2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie's recent blunder will cost him
He should have at least said that he wanted to join the Democratic party so he could expand it and make it better. Instead he said that he ran as a Dem so HE could get more money media coverage. So it's all about HIM.
He really fucked that one up.
This is probably why so many Dems haven't endorsed him.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)livetohike
(22,156 posts)Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Besides, Hillary was already pulling in way more Democratic voters than Bernie.
Independents are the ones that have been putting Bernie over the top in states like Michigan and New Hampshire.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)The party is better for his "hijack" of it.
840high
(17,196 posts)friends doesn't care if Bernie has a D or R or I after his name.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)a) The odds of a republican winning the white house become all but certain if he ran as an independent
b) The party needs to change to meet the needs of its members. Clinton, Dean and Wasserman-Shultz won't let that happen without a fight.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)But, you know, Cali, I welcomed Bernie on our ballot because I'm one of the many liberal Democrats who felt we needed to move farther left. As long as he does not win, I will be pleased.
And if he were to become our nominee, unlikely as that's looking, I would back him, but taking real comfort in the legal limitations imposed on our presidents and feeling fairly sure Congress and the Constitution would be strong leashes on his extremist tendencies.
Of course, it's too likely that many people going a little "wild" by voting for him would stupidly "balance" their vote by denying us control of the Senate, and the House, meaning he'd be lucky if he could build modestly on what Obama has started.
Compare that to electing Hillary with a genuinely likely Senate majority and far stronger representation in the House...! I do wish he'd drop out now and start supporting her and the Democratic Party he owes so much to in the general election.
We'll see.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)...because his actions give the lie to their half hearted protestations that they're fighting the good fight for progressive principles.
Perogie
(687 posts)immoderate
(20,885 posts)--imm
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)uppityperson
(115,678 posts)or money enough to run a strong campaign. Unfortunate but true.
Do you really think Democrats don't endorse him because he's running as a Democrat, but would if he ran as an Independent?
MineralMan
(146,324 posts)I believe him. As for this hurting him, I doubt that very much. He's a career politician, after all. The Senate's a good gig, but being President is even better. I'm betting everyone in the Senate would like to have that promotion.
It's a long, tough haul, though, and there's no assurance of a win. A lot of work goes into it. Many people have had disappointment in that quest.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)Lying is......and boy Hillary certainly has.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)everyone should operate.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)This is reflective of what Clinton has trained us to expect of a proper politician.
marew
(1,588 posts)mathewsleep
(857 posts)than the policies, you are a bad liberal.
CalvinballPro
(1,019 posts)...more to do with the lack of Congressional endorsements than anything else. The old expression, "Don't shit where you work," holds true in the House and the Senate, apparently.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)CalvinballPro
(1,019 posts)Arazi
(6,829 posts)But rather than earning the frustration and ire of his peers in the vein of other Senate hard-liners such as Sen. Ted Cruz, Sanders has managed to be respected even liked by much of the chamber, according to members on both sides of the aisle.
The entire article is great
mythology
(9,527 posts)The vast majority of them have endorsed Clinton. That action speaks louder than an article.
roody
(10,849 posts)onehandle
(51,122 posts)hollysmom
(5,946 posts)so what, change the political system if you disagree, make people get tattoos on their foreheads saying what party they are in from birth. UI mean like DWS would be a republican for life,. as she is in reality and Rahm Emanuel would have Asshole tattooed on his forehead. and so on.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)not that many people are concerned about 'The Holy Party" They are concerned about the issues and what Bernie and We can do together to crush the Corporatists Agenda. Which hopefully includes teh DLC Third Way Blue Dogs
not even a blip on most peoples radar
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)could anyone say something so stupid!
Oh ....
That wasn't Sanders?
... nevermind.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)I respect the fact that he doesn't really want to be a part of it.
It needs reform, badly.
DWS is proof positive of that, all by herself.
libtodeath
(2,888 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)pass it
Else You Are Mad
(3,040 posts)Simply put, in order to be a viable candidate, one needs to run in one of the two major parties. It would have been political suicide for him to not run as a Democrat. That is not scandalous, it is just common sense on his part.
Svafa
(594 posts)how bad for everyone it would be if he had run as an Independent and split the blue vote, handing the GE to repukes.
casperthegm
(643 posts)Does he oppose Citizens United?
Did he vote against he war in Iraq?
Is he in favor of marriage equality?
Is he in favor of reinstating Glass Steagall?
Does he take money from Wall Street?
Does he support fracking?
Is he for healthcare for all?
Does he smear his opponent, calling her a one issue candidate?
Labels of independent or democrat don't matter. What a candidate's record and beliefs are is what matters. So often I see posts with a bunch of rhetoric but no actual issues addressed. Well here you go. If these issues don't represent what a democrat is, or at least should be, I don't know what does.
So what if it got him the coverage he needed? He needs coverage to get this message out so that we can see the clear contrast between a true progressive democrat and one who is a lap dog for Wall street and the establishment.
Nanjeanne
(4,974 posts)He made a joke when Chuck Todd asked him - he said "I wouldn't be on your program" - that was the extent of that. His whole response was about the way we have a 2 party system and that it was necessary for him to run within the Democratic Party.
Makes sense to me. And is very very accurate. Anyone who knows Bernie knows he has always caucused with the Democrats and supports the real values of the real Democratic Party. The Dems in Congress are certainly happy to have him caucus with them - vote mostly with them - and actively work against the Republicans. Aren't you?
If he ran as an Independent - I would certainly vote for him - but he would be risking pulling lots of votes from Hillary. This way - if he loses - he is supporting the Democratic ticket. Would you rather he run as an Independent? Clinton would certainly lose if he did. You should be grateful he isn't interested in splitting the Dem ticket and causing Hillary's immediate loss.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)An independent in name only in many ways
He caucused with the Democrats for, 16 years in the United States House of Representatives, 10 years in the United States Senate;
where he served on many committees Representing the Democratic party such as the:
Committee on the Budget (Ranking Member)
Committee on Environment and Public Works
Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety
Subcommittee on Green Jobs and the New Economy
Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Subcommittee on Energy
Subcommittee on National Parks
Subcommittee on Water and Power
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Subcommittee on Children and Families
Subcommittee on Primary Health and Aging (Ranking Member)
Committee on Veterans' Affairs (chairman)
He has every right to expect respect from those he served with such loyalty and in so many capacities.
The Democratic party must consider him a true blue ally to have given him seats on so many commitees.
He was also a founder of the Democratic Progressiuve caucus.
It appears to me the only one's that are offended by his Independent status are all the Moderate Republicans that are far less honest and register as "Democrats" while voting for Republican policy, those "Democrats" are most often both conservative and liars, among them Hillary Clinton.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)... I wasn't just being overly and unfairly suspicious of him or his motives.
BainsBane
(53,041 posts)I think the ones who care about that have already factored it in. It may well hurt him with superdelegates though. And of course you're right about endorsements.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)You run with that. It will resonate with maybe a few Hillary supporters beyond this site and that's about it.
Meanwhile no one died on our watch in Libya...
farleftlib
(2,125 posts)Nobody cares which letter he puts after his name or why, except Hill fans and they don't count.
Now about the Reagans being the heroes of the AIDS era....
Kall
(615 posts)HERVEPA
(6,107 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)"It may be hard for your viewers to remember how difficult it was for people to talk about HIV/AIDS back in the 1980s and because of both president and Mrs. Reagan in particular Mrs. Reagan we started a national conversation, when before nobody would talk about it, nobody wanted to do anything about it, and that too is something I really appreciate with her very effective low-key advocacy. It penetrated the public conscience and people began to say, hey, we have to do something about this too."
You might not get that this is like saying Trump soothed racial tensions or that you proudly stand with David Duke, civil rights icon but that's exactly what it is like.
I doubt the basic decency of anyone who would say that and of anyone who does not flinch at supporting such a candidate.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Isn't that what ALL politicians claim to be doing?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)It would never go without joining the party and correcting its course.
JFKDem62
(383 posts)Bjornsdotter
(6,123 posts)....I don't really care what party he runs under.
Tom Rinaldo
(22,913 posts)I Chair our Town's Democratic Committee so I can say this officially. I not only register Democratic, I not only vote Democratic, I have a say (a tiny one) in our Party's County Convention - and theoretically in matters higher up than that. My Party does not make it easy for me to participate in matters beyond my geographic base. Our conventions for the most part are per-orchestrated. Like any organization I am sure that if I invested enough personal energy into it I might rise some in the ranks. Instead I invest the time I have into building the Democratic Party in my Town so that we can win local elections. I do a lot of grunt work for the Democratic Party, and I am not complaining - but I have no illusions about what it is, it largely functions as a social ladder.
I am in a tiny minority of voters who actually invest some energy into the machinery of a major political party, rather than just working for candidates who I personally support. Our Party is a vehicle that must be kept in running order to help accomplish certain aims, but it is not some fantastic mystical embodiment of our highest societal ideals. The Democratic Party exists for us, not the other way around.
I am proud to have Bernie Sanders running as a Democrat. For me at least it offers some validation that the Party that I labor for is actually promoting something of importance and lasting value, that it actually is providing the logistical machinery needed for an individual who I actually believe in to mount a strong campaign for President.
Thank God for that. I am tired of helping keep a political party going that far too often turns its back on the reasons why I initially registered, in my youth, as a Democrat in the first place.
farleftlib
(2,125 posts)Well said.
I've remained a Democrat long after the party has become unrecognizable to me and left me as it marched farther and farther to the right. We have as much say as anybody who is and isn't welcome in the party and I personally believe Bernie is giving us old-timers a taste of what it used to mean to be a Democrat. Hillary misses the mark by miles, as did her husband.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,168 posts)Yes, I believe I do.
DefenseLawyer
(11,101 posts)Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)Great strategy guys.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)It's really funny actually since Independents are the majority. We finally see a reason to join the Democratic Party and they want us out. Well god damn. lmao
So Far From Heaven
(354 posts)to get a decent liberal candidate. Viva la revolucion! It's about time.
marew
(1,588 posts)retrowire
(10,345 posts)Because he's sincere and trustworthy. Hillary on the other hand! :/
Sorry about Hillary's untrustworthiness and proven record of doing whatever she can for herself! Damn!
JackBeck
(12,359 posts)I look forward to Sanders bringing the Party back to the economic and social justice beliefs that first attracted me to the Party.
It was ultimately the Clintons that made me question why I was even giving the Dems the time of day.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Only braindead party loyalists give a rat's ass about this heinous label betrayal.
ThePhilosopher04
(1,732 posts)is duly noted.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)It's effective triangulation meant to garner a wider and more diverse voting base that would otherwise be the case. It also gives him far more access to the Democratic machine and its infrastructure that would be otherwise. I see that as effective politicking rather than a "f*ck up."
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Except for all those times it's hurled at Hillary as another example of how evil and manipulative and cynical and weathervane-y she is. Other than that, it's all good.
TCJ70
(4,387 posts)...big surprise.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Skwmom
(12,685 posts)been working out well for them. The people - not so much.
N.Y. to Paris
(110 posts)I'm sorry, but I must speak...very rarely
do I speak on here cause I won't get into
pissing contests with people, but again, I'm
sorry.....your candidate has more fucking
baggage than LAX and you post this? Really?
"oh, he really fucked that one up" Yeah, it's
"all about him"..... Unbelievable....
You obviously haven't heard a word or FELT
a word he's said....
Well, this Dem is supporting him over the
Corporate Schmooze Queen a million times
over.... What could possibly change with her?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)that is some flair with words right there.
(And you are correct to boot)
N.Y. to Paris
(110 posts)I'm a big fan of yours, but I'm obviously more of a reader.
I'm on here every day and I love it, there are many on here
that I'm a huge fan of....I learn here...Be Well!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)from some of the panic (undertow) I am seeing, we might see a few Michigans all over again.
beedle
(1,235 posts)and this time it was a truth that was obvious, logical, and aligned with the reality of federal politics. What will the voters think? An honest politician? Is he trying to ruin the system?
I can understand though how Hillary supporters might find this shocking and a bit disgusting ... something to do with breaking out in hives if someone slips and gives a straight answer.
asuhornets
(2,405 posts)Hopefully Hillary can finish him tonight...He hardly every give Democrats credit for anything.
shawn703
(2,702 posts)Those that do already support Hillary.
Vinca
(50,300 posts)Autumn
(45,120 posts)cyberswede
(26,117 posts)but not Bernie.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)I do have to give him props for that.
cyberpj
(10,794 posts)Are you too young to remember Nader?
You should be grateful he gave her a fair game.
He did Dems a favor by allowing a real choice between someone with a true Dems heart and soul and someone else with the heart and soul of a Republican.
Now it's up to the voters.
itsrobert
(14,157 posts)This is a short term gain for him. Why would the Democrats holding the SuperDelegate votes choose him after he basically trashed them, the President, and the party?
DrDan
(20,411 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)myself included, couldn't care less about labels.