2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumAm I crazy? Tweety is an idiot but
his Rant tonight about how President Sanders wont be able to get anything done because of the 60 vote threshold..? was just plain bullshit!!
Bernies answer was by amping up the millions upon millions to force the change.. Tweety wouldnt let go of the 60 vote problem he would encounter as president ...
Now,, Couldnt Bernie have answered by simply stating that it might not happen in his first year as President..., however, if he fights like hell from the bully pulpit for a long enough time and effectively reaches our populace, then perhaps in 2 or 3 election cycles..change would begin to happen.
Fucking Mathew's really pissed me off with his insistence that the 60 vote threshold would negate Bernie from achieving his agenda..
I posted this in a rush...Off to work..
kimbutgar
(21,210 posts)I agree he did ask Bernie hard questions. Can you imagine him asking trump the same type of question? How will trump get 60 votes in the senate to approve his wall?
thesquanderer
(11,993 posts)The difference is, Sanders will Try. And what can't be done with the 2016-elected congress might be more do-able with the 2018, 2020, or 2022. It will depend on Sanders and his supporters to continue to fight for what they want past election day, which Bernie himself says as well. Hillary? I don't see it.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)Chris's wife is running for office in Maryland as the "centrist" Democrat and, oddly enough, she has raised more money than anyone else running and it's mainly from 3 out of state "donors" who have been long time funders and supporters of the Clintons. Isn't that a strange co-incidence? Who'd have guessed that?
Dustlawyer
(10,497 posts)Hillary's Donors, that's why they did it! The corruption has reached critical mass!
PatrickforO
(14,592 posts)Sometimes he cannot see beyond the end of his nose, as I have heard him scoff at the 'political revolution' and actually deliberately misread/misunderstand it on the air.
Leaders set the vision, and the people perish without a vision. Bully pulpits are for setting, communicating and reinforcing vision. Think back. That's what the Fireside Chats were. The media is different now, but the concept is the same.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)rurallib
(62,451 posts)Comcast has let Ed and Rev. Al and I can't even remember who else go or get cut way back.
Tweety makes a fucking wad of money.
I bet you could write what tweety will be saying for the next six months.
Questions?
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)jillan
(39,451 posts)That is the one message that keeps coming from the other campaign and the media that makes me scream.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)What if most voters just don't agree with or want Bernie's proposals?
jillan
(39,451 posts)I don't want progress!
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)I think that's the real issue. Ever considered that?
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)The problem is that our representatives don't represent us. They represent the 1 percent or whatever corporation is funding them, so none of these proposals ever see the light of day.
A Bernie presidency would shine a big light on them and either these reps will have to do something with them or risk being voted out of office.
This is what Tweety couldn't understand, either. Sanders has risen so quickly from obscurity because he's speaking to issues Americans want to talk about and want to get passed. Bernie is the first senator to speak to these issues in decades. By just TALKING about these issues, he fires people up - and these are the issues the next generation wants to talk about.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)They don't track over to Bernie's proposals.
They support Obama's plan for free community college, not Bernie's plan to send rich kids to college off a tax on middle class 401ks. They support healthcare for all, and a public option on the ACA, but not single payer that prohibits selling commercial / private insurance.
I don't see anything you posted about breaking up banks (and wreaking havoc on all of our retirement savings), or raising taxes on the middle class, or increasing the size of government by 40-50%.
The devil is always in the details, as they say. And I will tell you what I hear from people - they want to fix capitalism. Not convert to Socialism.
DUzy 100,000 times over. The fine line between comedy and tragedy becomes very blurred when one looks at the reality we experience today. Thanks for the laugh!
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)be in favor of Bernies proposals?
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)... if the polling is accurate, and so far it appears to be accurate.
I think what you mean to complain about is that most Dems aren't buying into the socialist solutions.
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)or Medicare for all? Do you realize that Medicare for all is a huge tax break for the middle class?
How about term.. Democratic Socialism? Does that fix your problem? Cause thats what Bernie is calling it!
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)No, I am not in favor of taxing middle class 401ks to send rich kids to college. I fully support the Obama/Hillary plan for debt free college.
As for Bernie's healthcare plan, the numbers are pure fiction. We spent $3T on healthcare expenditures in 2014. Medicare and Medicaid alone are $1T per year. $1.38T (his number) to cover 29 million more people with less restrictions on coverage than we have now is simply fantastical bullshit. Sorry. And no, I am not in favor of outlawing private insurance, as his plan proposes.
I am in favor of expanding the ACA. Adding a public option would be excellent. Although I do not think it will happen unless we can get rid of gerrymandering in the next re-districting in 2022.
As for "Democratic Socialism" - sorry, the fact that the socialist leader is elected instead of a dictator doesn't change the fact that it's socialism.
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)You just stated that its o.k. to make a profit off a human beings state of health...
You lose a lot of credibility with your statement I am not in favor of outlawing private insurance.
Private Insurance Companies IMO, should exist only for the wealthy who might consider Vanity Surgeries.
In the meantime you should perhaps scroll down this article to see some of the successes of Social Democratic Govts.
How the heck can you so easily dismiss their way of life so easily.
Something is very off with your reasoning..
http://www.commondreams.org/further/2009/05/11/worlds-happiest-countries-social-democracies
i
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Been extremely active politically for at least 20 years. Helped elect a blue state legislature in my state, and pass LGBT anti-discrimination bills and marriage.
I phone bank and canvass for Dems even in off year elections. I donate regularly to Dem candidates and progressive organizations. So yes, I am a great progressive and always have been.
I am a Democrat. Not a socialist. And I reject your claim that someone has to be socialist to be progressive. In fact, in my many years of experience I have never seen the socialist brigade do jack for progressive causes.
These non-stop attacks on actual progressives who have actually worked their asses off while socialists sat on the couch or became keyboard warriors will NEVER help them get a seat at the table. Never. So keep up the good work.
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)A Social Democratic Govt. in the U.S. Sweet sounds sweet to me..Man I guess you just hate Bernie Sanders
and the coalition of millions who are supporting him..
By the way:
So keep up the good work How the hell do you know what I do and dont do with regards to my activism. So you dont even want to get in a discussion with me on this..
Your non acceptance of the political term, Democratic Socialism still amazes me.. Why dont you be honest about your hatred of the term..
Lebam in LA
(1,345 posts)it will be just like the last 7 years if republicans keep the majority. They will plan from day 1 to obstruct, just like they did with President Obama.
BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)But I'd rather have somebody in there that would at least make the effort.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Has it occurred to you that lots of people just don't agree with Sander's proposals?
John Poet
(2,510 posts)That includes DINOs.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Including moderate and liberal (versus extremely liberal) Dems.
Did you know that liberals who identify as very or extremely liberal only make up 25% of the Dem party? And the Dem party only makes up about a third of the electorate?
So that is about 8% of the voting public that could be described as extremely or very liberal. That's reality.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)The problem is that if any of the corporate-owned members of Congress actually brought them up for discussion, much less a vote, these representatives would no longer get the big bucks from corporations or billionaires because it's not what THEY want.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)student debt. No rebuilding of U.S. infrastructure. No jobs for youth. No end to endless war. No end to the drug war. No end to mass incarceration.
What a bright future! I'm in!
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)That's not the same as single payer (although I see a lot of Sander's supporters who think they are the same thing - they aren't). Obama's plan for free community college is something we should continue to fight for, but again, not free college for rich kids paid for by tax increases that tax the middle class. The drug war on weed is over if we retain a Dem president. I think both Dems and the GOP want to fix the mandatory minimum issue.
But like I said before anyone who really wants a "revolution" needs to start with committing themselves to a lot of hard work to turn state legislatures and governors blue. Because that is what it takes to get rid of the gerrymandering. And we have until 2022 to do it.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)or Stanford for a public university. AND Bernie's proposal does not tax the middle class to pay for any rich kid's education. And Hillary has flat out stated that weed will continue to be illegal. And mandatory minimums are only a small aspect of massive incarceration. The big part is what we make illegal, who we target and; because of their limited resources, who we jail and imprison.
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)for the rebuttals to those wrong assertions (ie. lies)
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)And that would be paid family leave, expanding SS, and movement on climate change. But Hillary also agrees with those issues and has proposals. So I am left with all his crap I do NOT want.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)I prefer Hillary's proposals to his completely down the line.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Or you can't deal with the fact that I support NONE of them? His "pay fors" on his proposals are either full of crap, or tax the middle class while he pretends he is just taxing "billionaires."
If you are trying to imply that because I am not going to waste my time typing out some list on your command, I am not informed, I promise you, you are barking up the wrong tree. I could bust more chops just on his silly single payer plan than 90% of the journalists out there.
Here, enjoy this - you will find it interesting, I'm sure:
http://www.vox.com/2016/1/22/10814798/bernie-sanders-tax-rates
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)thesquanderer
(11,993 posts)But so many of the "anti-Sanders" attacks are not about disagreeing with his goals, but instead, doubting that he can do them.
BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)Are when Tip and a bunch of good old boys from both parties got together and cut deals in the back room and he got to talk about it. Funny that he didn't seem to have any idea about how pressure from the public could turn up the heat on Congress and get some action, given that's what Reagan did to his old boss Tip O'Neill while Chris was working for him. Now Chris has amnesia.
Progressive dog
(6,920 posts)then he won't get a chance at a third.
People who believe that electing one man will change everything will be the first to desert that man.
BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)And I don't think he would quit saying it in the general election if he wins the nomination or in the White House if he wins the Presidency. I think every Sanders supporter here gets the message.
Progressive dog
(6,920 posts)which is why he has so little support for the nomination from Democrats already in Congress. They want to stay in office, so they are not going to run promising to take away everyone's health care, no matter what Bernie promises to replace it with. They are not going to run on a pledge to raise everyone's taxes no matter what Bernie says it will be spent on. Their constituents won't stand for it.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)????
Bernie wants Medicare for All. How is that taking away healthcare? He wouldn't ax the ACA until the other was in place. He's not an idiot.
And, thanks for thinking all Americans are dumb. Even Republicans can do basic math. It's not that hard of a proposition:
Example:
You pay $5,000 for health insurance a year, currently.
Under Bernie's plan, your taxes go up $500 a year, but you rid yourself of the $5,000 in premiums.
That's a $4,500 savings and you never have to deal with an insurance company again.
I think the American people can understand that.
mythology
(9,527 posts)(Often saying that if he loses it's because it was stolen) that the hopes and spirits of millenials will be crushed. Wouldn't that same crushing occur if Sanders doesn't get his proposals passed? I mean if they are so fragile that they can't handle losing a primary, how can they deal with constant Republican obstruction?
jwirr
(39,215 posts)true.
Progressive dog
(6,920 posts)never made a promise he couldn't keep.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)no one can do it alone and he is not promising to do anything alone. Anyone who thinks we are all expecting him to raise his hand and part the Red Sea does not understand where we are coming from.
We want someone who will try to do what we want regardless if it is a sure thing or not.
Progressive dog
(6,920 posts)as President and you think that describes Bernie. You don't really expect him to part the Red Sea.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)It has been a long time since we have had an honest president.
And all you want is someone who wins. Well we have had that before and look where we are at.
Progressive dog
(6,920 posts)to be honest?
Don't presume to tell me what I want. I don't only want someone who wins, I want someone who stands up for this nation, of which I am pleased to be a citizen. I do not want a President who used to stand up for repressive regimes as long as they claimed to be socialist. I do not want a former mayor of a little city in Vermont who thought bread lines were a sign of a healthy economy in socialist Nicaragua. A mayor who claimed that Lincoln and FDR acted like the murderous totalitarian Sandinista regime of Daniel Ortega.
If Bernie becomes the Democratic nominee, I will vote for him as the lesser of two evils. At least we have more chance of keeping some progress alive with Bernie than with any Republican.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)myself in front of your greater knowledge of history.
Progressive dog
(6,920 posts)thesquanderer
(11,993 posts)For example, if he can achieve 10% of what he campaigned on in his first two years, and another 20% of it in his next two years (with a further changed congress), even though he will will only have accomplished less than a third of what he set out to do, I think supporters would still be willing to re-relect, because we'd be on the right track.
Progressive dog
(6,920 posts)me believe that. Hah
thesquanderer
(11,993 posts)And he *did* get re-elected.
Progressive dog
(6,920 posts)wanted Obama to have a primary opponent in 2012. With friends like that, who needs enemies?
thesquanderer
(11,993 posts)...as well as something that has been well discussed in other threads.
Progressive dog
(6,920 posts)and the OP was "am I crazy? etc." which is hardly an invitation to a reasonable or narrowly ranging discussion.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... I'm inclined to agree with him.
BernieforPres2016
(3,017 posts)Because the Republicans love her.
But then again, she doesn't have much of an agenda to enact anyway.
dflprincess
(28,082 posts)even if it meant selling her voters out.
But at least she'd be "getting something done" and she won't need those suckers again until 2020.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)I'd say she can probably get a few things through, but not much. She will be better on FP and exec orders and judges. She will make better cabinet appointments as well.
Also, I just don't want a lot of the stuff Bernie is proposing. so there is that as well. I think a lot of voters feel the same.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)Yet, ask for something that most advanced nations have, such as affordable healthcare and affordable higher education, and you're basically told to go fuck yourself, hippie.
Funny how that works.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)What keeps us that way is our military. As they say, our economy is essentially backed with "men with guns."
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)If you're a middle class shmuck struggling to put your kids through college like I am, you're screwed. And that's thanks to power players like Hillary who prop up this insane system of impoverishing the many to benefit the few.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)It's not Democrats that do this shit. It's republicans. And that is one of the things I loathe about Sanders the most. He is simply full of shit when he implies the Democrats in congress or Obama caused these problems. Complete BS.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)However, only 25% of the Dem party voters consider themselves "very or extremely" liberal.
And by the way, nobody who is "republican lite" is in favor of the ACA, expanded SS, and free community college. Hope that helps.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)I can read and when many of the proposals that third way has match the republican proposals it seems pretty obvious to me. You don't have to be a dog to see the ppo on the ground
treestar
(82,383 posts)Reality is a real thing.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)question. IF we can take the senate back can't we change that 60 vote rule at the beginning for the session? I remember being mad at Reid because he did not do it.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)to create our own country, give women the right to vote, pass the civil right acts, etc.
Maddow is another gleeful schmuck.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)That's simply reality.
I really don't understand what Sanders supporters mean when they claim "millions will force change." Like a rally or a march or something? That isn't going to force anything through congress. Doesn't work that way. I guess if you had constant riots or something like the years long civil rights movement that might get some simple stuff changed - nothing major.
But if you are counting on these kids that are voting for him to do that I think you're going to be very disappointed. They just aren't that committed to politics, as we saw in the mid terms (and the decrease in turnout so far as compared to 2008). One rally or march might be fun for them, but then they will go back to gaming, clubs, normal life.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)"constant riots or something" that brought about the civil rights legislation of the '60s was "simple stuff." It sounds like you want everyone to just shut up, stay home and accept the status quo.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)More details on that please. Sounds a little naive for a lifelong politician.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Kip Humphrey
(4,753 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)moondust
(20,006 posts)that correcting the gigantic mistakes and injustices of the past 35 years (that Matthews watched from a position of relative power w/o raising much of a fuss) won't happen overnight. Bernie cited good examples in the civil rights and women's movements and DOMA.
k8conant
(3,030 posts)that remembers what he and I have lived through in this country.
I believe the dreams that got shot up in 1968 are finally coming to the forefront again after being beaten down for years.
Joy Reid was on the Chris Hayes show earlier tonight talking briefly about that very thing--the resurgence of the old Democratic Party before it was hijacked by the DLC.
elleng
(131,143 posts)Left for TV-land. Have avoided matthews for years; NOTHING changing!
LUCKY you have work to go to!
CBHagman
(16,988 posts)Or perhaps I should use the word spite in this case instead of strategy. We've all seen what happened from the first hours after the announcement of Antonin Scalia's death. It doesn't really take that many senators to gum up the works, but during the current administration the Republicans were openly hellbent on making that the case.
As yet we don't know what the makeup of the Senate will be, but it's not as though every seat isn't going to count when it comes to passing a new administration's agenda. And that's without even considering the House, which, thanks to gerrymandering, is projected to remain in GOP hands for at least a few years longer.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)That's how long we have to build up and elect Dem state legislatures and governors so that re-districting won't screw us and we can un-gerrymander this shit.
Anyone who really wants a "revolution" needs to start there and commit themselves to a lot of hard work. Because that is what it takes. Although I will say it is much easier to turn a state seat than a federal one.
The President and the bully pulpit and everyone else following like sheep is their obsession and all they depend on. It's embarrassing. Even the Tea Party knows to start lower.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Steagall and other things Republicans dream of.
Few people know that better than Tweety. He used to work for the Speaker of the House. Tweety was being disingenuous. Also, very obnoxious and rude in the way that he kept hectoring with that question, interrupting, talking over, etc. He's a disgrace.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Impedimentus
(898 posts)He doesn't and he won't.
treestar
(82,383 posts)So are elected Republicans who take everything to the extreme.
The bully pulpit as answer is oversimplified. It is not a miracle allowing a Presidential dictatorship. This is a free country and anyone is allowed to oppose the President, whether in the media, the Senate or just regular conversations or DU.
Gothmog
(145,619 posts)Sanders' plans for adopting his proposals depend on these new voters. Here is how Sanders thinks that he will be able to force the GOP to be reasonable http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/2/21/1483791/-Imagine-Bernie-Sanders-wins-the-White-House-Then-what
Thats a phrase Sanders uses often, but what does he mean by it? Sanders has said that if he wins the presidency, his victory will be accompanied by a huge increase in voter turnoutone that he thinks might end Republican control of Congress. But Sanders acknowledges that the House and Senate could, in spite of his best efforts, remain in GOP hands come next January.
Given that likelihood, Sanders offers an alternate means for achieving his political revolution. He says he knows that a Democratic president cant simply sit down and negotiate with Republican leaders and forge a series of compromises. Anyone who's observed the GOPs behavior over the course of Barack Obamas presidency would not dispute that, and in any event, no compromise with Republicans would ever lead to single-payer anyway.
So what then? How would a President Sanders get Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan to pass any of his big-ticket items? This is the model he proposes:
What we do is you put an issue before Congress, lets just use free tuition at public colleges and universities, and that vote is going to take place on November 8 ... whatever it may be. We tell millions and millions of people, young people and their parents, there is going to be a vote ... half the people dont know whats going on ... but we tell them when the vote is, maybe we welcome a million young people to Washington, D.C. to say hello to their members of Congress. Maybe we have the telephones and the e-mails flying all over the place so that everybody in America will know how their representative is voting. [...]
And then Republicans are going to have to make a decision. Then theyre going to have to make a decision. You know, when thousands of young people in their district are saying, You vote against this, youre out of your job, because we know whats going on. So this gets back to what a political revolution is about, is bringing people in touch with the Congress, not having that huge wall. Thats how you bring about change.
The rest of the DK article debunks that concept that Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell could be influenced by these new voters but we never get to this issue and Sanders himself admits that he will not bet elected without this revolution. So far we are not seeing any evidence of this revolution. Again, Sanders's whole campaign is based on this revolution and so it is appropriate to ask where these new voters are?
It is hard for me to take Sanders' proposals seriously including the ones you want to talk about unless and until we see some evidence of this revolution.
Again, where are these millions and millions of new voters?
UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)that same meme last night with a Cruz supporter a Governor I believe and stated Bernie could not name anything he got 60 votes for even though Bernie mentioned the Veterans' Health bill. His wife must be getting a lot of support from Hillary's donors...
Avalux
(35,015 posts)That's all we need to know. Bernie knew that sitting down with Matthews would be tricky and that he wouldn't get a fair shake. Journalism is dead.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)an incrementalist manager.
When JFK announced that we would send a man to
the moon in ten years, a lot of people thought that
he was nuts. Okay, it took 11 years, but it happened.
People with no vision love the status quo, and the
present one does not work for most people.
Tweety adores HRH, thus no surprise.
OZi
(155 posts)I also want someone I trust not to get the wrong stuff done. The kinds of things that Tweety and his ilk would be fine with.
madokie
(51,076 posts)and the CON horse he rode in on. In a just world he'd be rode out of town on a rail.
themaguffin
(3,826 posts)do you think that the GOP gives a shit about people complaining.
The ONLY way to really impact change is if Bernie gets a Democratic Congress. Period.
He needs to advocate that his supporters advocate for that and so far, I haven't seen that.
pdsimdars
(6,007 posts)But Hillary only needs 60.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)He's a cringing bootlicker, but he makes $5 million per year, supposedly. That kind of money gets a LOT of bootlicking.