Will Bernie Sanders endorse challengers to existing Democratic House and Senate candidates?

[brooklynite]

Because, I'm told that he (and his supporters) want a "political revolution". But as someone involved in getting Democrats elected, I've talked to almost all of the announced Senate candidates and many of the House candidates. With few exceptions (Russ Feingold, for example -- and even he sees a Sanders nomination as problematic) they're "mainstream"; perfectly competitive in their respective States and districts, but not "revolutionary". So will the Sanders movement be bringing their own candidates into the race?

[think]

1. Has Sanders implied or said anything to this effect?

[JackInGreen]

2. In time I'm certain

Would you prefer the status quo?

[ibegurpard]

7. of course he would

[BlueCaliDem]

15. Why wait? Why not NOW. Why hasn't he been busy with it for the past 24+ years?

[Ed Suspicious]

3. You, I think intentionally, misread the nature of his revolution. He wants people to vote in

large numbers based upon political campaigns that are fought over each candidate's policy prescription rather than their personalities. That's the revolution he's talking about. He wants participation from voters and he wants candidates to be honest brokers.

[aidbo]

6. I won't speculate on the op's intentions, but I came here to say what you said.

I would only add that he also wants to remove the pernicious influence of money in politics.

[Warren Stupidity]

4. If it is appropriate, sure, and why not?

What exactly is wrong with competitive primaries?

[BlueCaliDem]

16. Then why hasn't he called for it yet? He had proposed to primary President Obama back in 2012.

He had no problems doing that back then, did he?

So why doesn't he propose to primary all those "establishment Dems" in Congress now? Or at least ask his Revolutionaries to go out and find strong challengers to them?

What exactly is wrong with competitive primaries?

In a perfect world without egos? Nothing. In the real world of politics and power? It's a career killer - for the person calling for those competitive primaries. He knows it. We know it. And I know you're intelligent enough to know it. And as much as Sanders cares for jobs for the little guy, he cares about his government job just a bit more.

[Warren Stupidity]

20. In Vermont? Which ones?

And the fact that most congressional districts are non-competitive at both the general and primary election level is one of the symptoms of the complete breakdown of our allegedly representative democracy.

But by all means lets just keep on doing the same thing every two and four years and wonder why we get the same shitty results.

[Comrade Grumpy]

5. Give it a rest. n/t

[wendylaroux]

8. are you trying

to get Bernie kicked off du?

[brooklynite]

9. Actually, I'm raising the question of Primary challenges...

...perfectly acceptable under TOS.

It's just that there's no much hostility here towards the Democratic "Establishment", I'm wondering what the reaction will be when, as I suspect, Sanders in fact does nothing to push the "Establishment" candidates out.

[wendylaroux]

12. just a joke

Bernie will be there for the dems, just like always.

[rhett o rick]

25. He wants a revolution of peoples of the 99% to get involved and try to throw

out the big money influence in our government. He is concentrating on defeating the big money billionaires for the Presidency. The rest of us will be looking to throw out all the corrupt "establishment" politicians that answer to the billionaires.

The big money and corp owner of our media have suppressed democracy and now with Sen Sanders, we see a way to fight the big money. Sadly, some Democrats choose to side with the 1% over us. They ignore the growing numbers of us living in poverty because poverty numbers are inversely proportional to corporate profits. For some corp profits mean more than helping those living in poverty. And now the Conservative Dems are looking to cut (enhance) Social Security and Medicare.

[restorefreedom]

10. I have not heard Bernie mention anything about nonpresidential races

and my guess is he is going to be focused primarily on his own race. If his supporters want to primary nonprogressives in the down ticket races, then that's up to them. I personally wouldn't have a problem with it. But I haven't heard Bernie speak out on this issue so far this election cycle.

[Dawgs]

11. Well, that explains why you're supporting Hillary.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

[ibegurpard]

13. every Democrat who defected on TPP should be primaried

And many of them are from solid Democratic districts where there's no danger of electing a repuke.

[BlueCaliDem]

14. Let him try. He's not popular with his colleagues in either Chamber as it is, and if he thinks

he can "primary" those very same people for his vision of a political revolution and then, if unsuccessful, expect them then to support him in that radical vision of drastically changing America's political infrastructure, he's in for a painfully *rude awakening.

*Edited to correct spelling.

[Kentonio]

17. What do it matter what any one of them thinks?

It's supposed to matter what the voters think, and if the voters want progressive change and their 'representatives' try and block that for their own ends, they deserve to be primaried each and every one of them.

[BlueCaliDem]

18. What does it matter? Well, why not ask Senator Sanders who hasn't called for a single

primary challenger to those dastardly "representatives"?

You're forgetting that those U.S. Reps and U.S. Senators are elected by their constituents. Apparently, they like them enough to reelect them over and over and over again.

[Kentonio]

19. You mean rather than vote for a Republican?

I think you Clinton fans have explained EXACTLY how the lesser of two evils equation is supposed to work. If you want to see exactly how much those voters like their representatives, perhaps you might want to look at the congress approval ratings some time.

[BlueCaliDem]

23. No. I wrote in clear English what I mean. Try rereading it again.

I think you Clinton fans have explained EXACTLY how the lesser of two evils equation is supposed to work.

Clinton "fans"? How about just Clinton supporters? Too much to ask?

Governing requires compromise. NOBODY is going to get everything they want. That's what happens in a democracy. And the Democratic Party nor its members is/are "the lesser of two evils". That statement is made by people who don't understand how a democracy works and appear to prefer a totalitarian type of government where compromise is never necessary and one side gets everything they want. Are you one of those people?

If you want to see exactly how much those voters like their representatives, perhaps you might want to look at the congress approval ratings some time.

If you really want to see exactly how much voters like their representatives, perhaps you should put polling data aside and look at the fact that these U.S. Reps and U.S. Senators are reelected over, and over, and over again.

[Kentonio]

31. I'll start using nicer language at exactly the point you do. You get the respect you give.

You can also spare me your lecture about compromise, when you were the one who was just crowing about 'Glorious F-Ratings' from the NRA. The Democratic party establishment seems to have no problem compromising on economic issues that slide the country increasingly to the right, yet when it comes to something that kills 30,000 Americans a year, suddenly compromise is off the table in favor of purity tests.

Regarding that 'compromise' we keep making on economic issues, its not even compromise its capitulation. The Republicans have used the same trick over and over and the Dem leadership have fallen for it over and over. They make demands that are so extreme that they could never pass, and then 'compromise' on reduced demands that would never have been accepted if they had originally been presented. It's time that we returned to real compromise, where both sides start out with things they want and both end up with some. Ideally with our demands not just being 'don't take everything please'.

[BlueCaliDem]

34. I see you don't want to bring up this conversation to adult level.

So I won't waste my time with you.

At least have a nice weekend.

[Kentonio]

35. Have a lovely weekend

[rhett o rick]

28. You must not understand politics. People get reelected over and over because

people vote for the incumbent most of the time. And in primaries the Party Establishment has a lot to say who gets support and who wins. I remember when Sen Cantwell was running for reelection as the incumbent. She had a very outspoken challenger who was polling very low. Didn't matter because her campaign got him to quit and work for them. The status quo in politics is that those with money and power control. That's why we need a revolution to kick the corrupt politicians out

[ieoeja]

21. Once elected he will nominate a new head of the DNC.

The simplest way of going about this would be to wait until after the election and nominate a new head of the DNC who would support Liberal primary challengers to conservative office holders.

If the DNC breaks with tradition and rejects his nomination - "as the President he is automatically head of the party" is one of those common statements on DU which drives me batty due to its inaccuracy - he could spend a good part of his first two years in office working on that himself.

[Skinner]

32. The DNC always supports the Democratic nominee for president.

It would do so vigorously if Bernie Sanders were to become the nominee.

Also, the DNC rarely takes sides in primaries at any level. During a Bernie Sanders presidency, it would continue to not take sides during primaries.

[Agschmid]

33. The DNC would do no such thing...

"Break with tradition?"

What?!?!

[bunnies]

22. Every senate candidate sees a Sanders nomination as "problematic"?

Well now, isnt that interesting. Should his supporters leave the party then? Is that the goal here?

[rhett o rick]

29. Oh no, we aren't leaving our party. We aim at kicking the conservatives back into the Republicon

Party where they belong. If you support continual war, the MIC, the Patriot Act, fracking, the TPP like the Republicons do, then you should be in that party. We want to save SS from Goldman-Sachs and their puppets.

[MineralMan]

24. No. He's stretched pretty thin already.

[Scootaloo]

26. Just throwing shit at the wall and hoping it sticks, huh?

[Kalidurga]

27. So, you want superman running for President that is interesting.

[INdemo]

30. Where do you people dig this stuff up at?

There has to be some direct coordination with the Clinton Campaign. I suspect Bill Clinton is behind most of this BS.

You Hillary supporters are digging up all this negative BS and it is a mirrored effort as to the way Bill worked behind the scenes in 2008 against Obama

There are Hillary supporters here that are bringing up unbelievable accusations against Bernie Sanders that have come out of the woodwork. New DU Hillary supporters that have only been here for 2-3 weeks or so are posting this BS and anyone that challenges their efforts there is an "alert".

This is Bill's style.Its the kind of campaign strategy that one expects from a Republican campaign.

I look for my "mail" alert