the rules. The End.

You really, REALLY need to try harder.

But, if you think an alternative is your only path, by all means go forth and follow your dreams.....LOL

wins? That is a novel argument on Democratic Underground.

Hell of a risk you're taking in the general.

Hell of a risk not voting for the Democratic nominee considering that not doing so helps Donald Trump.

Frankly, I'll be voting a straight Democratic ticket, as I always do.

I guess they weren't pissed when the Supreme Court handed the Presidency to W either.

instead of a Big Tent for all, I think your plan will give us a Republican president.

Unless that is the intent!

Hillary is a giant step backwards. So, I'd rather keep the party liberal. What are we fighting for in the big tent if all we are is a slightly less abrasive version of the other party.

isn't another man's Democratic Party.

You're in the tent, not THE tent.

"You're in the tent, not THE tent."

Well said, yallerdawg. You've seen the left-over vitriol, too, have you?

Have a good weekend.

our planet is way off in some obscure part of the milky way. As line in a a movie...we are like a flea on the back of some animal at 50,000 feet. Changes don't come quickly when you are dealing with many millions of people. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. This is a long haul project, not an all or nothing on shot affair. Even the Dalai Lama perseveres.

The time to stop the crawl is NOW.

Time to leap left otherwise our middle class will be gone in the next decade, the climate will be irreparably harmed and war will be permanent.

The world turns daily. Do something every day and you might have a chance at being successful. But going crazy every four years is not sustainable. Have you run for office? Have you become a board member of anything in your community? Just demanding the world think like you won't work either. Your candidate lost and you can either pout and take you vote and waste it or you can push the world in a better direction and vote against the crazy man with orange hair. Your choice.

Its hard, and not really appreciated by a lot of the voting members. They kinda just nod and say, get us a raise!

I am trying to make things better.

I am not a secure enuf person to venture out and run for office. If I had been a more confident person, with a few less decades on my chassie, I would have run for office, had I discovered politics back then. As it stands, I hated politics and everything it stood for after spending the first 18 years of my life listening to my folks fight like cats and dogs over it.

Now that I am older (62), I have gained SOME confidence, but not enuf to sit on any local council or board, etc. Just not in me to do it.

I vote, I volunteer, I donate, I wear the T-shirt and I am vocal around those who will listen to me. I am not allowed to talk about politics at work (but if someone brings up the election, I state my case).

I am supporting Bernie Sanders for President because he shares my values. I am living from paycheck to paycheck, my retirement will be nearly 100% SS and I literally cannot financially afford a Hillary presidency.

so there you have it.

How will Hillary negatively affect your SS retirement?

Why will you blame the government if you didn't save any money to bridge the gap between what SS will provide and what you will need to retire?

how do you save any more?

For several years, I was paying $600 per month in health insurance which pretty much took any of my extra money that should have gone into a pension.

And I watched what little I had in the stock market from a previous job, dwindle quite a bit in 2008/2009.

I'm 62 and back when I was a younger adult, that is what I thought SS was for.

It was not instilled as heavily as it is now, to save for retirement beyond SS.

Try wording your question so it isn't a direct insult to the reader.

And, Hillary apparently plans on means testing SS which could reduce if further.
That is enuf to make me want to stay right away from her.

No insult intended.

If you had been able to leave that money along in 2008, it would have been worth quite a bit more now.

I don't believe that Hillary is for means testing of SS, but even so, it wouldn't affect you.

In case you hadn't noticed, the party is fractured. Far, far more than during previous primary squabbles...

Regardless of how this election turns out, nothing will ever be the same.

Although the past 20 years of the New Dem's program have been 'educational' to people paying attention, this election cycle has been a popular crash course in what that putsch has done to "the people's party".

Somewhere around half of dems -really- don't like what they've learned.

The current Prez:Obama says he'd be seen as moderate Republican in 1980s

So will yours

Seriously, what's in it for us?

I can see the moneyed people staying in this party, but those of us who keep falling further and further behind? Why would we (why should we) keep supporting a party that does that to us?

If you want a big tent, you need to reach out to the people you want in that tent and offer them something that actually helps them.

When you keep glossing over our needs and the needs of our children, what do you expect?

"Deal with it, where else are you going to go?" That isn't a big tent. When corporate and elite cash own the leaders in that tent, it is a club where you can walk around in the tent as a peasant or even serve, but you really aren't a valued member of that club.

Destroy the Democratic Party and out of the ashes will rise a progressive party of Democrats ... against all evidence to the contrary.

...there has NEVER been a Democratic president the angry left has liked. The "progressive" movement relies on historical revisionism for these kinds of arguments.

you call us 'the angry left', but you're a conservative Georgia democrat. I hope there are more of us than you leading the party. Given our current 'probable' nominee, I think I'm wrong on that count.

The left despised JFK and hated Johnson even more.

was disliked by a lot of lefties.

I was emphatically told just the other day that FDR was a true, blue socialist, the ideal we should all be striving toward and . . .

Amazing how revisionist history works.

Yes, FDR, JFK, LBJ, Carter, Clinton, even Obama were all put through the purity strainer either before or after their elections and found wanting by progressive purists. And we should listen to their bellowing now? Because Bernie is the Savior, Bernie is The One, Bernie has the Only Pure Message.

Earth to Bernie supporters: the primary is nearly over and Bernie Sanders has lost in the same way Hillary Clinton lost in 2008--for the want of votes and delegates. Throwing right-wing memes at the wall isn't going to change the reality or the will of Democratic voters. Hillary Clinton will be the nominee of the Democratic Party because she's a Democrat and earned the biggest vote share.

It's not that complicated. Bernie Sanders ran a hard, spirited race. In the end, he simply came up short. Hillary Clinton will carry the fight forward because the biggest threat to the future is Donald Trump. It's really not that complicated.

and I loved JFK and I love Obama.

I think you are trying to paint all people of the "left" as unreasonable, and that's just not true.

... so difficult to deal with the Dem party doesn't even try.

this is over 10 million angry people. You might want to think about that.

The one with the most votes wins. Bye Bernie.

support the Democratic nominee, Hillary, are considering starting their own party, and they want to call it the "democrat" party

The majority of them want Hillary as their nominee. That's why she's ahead in votes, and ahead in the delegates those votes represent.

If you don't find that to your liking, there are other parties out there you can join.

And that was kind of the point.

But its shame that this new, lame version of the 'democratic party' gets to keep the name and history of the party, when it is nothing like what it use to stand for.

at the county, district, and state levels? Walk away from all the gains? Start over in four years?

... that the Party IS what it's always been.

Those who don't believe that are free to start their own party, based on whatever they believe.

It's really that simple. Calling the present-day Dem Party "a lame version" of what you think the Party should be is a great launching point for starting a new one. So why not go with that, and see how many people follow your lead?

When did you start following politics? '96?

If that's what you believe the party has become, you are free to leave. No one has a gun to your head.

I know you're schtick is to avoid that, and keep towing the line of 'ice burns!', but my question remains.

What's the question?

Your t-shirts slogans are trendy, but little else.

are wrong.

... on a message board.

Dox me if it makes you feel better, though.

if those grousing now had put time and effort into the Democratic Party (before and/or after this cycle), the out-come would have been different.

Actual conservative agenda...

That's not fighting, that's capitulating.

The Democratic Coalition Party?

The voters have spoken, and this will be in effect wrapped up in 4 days.

It makes it really easy to see who is actually committed to turning this place more positive on June 16th, and who just wants to burn it all down.

I'll chalk you up for the latter.

Feel free to not answer that, we all know she is trying to dodge the conservative moniker.

Not sure why you guys think this is such a clever retort. It's just silly.

I'm just not believing that came from a Clinton supporter. Clinton supporters keep bringing up that Sanders was formerly an Independent... I just CANNOT believe Clinton was registered... and worked for another party in the past!!!!!

because the democratic party has not always been a progressive liberal organization, It is going back to some of it's roots

after all we know FDR was a fascist right? (RIGHT WING TALKING POINT BY THE WAY)

No, more like 1880 when actually both the Rs and Dems were pro business right wing parties, funny how history repeats huh?.

The Dems started to leave that after the Granger rebellion...

The other period where they were really right wing was before the Civil War... and during the civil war, and the 1820s.

It is funny, but the Rs were pretty much pro labor and whatever passed as pro union during the 1860s and all the way to mid 1870s. In some respects they were extremely liberal since they even asked for women to get the franchise before it was really the in thing.

Parties realign constantly

A better President. Presenting Bernie as the perfect candidate is just hero worship. Bernie has many more flaws than Hillary. That's why the people have rejected him.

but when you bring out internment camps you are parroting a RW talking point, a classic one.

And people who do that, are Right Wingers, though many have joined the party, so it makes sense.

When you want to point out flaws of current politicians you can't overlook flaws of past politicians. Are you denying the existence of internment camps?

the NLBR, but seriously, I have heard that point spouted often by republicans.

And no I am not denying that, but it was quite the tell that your first reaction was not social security or the NLBR, but the camps. It is not shocking anymore either,

This is also another reason I left your party, The party left me.

I have. Do a little research into how they were treated. You may think it was nothing but it is a stain on our country and FDR. You play the game of listing Hillary's flaws as if Bernie has none. FDR did many great things but there is no excuse for the way the Americans of Japanese descent were treated. No politician or human being is perfect. Only a fool would think that.

so try that one somewhere else. The camps were terrible. But that was something democrats shied away from highlighting and republicans did.

I expect social security to be on the chopping block ok.

And I am not making this about Bernie or HRC. The party that once was the party of labor is now a neoliberal, business friendly right wing party, If you want that, embrace it, fully, with the full consequences of that. But have the decency to stop using Social Security or Medicare as your brand, Neither would be passed today. Nor would the VRA either, or title six or nine.

when your party decided to not even try to fight for single payer

That was very revealing of the RIGHT WING turn of the democratic party, a neoliberal turn. It started in 1992

Anytime they had a Democratic President from FDR till 1994. Hell, after watergate they had the run of the place. So if single payer and all the other democratic socialist goal were the goal of the party in past years, why were they not enacted?

As my grandma used to say 'the good old days were not that good.'

and historically I think there is a reason for that. FDR died, well none in their crazy mind would actually enact this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights.

I am not sure he would have been able to get that though the House and the Senate, but it is curious that after he died, that was shelved, It was in the 1944 SOTU. He died a few months later.

your party


if this isn't your party why do you have 6 thousand posts in the last 90 days, isn't there an independent underground that would much better suit your needs

Do you have a problem with that?

bitching about the democratic party

and spout gloom and doom all day

and I say what I want to say. This is a message board after all. Many of us are downright fed up with how things are going and that isn't against the TOS by any means.

is not a monolith. While some enjoy the concept of a litmus test, the Democratic party consists of many flavors.

When the ACA was passed, it generated a good amount of discord among many liberal Democrats. Their disagreement was of course that it should have been Single Payer, ignoring the fact that the votes were NOT there. Democrats such as Byah, both Nelsons, Liberman, and a good number of blue dogs made it very clear they would NEVER vote for a single payer or public option, and time was very limited to get something passed. The decision was made that the ACA was better than nothing, and I would venture that those who were uninsured, have pre-existing conditions, qualified for expanded Medicaid, and a whole host of other positive effects, are grateful that they have something verses nothing.

That some do not seem to appreciate that the votes weren't there for Single payer, and that there was a finite amount of time to get something through, I don't think they will ever grasp.

After the dixiecrats but before the third way.

we might but not in my lifetime

I already made my peace with that.

"What is repudiated at the polls by the overwhelming preponderance of Democratic voters cannot be the real face of the Democratic Party. It really is that simple."

Sanders and his followers have been repudiated at the polls by the overwhelming preponderance of Democratic voters

what is "fortunate" about the Dems going with a center Right candidate who thinks single payer and $15 hr wages are impossible?

Science.

from voting for Hillary?

The fact that we haven't heard from him in two years concerns me, but that's life on an anonymous message board.

And if she gets elected a very small party.

Opening primaries would be a good way to grow the party.

They went for HRC big time.

"Dixiecrats - They went for HRC big time."

Hillary won the south based on the African American vote.

I agree with you. This party would not pass social security, or the national labor relations act.

Did I mention you are parroting REPUBLICAN PARTY points? Nor does that shock me anymore.

From Japanese internment to turning back Jews from the pursuing Nazis to withholding social security participation from poor African Americans to refusing to sign anti-lynching laws.

Nothing REPUBLICAN PARTY points about that.

My my, the last time I heard that was at a republican party debate... it is a talking point when talking about Democrats.

Oh there was a day democrats highlighted the NLBR and Social Security and winning WW II. This internment issue was seen as a shameful moment, I could list a few more like not intervening after the Zoot Suit riots, and starting a long term policy that led to the crime bill that Bill signed, yes that rend started in 1943... but this is not a history board.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoot_Suit_Riots

Refute what I wrote.