I think the majority of Bernie supporters get this & want this.

We finally have a leader to help us take the first step & to fight those that will push us down.

¡Si, de acuerdo!
Ja, das stimmt!
その通り！
Yesssssssssss!

Democrats have been surrendering without a fight for too long. Better to fight and lose than not to fight at all. Even if lost, early battles often set the stage for later victories.

If it does nothing else, perhaps Bernie's campaign will help some members of the party to grow a backbone.

it means not many big battles can be left alone

i'll try to get better health care ...is better than...nope can't ever do that!

i'll try to get higher minimum wage is...better than ...nope who cares?

i'll try to get X for working people.....is better than....naaah my 1% super pac's would hate that

sheesh almost sounds like a democrat doesn't it?

I want him to have the chance to try, with our help.

insists she is 'pragmatic' and 'practical' which is giving up a fair share of outcome before one even begins! No thank you. I want to reach for the skies - we deserve it.

than to have never tried at all. Geez, can you just imagine if our founding fathers had had her attitude? We'd all still be genuflecting to the Queen of England and bitching about how high today's taxes are on tea!

Thanks for the thread, BigBearJohn.

Reflects what most all of Bernie supporters feel, including me!

what I'm seeing and feeling is that Bernie is the first politician in a very long time to make people feel that gthere is hope for change from the same old same old, Barack Obama had that going for him too-for a time

We have some good Dems in Congress who will jump on board, but we need to sweep the rest out. MoveOn or some organization like that is going to have to find these people.

... establishment sure makes it seem like it.

Sanders whole campaign hinges on people not finding out how historically bad for America the 2010 election was and the gerrymandering that went on afterwards.

Sanders is screaming at the cabby for not going through stop and go traffic fast enough.

..not support any of theses guys.

There overall record should be looked at...

I admire President Obama greatly. Went to his inauguration, met him twice during the 2008 campaign, voted for him twice, greatly admire his wonderful book Dreams from my Father. He's been a class act like few other politicians that I've ever had the pleasure of supporting. Historic, epic, transformative politician.

But he's not beyond criticism! I'm a black voter but also a liberal voter, and I didn't like an economic team with Larry Summers, Timothy Geithner, and the rest of the Clinton holdovers with ties to Goldman Sachs and an anti-regulatory, anti-Main Street mind set. I agreed with Sanders that it was important to pressure and lobby Obama from a left perspective, and this is also true on the Affordable Care Act with its lack of a public option. I also think that the supermajority the Dems had in 2008 was squandered due to a poor choice of chief of staff (Rahm Emmanuel) and not enough urgency in proposing legislation (I live in Wisconsin and note how when the Republicans have the numerical advantage, they go gangbusters changing laws). I still admire President Obama, but I think it's not only reasonable, but necessary to challenge the platform and governance of any administration.

Sanders isn't perfect- no one is. But this whole cherry picking of Sanders' record based on 2-3 votes, treating Obama like he's beyond criticism, and ignoring the Clinton record on the IWR vote, Wall Street connections, racist statements during campaigns, opposition to single-payer, etc. doesn't serve anyone.

... and what Sanders and Killer Mike and Mr "Nword-izzed" Cornell West words were not just due criticism, they were pretty anti Obama.

Which is my current gripe against Sanders is now he's going around acting as if he likes Obama and he doesn't

Sanders is not willing to tell the people in SEC states he wants a "course correction" and not a continuance on what Obama built on.

That's inauthentic

There was a statement by Sanders about a primary challenge, which I believe he backed away from in a later statement, back in 2012. Obama can't be re-elected at this point, so why is that even an issue now, as opposed to the many difficult challenges that are on the table at this moment?

I agree that West is anti-Obama - true. He speaks strongly from a left perspective, and I get that. Out of my four siblings, there are three Sanders supporters and one Jill Stein supporter who talks about Obama like Cornell West does. We argue sometimes about Obama's record, and we don't agree. And that's ok with me. I welcome multiple perspectives because my own take isn't the only valid take on the issues.

I don't think there's any evidence about Sanders not liking Obama - they are both veteran politicians, and unlike Clinton's campaign against Obama, there is no public smearing. Sanders has been a reliable DEM ally all throughout the Obama presidency when it comes to legislation in the Senate, including important items in the Obama legacy (ACA, Dodd-Frank, the stimulus package, etc.). It's disagreement about some of the issues - single payer vs. ACA, TPP vs. a more balanced trade pact, etc., where the contrast becomes more apparent. The Obama record is not perfect on these issues - there's room for criticism and there's room for improvement, in my opinion. And, as is obvious, Obama is not running in 2016.

But if you want a candidate that will say they'll follow the Obama legacy to a t (at least in campaign rhetoric that's tailor made for SEC states) vote for Clinton. Enjoy the results - you will have earned them.

... calling Obama weak and rightward (the bad version).

Also, it wasn't JUST a statement it was a continuance of bashing by Sanders over the last couple of years and then associating himself with Bigga and West who've said some of the most vile racialized things about Americas first black president.

Sanders may be trying to pass what he's said about Obama as just mere criticisms but it comes off as hiding and running from his own words.

Associating with people like Bigga and West say loud and clear that Sanders doesn't like Obama...

Have you seen them lately?

I've posed this question to Clibton supporters since he got in the race. Please provide specifics.

... to make doctors, hospitals and pharma pay half of what they're paying now under his SP plan,
3. Demolishing generations of democratic progress with his revolution and putting asunder the democratic establishment including Obama himself
4. Sanders "revolution" has too many asterisks by it that leaves out marginalized groups and even not reducing military programs to begin with... go hard or stay home.
5. Total lack of foreign policy INTEREST ... not just experience... he isn't even interested... not by the least bit.

Personal
1. Sanders came to this primary with an establishment mindset; that groups of marginalized people would join his revolution if they just heard about it vs building a relationship and finding out what people needed. Sanders had months to get out of the Northeast environment and into others environments where there was different thinking and choose to stay were he was at and now his message is reaching the very people Clinton lost her 08 bid with. Recent polls have in GOP. territory with his numbers in the marginalized groups.... This looks like he had good marketing to a narrow group of people.....not a revolution.

2. Sanders purity test is something even he can't pass. Instead of going hard against the establishment he could've proposed he's direction is better by proposing legislation or actions that would progress his revolution. No, it's mostly personal attacks on Hillary and others in the establishment for not being pure for something he's done even in small measures in comparison. From the CFMA to his 94 vote to his gun immunity vote etc etc... don't just be slightly better while bashing everyone else.... propose something that actually works.... and no, 2 trillion people standing outside of Mitch McConnell's windows doesn't work, he'll just shut the blinds

3. Sanders overall has never been the person he's bashed others for not being... Sanders doesn't have a PROVEN TRACK RECORD for revolution... not in the least bit. John Lewis had a small point the other Day... "where his ass was at!?" (where yah at by future) all this time?!

Where Sanders as was at when the left needed his revolution for

- Cops to stop murdering Americans for minimal causation of being sKeered?!
- Getting medicare for all past congress
- Reducing military spending and pegging our resourses for relative little gain
- Reducing the threat gun manufactures and gun attitudes placed on this country
and last but not least
- Getting Single payer passed in VT..........................VT!!!

Your take?

tia

someone talk about a different way to look at things -- democratic socialism -- rather than having to listen to more "innovation/bootstrapping/start a business/free trade" bullshit.

Go big or go home

the 21st century McGovern, Mondale, Carter (2nd), or Dukakis.

I believe in free will.

HRC has even less chance of accomplishing anything of importance to poor & working class Americans, because she'll simply carry water for her owners (Goldman Sachs et al).

She's won exactly one election - in New York, as a Democrat. Not exactly the highest bar in politics.

He won 1 state. His home state. MN

Hillary Clinton hasn't proved yet that she can even do that - win majority support among Democrats!

purposes, the electorate is opposed to raising taxes.

He would be the first President in my lifetime who actually governed for US. It would be our government again. Even if he only gets some of what he/we want it would be an achievement. Congress won't cooperate then get a new Congress. Even though Obama has the Congress problem he spent way too much time trying to cooperate, bargain to get them to back even watered down versions of bills. Didn't work, people saw him as weak.

You do know that Congress isn't appointed. You obviously don't live in a red state.

and when they are up for reelection for Senate, not just throw them out.
What Bernie wants is what most people want so it wouldn't be as easy in a red state but possible. Guess you would know that better!
I am from a very blue state, the R's have problems just trying to get someone to run.

We cannot go with a weak, untested, inexperienced candidate like Bernie Sanders. We need a strong, battle-tested candidate who can win like Hillary Clinton or we risk losing it all.

From the NY Times..

There is a big difference. Read the articles I posted earlier.

Meanwhile, over at the Justice Department, the pressure is mounting on attorney general Loretta Lynch to step aside for a special prosecutor:

Loretta Lynch is on the edge of the spotlight, about to be dragged to the center. If the FBI finds sufficient evidence to launch a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton or one of her top aides for mishandling classified information, Lynch’s Justice Department will have to decide whether to press ahead.

Even if no evidence of wrongdoing is found, Clinton’s many critics are unlikely to take the word of an appointee of President Obama’s and will doubt that justice has been served. Already, top Republicans are calling for a special prosecutor to be brought in and evaluate the situation. No. 2 Senate Republican John Cornyn (Texas) took to the floor of the Senate last week to call for a special counsel to be appointed “because of the conflict of interest by asking Attorney General Lynch to investigate and perhaps even prosecute somebody in the Obama administration.”

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) agrees that Lynch ought to consider a special counsel, a representative said, to reassure the country that decisions are made “without regard to any political considerations.” The Justice Department, however, has so far declined the request.

________________________________
If Hillary DOES get the nomination, the Republicans will really start turning the screws and ratcheting up the pressure to bring in a special investigator. Can't you just picture the kinds of ads the GOP will spend million on? Just use your imagination. You think you've seen ugly? IMHO, you haven't seen anything yet. The Republicans are licking their chops in anticipation.

Support Clinton if you want. But she doesn't have nearly the track record in elective office that Sanders has. This is not to say that she's inexperienced - she served for a term in the senate, she served as Secretary of State (and she served as First Lady, which no one can seem to agree on whether that counts as being part of the Bill Clinton administration). This is significant experience, although we can debate about what the record shows as to what she has accomplished in these offices.

Meanwhile, why not give due credit to the lifelong accomplishments of Senator Sanders - whether or not you support him for president?

Vermont is probably the least representative state in the country.

Again, we're cherry picking what counts as experience. Sanders has served in more elective offices and for more years than Clinton - it's a fact.

That's a fact.

After years of reaseach and planning. What could possibly go wrong?! But by all means, let her have her day.

deserves a recommend for that alone

Someone who will actually try, actually make our issues a priority and fight for them, will do better than someone who has other priorities. It's a given.

(Although the past couple of weeks have made it nearly impossible to ever consider Hillary)

What got me off the fence was just a minor bit of pondering, ... Do I want to be constantly fighting Rebublicans just to keep the status quo? Or do I want to be constantly fighting Republicans over liberal ideas?

It became a no brainer for me after that.

Together, we can accomplish anything we put our minds to.