

As important as it is for Bernie to have a real vision, it is equally beneficial for the media to keep poking the bear, and thumbing their nose at the public.

Their arrogance will be their downfall.

American Macron's.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Man I really hope you are right. It is tough to have 60% of the entire country wanting the exact same policies as the most honest and true candidate in america fights for and believes in AND not have the DNC or corporate media backing him

I feel like every Bernie supporter that was devastated when he didnt quite pull off the historical upset, is just frothing at the mouth for another shot at this.

I think the momentum is going to pick up right where it left off. We just get to start with name recognition, and as a front runner.

Quit amazing to remember back to having to explain to everyone who Bernie is.