Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Human101948

(3,457 posts)
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 08:20 AM Apr 2016

NY Times: Sanders and Kasich Should Ignore Any Pressure to Quit

Mr. Sanders’s presence has made this an immeasurably more substantive race, in which both candidates’ policies have been better vetted, and as a result, better delineated. That’s the best preparation for the general election.

Yes, Mrs. Clinton’s lead is nearly insurmountable, but it should be voters who erase the “nearly.”

Mr. Sanders has voiced the concerns and energized millions of young people, many of them voting for the first time. His candidacy has forced the party to go deeper on addressing issues like wealth inequality, college tuition costs and the toll of globalization — important points of distinction with Republicans.

What’s more, Mr. Sanders’s commitment to small individual contributions has put the lie to Democrats’ excuses that they, too, must play the big money game to win. This is a message too seldom heard in the party
that first championed campaign finance reform. That it’s back is long overdue, good for Democrats and good for campaigning.

Mrs. Clinton “is clearly irritated by the fact that she has to deal with this guy,” the Democratic strategist David Axelrod said in an interview. “But he’s pushed her on a lot of issues in a positive way, and I think that his young supporters will be bitterly
resentful if anyone tries to shove him out of the race.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/20/opinion/sanders-and-kasich-should-ignore-any-pressure-to-quit.html?emc=edit_th_20160420&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=70251688

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

merrily

(45,251 posts)
1. The New York Times can pee in its hat. It's done little but denigrate and dminish or smear Sanders
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 08:26 AM
Apr 2016

from the jump.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
3. My point is: Too little, too late. They've been shameful from start to finish.
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 08:30 AM
Apr 2016

This very belated half hearted attempt to appear decent don't impress me much (apologies to Shania Twain) and, IMO, should not impress any Sanders supporter much.

Sorry if I did not make that more clear in my first post.

Baitball Blogger

(46,736 posts)
10. They are thinking about reconciliation.
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 09:39 AM
Apr 2016

As if they can play any role in that process.

The truth is, those of us who have been disenfranchised our entire lives because the U.S.A. is a one party establishment will just continue to feel disenfranchised. And the number of people who stop reading newspapers will rise as we look for alternate places to express our p.o.v.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
11. Exactly. Too little, too late. The NYT was one of the worst, exceeded only by MSNBC and a couple of
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 09:41 AM
Apr 2016

others.

FlatBaroque

(3,160 posts)
7. It gave him praise because the NYT is part of Team Clinton and this is the start of the
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 09:10 AM
Apr 2016

charm offensive. They have no idea how much they are reviled.

DemocratSinceBirth

(99,710 posts)
5. They should follow their conscience
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 08:54 AM
Apr 2016

They should follow their conscience but at the end of the day the nominee from both parties should be the man or woman who has garnered the most popular votes and pledged delegates.

There is nothing as ennobling as submitting to the will of the people.

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
6. With the New York Slimes, you've got to figure ulterior motives.
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 09:08 AM
Apr 2016

Sorry, Slimes, Sanders and his supporters, including this one, are NOT in it to decorate the coronation. We're in to win it. The delegate count is not "nearly insurmountable." It is surmountable, period. Clinton netted only 30** delegates in NY. There are plenty of delegates still to be won, including CA's 500+! And most of the remaining states are unlike NY, where Clinton won two Senate terms.

Sanders did better in NY than Obama, even with all the Democratic voter suppression in NY yesterday. And he may do better still, if the court forces a count of "affidavit" ("provisional&quot ballots.

The one big set of facts that the Slimes and all of the Corrupt Media ignore is that Sanders has fantastic favorability and trustworthy numbers, nationwide, while Clinton's are dismal, that Sanders beats Trump by twice the margin that Clinton does, that Clinton loses to other Republicans, while Sanders beats them all, and--most important of all--that Sanders wins big among independent voters, who comprise 40% of the electorate.

Clinton has a constituency within the Democratic Party and nowhere else. And Sanders has closed the gap there as well, nationwide.

Upshot: Clinton is a lousy candidate. And it is truly unfortunate that so many Democratic primaries are closed, because this makes her serious vulnerability in the GE less visible.

Nope, this primary is NOT over. And Sanders is not an adjunct to the Clinton campaign, and his supporters don't view him that way. We see him as President--the best President we have had since FDR. And not since the New Deal has there been such a passion among Americans for fundamental change. And if the Democratic Party won't give it to us, we are going to see the end of the Democratic Party with Clinton's fail in November, or maybe a bit further down the line, with her fail as President.

She does not have the support to get anything done, even for her true constituency, Wall Street. And she is so scandal-vulnerable, we may see the U.S. government simply fall apart, with scandal-mongering, corruption, indictments and impeachment. Meanwhile, the very planet we depend upon for life is deteriorating day by day, due to fossil fuels. She can't and won't do anything about that either. It requires dramatic change and great courage. She is not capable of either thing. We may well see social chaos in this country in the near future, if we don't get the leader we need. Bernie Sanders is that leader. He is the only candidate who says that stabilizing our climate is our MORAL duty, and the only one with a plan to create decent jobs and improve things for the poor majority while we tend to our planet's habitability.


-----------------------

**(Latest news is that Clinton will only net 15 delegates, not 30, because Sanders won so many counties overall in NY. See
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280179974 )

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)
12. Well, thank you! I don't think I'm able to be that pithy!
Wed Apr 20, 2016, 10:07 AM
Apr 2016

Could try, though. How about this?: "Sanders, still here."

Note my added footnote, above. See that link for a big boost. Sanders won so many NY counties that, as congressional district proportionality goes, Clinton's delegate gain may be only 15, not 30, and maybe even less.

Sanders: 40 years of not giving up!

Sanders: To the convention!

Sanders demolishes Trump!

Sanders: A little birdie told me!

Sanders: The leader we need for climate change.

Sanders: When was he wrong?

I do love this one (not mine): Vote Bernie Sanders: He is not an asshole!
(It's big with my son's crowd.)

Mother Earth endorses Sanders!

Mother Earth endorses Sanders
(and she'll be at the convention)

Hey, I could get a job doing this. It's fun!







Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»NY Times: Sanders and Kas...