The real worthwhile stuff, legislation creating programs, laws, regulations, and the funds to run those worthwhile programs can only be created only by Congress through legislation.

No matter how well a President can whip the bully pulpit or negotiate with the other side (or what ever route will be take) will work.

If we could get groups one quarter as active promoting Congressmen as we are in the Presidential nominee war, we might have a chance.

national political forum. Congressional campaigns, no the other hand, are local in nature, even though their effects have national impact. They are just not something DU get's interested in on a regular basis. That's why I encourage people to get involved locally and build relationships in their own national and state legislative districts.

It's amazing what a few people, working together, can accomplish in a congressional district or state legislative district. You can also form a relationship with the actual office-holders, who recognize people who work to help them get elected.

Presidential politics are interesting, but are national, so local activism is less useful, since a neighboring state can have more influence than your own. It is in elections where the results come from a single district that individuals can have the most influence.

And, since Congress is the source of all legislation, those people in the House and Senate are the ones who really need to be on our sides. Even Senators, who run state-wide, are accessible locally and it's possible to get to know them and for them to know you.

Who becomes President is often a crapshoot. I don't spend a lot of time on presidential races.

I suspect that as we get closer more Republicans will jump into the open primary.

Perhaps the good thing about Congressmen is that the election for the next Congress doesn't start before the last vote is counted in the current election.

For Senate, there are 9 declared candidates out of a total of 31 potential candidates.
I favor Kamala Harris.

That is yet another reason for backing Bernie Sanders.

The DNC and the DNCC, etc., all the national organizing groups have failed to excite and bring out enough voters to win interim and local elections.

We need a new approach.

Bernie has it.

When I campaign for him, I meet a surprising number of people who have never voted before and who are planning to get out and vote for Bernie.

He is what the Democratic Party needs if we are to retake the House and the Senate.

While Bernie does generate enthusiasm among some Democrats, the polls are beginning to show the limits of his appeal, I think.

I know you'll disagree, but keep watching. If I'm right, you'll see Sanders peak. If Biden chooses not to run, the entire picture will change almost overnight in the polling, and it won't be in Sanders' favor.

Still early days, though. We'll learn more this week, I'm sure.

that will persist beyond him personally, with the hope of changing local / state governments, which will have the organic effect of getting the districts redrawn more fairly. This is a very long view, however, and I don't know how/if he can maintain enthusiasm should Hillary steamroll him in the primary.

I personally think he is attracting the Howard Dean/John Edwards crowd, and like you say his support will max out soon. We'll see.

Those leaders spoke to the middle class's need in t gilded era for better opportunities and more equality. The movement builds from there and takes over even in more conservative sectors of society.

That is what happened more or less in the 19th century. It culminated in Theodore Roosevelt's populism, his ardor for clean government, the end of Tammany Hall as well as laws that curbed the monopolies which were the corporate excess of that time.

It is just a matter of whether Bernie wins as a populist or whether Trump wins as a populist. I hope it is Bernie.

I don't think that Hillary's rather lukewarm embrace of Bernie's issues is promising for her. There is not one issue other than gerrymandering (about which she can do very little as president without a strong Democratic majority in Congress and maybe even Democratic victories at the state level) on which Hillary has really taken the lead with exciting ideas.

I'm in California, and I am campaigning at the grass-roots level as I always do for candidate. People love Bernie like no candidate i can recall. They just light up when you mention his name. I've never seen this.

Try going out and talking to people on the street outside the DC and NYC areas. You'll see how it works with Democrats. It may be different in the Middle West, but I doubt it.

Bernie is speaking to all the issues Americans are dealing with in their lives. And nobody wants the TPP unless they are being paid to want it.

As for the cost of Bernie's programs, he is not suggesting anything that the middle class is not already paying for or needing desperately. The middle class is already paying for college education (student loans are expensive) and healthcare (bloated pharmaceutical prices and insurance companies that take a cut of up to 20% already????) and desperately needs more jobs. Those are the programs that Bernie proposes that will cost money. Bernie's plan is to spread the pain of paying for them. The price will not increase that much. And as for college, government investment in education will improve our economy a great deal. So will better mental health care availability, affordable day care and all of Bernie's proposals. Parents already pay for day-care -- and a lot of it is substandard.

Hillary is just not an exciting candidate, and the criticisms of Bernie don't hit a chord with Americans who know he is right about just about everything.

because their votes on the TPP makes my skin crawl.

I always found their silence (opposition) to cannabis legalization to be irrational, especially when most of that legislation would benefit Washington state citizens and their economy.

They probably had to drive through Hemp Fest traffic one too many times.

And despite our candidates facing a rigged situation in the House thanks to the gerrymandering, I suspect we will be somewhat better off after 2016 than the current state of affairs.

Also, whether he wins the nomination and general election, or not, we should not discount Sanders' efforts to get his supporters to become more active participants in the lawmaking process. That means letter writing campaigns, street activism in legislator's home districts, letters to the editor, ect. One should never discount the power of strong organized support (or dissent) from a lawmaker's home district in his or her decision making. Even R's will buckle if pressed hard enough.

a lot of his supporters will stop being activists for 2016. I'm seeing that sentiment here on DU. That's too bad.

Sanders and his supporters have been the ones to get out the enthusiasm and get the majority of both those that feel disenfranchised and the millennial vote. The DNC's dirty tricks haven't gone unnoticed by either group. If Democrats feel Hillary wins the nomination due to its obvious lack of support for Sanders, I think most will abandon the party. That would be a real shame!

I will never abandon the Democratic Party, though. Not a chance in Hell.

But not everybody feels that way. I have been a supporting and donating member of the DNC for longer than I care to remember and, have voted Democratic since I was old enough to vote. But if I feel the DNC is the cause of the only hope I feel this country has what would be the point?

Unlike the GOP light, I am not willing to sell out in the hopes that they will grant me a forestalling of the eventual end to the country as we now know it. If you are determined to proceed in finishing off America, I won't be a party to it.

That's closer to how I feel. In Presidential elections, the choice is binary and requires voters in all 50 states to elect a President. I don't believe Sanders can win the general election, so I'm supporting the candidate I think can win. Some disagree with my opinion on that, and that's fine. That's why we have primaries or caucuses in all 50 states. We'll see what happens. I will be supporting the Democratic nominee for President, as always.

My congressional representative is Betty McCollum. My Senators are Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar. My state legislators are progressives. That's my party at work, with my help. Presidents are something else again. They and the VPs are the only people elected by voters in all states. I vote for the Democrat, because it's a binary choice. I would always rather have a Democratic President, since there are Supreme Court justices and the operations of the military at stake.

But, I have little to no influence on who becomes President. Just one vote at my primary caucus on March 1. That vote will go to Hillary Clinton in 2016, because I think she has the best chance of election, given all 50 states and their political makeups. That's the basis for my decision. Where I live, we will relect our congressional representative and state legislators. That's a good thing.

So, no, I don't feel abandoned by the Party. I am part of that Party, and work to help elect Democrats to office. I've done that for decades, and have no intention of changing that practice.

I admire Bernie Sanders a great deal, and hope he continues to serve in the Senate, bringing his unique voice to that body. I don't live in Vermont. I live in Minnesota. I do not think he is a viable candidate for President, however, for many reasons.

With Patty Murray, Maria Cantwell and Al Franken earlier this year or last year...so much happens. I was sending Patty bits but not after she voted for the TPP. Both are very disappointing to me now. I will support a more left candidate. I voted them both each time they were on the ballot.

bernie is the one who can change things

he has energized a lot of people, including many young people and people who have never been involved with politics before

mineralman is right about getting numbers of people out. the voting places have to be overwhelmed

i think bernie has the best chance of doing this

Before he can do that, though, he will have to get the nomination. What happens if he fails to do that, which I think is likely? Will his supporters shift their support to the nominee and continue their active participation? I don't know. In some cases, I doubt it, based on the discussions I'm seeing here.

I can tell you this, though: Whoever the nominee turns out to be, I will be out there as usual, working on GOTV efforts with all the energy I can muster. I encourage everyone to take the same approach, regardless of who becomes the Democratic nominee. In all of those legislative races, it matters very, very much.

I do think that Bernie will win the nomination, but if he doesn't, I hope that those who supported him will continue to support progressives in all of the state and local races, because we're going to need them too. As for president(well all offices, really) I think everyone has to vote their conscience whatever that means. But I also believe that this election is about much more than the White House. it is a national movement that could end up affecting positions at all levels. Some are calling it a revolution.

progressivism is sweeping the country, and even many people who don't normally identify themselves as progressives are embracing these ideals. if they all vote their hearts in the down ticket races, things in this country could really change.

your calm and steady "forge ahead" approach helps keep things sane here on du, and i know i am sometimes part of the insanity. i always enjoy your posts, even when i don't agree.

She's a Democrat.

Funny how I don't have to change my party to caucus in my State.

But what is really funny, is that I don't feel the need to prop up a candidate who isn't what I would consider a worthy Democrat.

She has 18 million cracks, let them have at it.

I absolutely agree with you that we need to turn out Democrats in huge numbers.

Where I disagree with you is how we get people to the polls. I think Bernie Sanders will generate the enthusiasm for Democrats to show up in droves to vote. He has thousands of supporters show up anywhere he speaks.

If Bernie gets in, we still will not have the house due to
redistricting. And the House holds the purse.

If HRC or Biden get in, the millennials will pout and
stay home.And both Houses may stay in repugs'
hands.

The only hope is that if Bernie gets in, the young
generation will work their butt off for 2018. Sorry,
but I can look at this as a realist too.

There is also the reasonable possibility that Kasich
or Rubio could get in, in which case 2018 will
change House and Senate.

you are right.

We need a democratic House and Senate to really get things done, so I hope our presidential candidate has coat tails.

This next democratic president can appoint some liberals to SCOTUS and possibly save this country from fascism as well.

... need to finish the job in 2018.


Which of the Democratic presidential candidates do you think has the best chance of achieving this?

So, I don't know. We'll see, I suppose.

There was a movement in the late 60's, but nothing like this. The rest of the time it's been business as usual - steady movement from democracy to fascism.

I've voted for losing Democrats in that past, too. I don't want to do that next year, so, I'm supporting the candidate I think can become President. I've yet to have a President with whom I agree on most things, and don't really expect to. That's why I focus on legislative races primarily. Presidents have to win a majority of electoral votes from all 50 states. That's a tough nut to crack, and we've lost that battle too many times.

except probably Mrs. Clinton. Voting for her is giving up.

In many ways a congressional majority is more important than the presidency.

Presidents have very limited powers, but the powers they do have, like appointing Supreme Court justices and running the military are very, very important. We need a Democrat in the White House, but we need Democratic majorities in Congress even more.

Right now, most incumbent Democrats in Congress are endorsing Clinton. Most of them will be re-elected. I'm paying attention to that. People often have a low opinion of Congress, but hold their own Congress members in much higher regard.

I'll leave it to you to determine which of the current candidates is generating the most enthusiasm.

It has nothing to do with who the Presidential candidate is. It's my state legislators and congressional representative. They have far more to do with my life than any President. It's my city council members and mayor. They affect my daily life constantly.

And that's exactly what I'm selling when I walk my precinct and knock on doors. When I hear, "I don't like the Democrat for President," I ask how they feel about their congress member and their state legislators. "What?" Then I explain who the Democrats are who are running for their offices and their proposals to make things better. "Oh."

Vote for these excellent progressive people and vote for the Democrat for President while you're at it. That's what I say. That's what brings out the voters where I live. The President? Well, that's important too, so vote for the Democrat, not the asshole from the Repubican Party.

That's what I do. No President affects people's lives as much as local elected officials. That's the message I bring when I GOTV.

We need a Democratic President. No doubt about it. But, the President isn't elected in my precinct or district. That happens with the vote in all 50 states and the electoral college. If someone wants to know about that, I can explain that, too, and detail what a Democratic President will do that the Republican would destroy.

Enthusiasm about GOTV? I don't understand how anyone can be anything but enthusiastic about it. The President? Just vote for the Democratic nominee. It's a binary thing. The Democrat will support legislation that is progressive. The Republican will not. It's that freaking simple. I'm not enthusiastic about Presidential elections. I get enthused about a progressive state legislator or congress member. That I can sell to the voters where I live.

We pay far too much attention to the President. That's not who changes our lives, frankly.

... the plain fact of the matter is the POTUS election always has a bigger turnout, and a large chunk of the voting public will stay home if they don't have any enthusiasm for a presidential candidate.

Presidential coattails are a fact of American political life, even if the local races are critically important.

It's BECAUSE those races are so important that we need a presidential candidate who motivates voters to the polls.

That's why I'm supporting Clinton. You have no idea how far the Republicans will push the "socialist" thing. They will pound Bernie into the ground with it among centrist voters. This won't even begin unless he is nominated. If he is, that will be the primary campaign cry of the Republicans.

It will work, too.

Sorry, but I want a Democratic President elected in 2016. There's really no option in my mind. If a Republican wins, we all lose with GOP control of all three branches of government. We cannot allow that to happen.

the polls and leave thousands of millennials at home
than HRC.
I think that the chances are even for the GE as far
as she or Bernie are concerned. However, we will
have lost the millennials for a very long time.
Yet, the establishment of the dem party seems
intent to ignore that fact.

The RW echo chamber will scream memes about the Democratic candidate whoever it is. Bernie on the issues resonates with the public beyond the Democratic left, and he will bring more voters to the polls.

I too want to keep a Republican out of the White House, and I am not convinced Hillary is more likely to achieve that.

I also don't want to hold my nose when I cast my ballot. I'm sick and tired of voting against the R, instead of for a presidential candidate I actually believe in. Obama 2008 came the closest, but 2012 was an anti-R vote.

because he's been saying the same thing for months now...

Just a thought-which candidate, if successful, do you believe will generate the enthusiasm required to create and exceed 2008's 60%?

We're going to have an election, just like we do every couple of years or every four years. After the election, we're going to get a new President and some new members of Congress and Senators. We're going to keep doing what we've been doing in every election. The question is: Who will we elect? That's the only question. We'll elect a Republican or a Democrat. That's it. It's binary.

There's no revolution, except in the minds of a tiny minority of voters. The rest will vote for other reasons. If we are lucky and do great with GOTV, we'll win. If not, we get some asshole Republican as President and lose more ground in Congress. Seems like a simple choice to me. Go freaking vote and vote for Democrats.

That would be revolutionary enough, if we could turn out 100% of Democratic voters. That would change things in a real way.

Come the Revolution, we'll be righteously screwed, and that's the truth. What we need is a good election and outstanding GOTV.

In the White House, we need someone who won't give away anything or follow austerity orthodoxy and privatization.

For reality.

accomplish anything, that is. We are all so screwed with this irrational ANTI-GOVERNMENT bunch, it will take GENERATIONS for anything productive to come from this government. And I have grand babies!