Fuck the economic terrorist scumbag Koch Bros, Waltons, and so on.

If so, I'm listening. If not, GTFO.

he cannot do so. But voters will not like it if they feel their chance to vote for a great president is denied.

listen to the voters. See the mid terms, where the voters refused to vote for those who do not represent their interests, SS, eg.

Candidate. Two party politics tends to limit choices. But that's what we have.

someone who will not cut Social Security, Medicare and those programs that help the most vulnerable members of society are just dreamers, not living in the 'reality based community' as the Third Way talking points imply.

Reality is that we are seeing the Dem Party moving closer to doing something they never did, attacking these programs, putting SS on the Deficit table eg, that is just shameful for any Democrat to do. Thankfully Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are speaking out loudly in opposition to this.

What we want is extremely realistic, we want to preserve the best of the Democratic Party's programs which have ALWAYS been under attack from Wall St's party.

What IS unrealistic is the policies of the Third Way who want to gut these programs, leaving the elderly, the poor and disabled without the means to survive.

We do not want a Wall St backed candidate, a very realistic goal for Democrats.

I will vote for the Democratic nominee. I hope Bernie will not run as an independent.

... But in the generals, I will vote for democrats. Doesn't this site actually promote the importance of actually winning elections?

I swear, some of you seem to be in the "I'll hold my breath till I pass out" school of political strategy.

If someone is trying to kill me, it doesn't matter so much to me whether they want to kill me quick or torture me slowly.

without a safety net, is working for Wall St. Voters have now shown they will not vote for anyone who is a threat to their favorite programs.

As I said, it is up to the Party who are hearing loudly from voters now on these issues, to provide a candidate people can vote FOR, not someone who is 'better than' the worst. They've done that, it hasn't worked for them, and voters vote for their own interests.

Why would it be hard for the Dem Party to provide a candidate the people can be enthusiastic about rather than, as you seem to be saying, just someone who is not as bad as the Republican?

I don't see the problem here.

If Bernie runs in the primary, he has my ear, at least, though I doubt very seriously he could win the generals.

But yes, I think it is VITALLY IMPORTANT, that the next occupant of the White House is a Democrat.

If the Dem candidate is so great, the independent would have no effect.

And we once again have to settle for second best

I am behind his running because he (or someone similar) is who we need. He's also someone with great experience with underdog elections having won as the dark horse in every contest where he was not the incumbent.

Because last I checked, this site is educated to getting DEMOCRATS elected.

that kind of talk is not allowed!

I want to see both of them run, if they decide to, along with anyone else who wants to run. I want to see good honest debates about the issues and both Warren and Bernie would help us see such debates. I also will support whoever wins the democratic nomination for president, no matter who that person is.

would be a waste of a Progressive that we cant afford.

office of VP would become a lot more influential and useful.
If Warren or Sanders were Hillary's VP, however, the post would continue on its usual decorative way, attending funerals and making occasional speeches. If she chose one of them it would be only to try and scoop up liberal/Progressive voters. IMO and all that.

Where the hell are my 3000x3000 pixel images of Obama. Freaking hard drive flatlined after the 2 free years of community college (if you work for it) he says could happen.

any way shape or form.

So very "Man Who Came to Dinner."

If he runs as an independent or a third party, he can fuck off.

"If Democrats run as liberals, I'm behind them. If they run as Third Way, they can fuck off."

Ideals are so much more important than party affiliation.

is it more important to GRANDSTAND or get things done?

And maybe Sanders hasn't paid any attention to the state of today's newspapers and television, but no matter what Obama does he's either misrepresented, ignored or attacked.

That is why.

We could use someone like him or and/or Warren running. I know it's about more than just getting Hillary to the left, so I would support him or Warren. But if Hillary is the nominee, I will still vote for her though not enthused. We saw how much damage the Repukes can do in their first couple days in the majority in the House/Senate.

I'm not enthused either. Lots of time between now and 2016.

The country needs to hear what he has to say. That's what campaigns should be for.

I hope he runs. I love him; he's got pure ideas I can get behind.

Yeah, Sanders will get a lot of votes from a certain segment of the Netflix/iPad/Amazon Prime ascendency; just about everyone who eats organic Kale will vote for him.

They voted for Obama too (who turned out OK) but too bad, so sad,

1) Bernie's not hot, so the kids won't vote for him -- and
2) He's not African-American either, so the African-Americans won't vote for him.

The Kale Constituency on its own is pretty slim pickings.

Welcome to the Democratic Underground!

I do not eat organic kale btw.

I could care less what party he runs for as long as he runs.

What I like most is he's not afraid to address class: So many other so-called progressives are so beholden to the rich they shit their pants in fear of being pigeonholed as waging "class warfare"; that is the plutocrat's defintion of the term. Mr Sanders doesn't give a shit about playing nice with the establishment.

You can bet your bippy he'll catch as much hell, if not more, from turd-way type "democratic" candidates than from the repubs.

He's more of a Democrat than most of the ones with the D behind their name.

I'm going to start saving my pennies now, so I can throw him a couple of bucks when the time comes. It won't be much, but it will have to do.

A peculiar aspect of the Obama years has been the disconnect between the rage of Obama’s enemies and the yawns of his sort-of allies. The right denounces financial reform as a vast government takeover — and lobbies fiercely against it — while the left dismisses reform as symbols without substance. The right accuses Obama of being a socialist stealing the money of hard-working billionaires, while the left dismisses him as having done nothing to address inequality.

On all these issues, the truth is that Obama has done far more than he gets credit for — not everything you’d want, to be sure, or even most of what should be done, but enough so that the right has reason to be furious.

The latest case in point: taxes on the one percent. I keep hearing that Obama has done nothing to make the one percent pay more; the Congressional Budget Office does not agree:



According to CBO, the effective tax rate on the one percent — reflecting the end of the Bush tax cuts at the top end, plus additional taxes associated with Obamacare — is now back to pre-Reagan levels. You could argue that we should have raised taxes at the top much more, to lean against the widening of market inequality, and I would agree. But it’s still a much bigger change than I think anyone on the left seems to realize.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/13/why-the-one-percent-hates-obama/?_r=0

He could, in fact, end up taking significant numbers of votes away from whoever the Democratic candidate ends up being.

What would happen at DU if Hilary Clinton got the Democratic nomination and Bernie Sanders ran as an Independent?

Run and give'em hell!!!