Re: Bernie: Lets try to be constructive. Talk about issues

[sharedvalues]

There’s been a lot of back and forth about Bernie here.

Let’s try to focus on the important parts about Bernie: the issues he ran on.
- Medicare for all, or single payer (now being adopted by the Democrats. Thank you, Bernie.)
- Lowering college costs
- Reducing wealth inequality
- A fair shake for all, regardless of the family you were born into
- Stopping the influence of American oligarchs (Koch, DeVos, Adelson, Pope and other GOP billionaire donors)

Bernie is a good speaker and in speeches he represents progressive values well: a fair shot for all, reducing wealth inequality, helping people who are down (the social safety net).
Bernie’s doing a lot to spread those values with his speeches and recent town halls. I give him credit for that.



There are a lot of things we could snipe at Bernie about: like some of his extreme supporters or some money things which presently are quite unclear in details and might even be amplified by foreign or GOP interests. I guess if you really want to discuss those, feel free - we’re going to learn more in the future and I personally plan to wait for those details before discussing them.


But what’s we really can take away from Bernie today is how well he does defending important issues and important values.

Let’s talk about those values. Wealth inequality in the US is a huge problem. Bernie calls that out.


Robert Reich makes a good case for Bernie’s values and ideas:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2016/5/5/11581940/robert-reich-ezra-klein


This is what we should focus on: Bernie’s ideas. The next election is going to include people like Harris and Gillibrand and Warren and Schiff and Warner. Here’s the question we should be asking: which of Bernie’s ideas do we value, and which future candidates will support those ideas?

[KPN]

2. Not to mention he was and is appointed

Party Chair of Outreach by Senate Democrats.

[sharedvalues]

3. Issues :)

Your point is fair but what’s important about Bernie is not his interaction with a party, but the ideas he’s putting forth.


He’s good at outreach. And others could learn from him.

[Demsrule86]

4. There is nothing that happened in 16 that is worth 'learning from'...horrible loss which gave rise

to a fascist president who threatens our republic.

[JCanete]

50. now that is kind of a ridiculous statement. How would it not be worth learning from, even

if I don't get into the positives from my perspective? Even if you think shit went horribly wrong at every level and that the populist Sanders only brought poison, you're just going to put your head in the sand and hope it doesn't happen again next time?

But also Demsrule, it takes a short memory to believe that this cycle is what gave rise to a fascist President. This was no aberration. This has been the trending direction of our nation. Yes, 8 years of Obama were cause for hope but they were also years where the levels of decorum of the past had been massively eroded, where a tea party was astro-turfed to hate everything Obama and liberal as a scorched earth strategy that came with consequences even to the grand ole party. As to progressives and their beefs....

well Jesus Christ, we've continued to see, under Obama, under W, under Clinton, the rich get richer, the rich get off...the poor getting little more than squat and the middle class getting sent the bill. This sentiment didn't come out of nowhere either, but out of occupy Wall Street and all of the other momentum that has been calling for actual change in this nation. These are legitimate beefs. The system is legitimately broken. Its fair to say Obama's hands were tied and he did the very best he could do with t he resources he had available, but I think his avoidance of using the bully pulpit to promote strong progressive measures with powerful rhetoric against big money was a mistake. Got to go to work so can't elaborate on this now...

[Demsrule86]

85. Obama lost the House two years into his presidency. We were not able to

get our progressive policy through. In 14 we lost the Senate, Pres. Obama had his lowest poll numbers of his presidency-it cost us a SCOTUS seat. ...Same was true of Clinton. In that he lost his majority two years in also. It won't fix the system to elect Republicans...16 is how we lost-there is not much worth saving from primary to election...we need a fresh perspective on how we win...revisiting 16 won't help us. I honestly have always believed most of what Sanders has talked about...it is how it can be implemented that I have issues with...and free college needs come with income restrictions. I watched what happen in Georgia ...not good. I consider such idea Democratic ideas. And I have to say some of his comments regarding the Texas situation angered me. You know I voted for Bernie in Ohio in 16. I liked both candidates at the time. Now I just pray he doesn't run in 20 and possibly cause division that could cause us to lose.

[rgbecker]

160. What happened in Georgia? Please enlighten us....

I don't even know what to ask Google!

[sharedvalues]

89. Interesting on Obama's role and progressive ideas of reducing wealth inequality

I largely agree with you.

But also Demsrule, it takes a short memory to believe that this cycle is what gave rise to a fascist President. This was no aberration. This has been the trending direction of our nation. Yes, 8 years of Obama were cause for hope but they were also years where the levels of decorum of the past had been massively eroded, where a tea party was astro-turfed to hate everything Obama and liberal as a scorched earth strategy that came with consequences even to the grand ole party.

100% true. This GOP disaster has been building for years. Mann and Ornstein wrote this in 2012:
"Let's just say it. The Republicans are the problem."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lets-just-say-it-the-republicans-are-the-problem/2012/04/27/gIQAxCVUlT_story.html


But I see two points differently:

Its fair to say Obama's hands were tied and he did the very best he could do with t he resources he had available, but I think his avoidance of using the bully pulpit to promote strong progressive measures with powerful rhetoric against big money was a mistake.

I actually see it the opposite way. He used the bully pulpit well. (here's a great example https://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/obamas-howard-commencement-transcript-222931). He communicated as well as possible given the right wing propaganda machine. But he did NOT fight well. In 2008 he had the chance to call out propaganda at Fox News, and passed. He finally said something in 2016. He chose to try to compromise with the GOP and took years to realize they cared only about power and strongarm tactics. Obama's issue is that he's too much of a mediator. We needed a fighter, a pugilist.

[JCanete]

183. I totally agree that we needed a fighter at that point in time. I was thinking of the appropriate

use, given the hour we found ourself at, of the bully pulpit as a place from which punches should be thrown. I do grant there were amazing things Obama was able to accomplish in terms of articulating, and I think inspiring, compassion and the best in us, not just nationally but globally. But as you say, he did not fight well. That was partly by early strategy, which almost seemed brilliant to me(shame the republicans into joining at the middle) but it quickly turned out to be a horrible mistake from which Obama and his team did not pivot(until what, 2013, 2014? Turns out the repubs were going to fight tooth and nail on every little bit of progress, because at the end of the day what was the worst that could happen? That very little bit of progress is what. why not fight it. There was no haymaker waiting for them if they stuck their face in too close.

At some point it really does suggest a naivety about the actual political landscape and of just how much money has made rational, honest disagreement, an extinct species, not to mention a failure to appreciate the corporately owned 4th estate as a tool of their corporate agendas.

[sharedvalues]

189. Exactly. +1

We agree. I’d add one small point: naïvete was a part of it, but another part was just Obama’s personality. He’s a conciliator, not a fighter. We needed a fighter. Maybe HRC would have been that, despite her communication problems.

[sheshe2]

171. Under Obama.

Nearly 500 Accomplishments by President Obama, With Citations

http://pleasecutthecrap.com/obama-accomplishments/

I know it is hard to believe now, but it wasn’t that long ago that we had a perfectly sane, competent and adult presence in the White House. It’s only been a little over four months since that was the case, although there are times when it seems like it’s been years since then. Most of our presidents have been good for America, although most of those who haven’t have been Republican, which should shock no one. Go ahead and look it up. Name the last time a serious recession or depression happened when a Democrat was in charge.

Anyway, President Barack Obama faced more obstacles to implementing his agenda than anyone in history, despite the characterizations of many that he was some sort of disaster. And while I would like to say that the right wing generally and the Republican Party more specifically, were the reasons why his record wasn’t better, the professional left had a hand in things, too. They labeled him as a “disappointment” because he didn’t come into office and undo everything the Bush Administration had done in the first two years and they handed Congress back to the opposition with the 2010 election. And let’s be clear, unicorn progressives and professional lefties targeted him because he was black as much as the right wing. It’s really not less racist to create unrealistic expectations because he’s black than it is to trash him for his blackness. Demanding that he put on a magic dashiki and take down “the man” is just as ridiculous as blocking his agenda because you can’t allow “the black president” to be successful.

Anyone who has ever referred to President Obama as anything less than “amazing” is not paying close attention. That is why we are archiving his main accomplishments as president for posterity. And not to worry. Every single one of these accomplishments has a link to proof from a reputable source, so no one can claim they’re lies. They are all documented.

......................................

He did damn good. Damn good and will never pet credidit fot it by some.

[KPN]

5. Got it. Just clarifying that in fact that's exactly what Bernie was asked/

appointed to Do. Outreach on issues.

[sharedvalues]

19. Yeah- hes been good on outreach to the working and middle classes

His CNN town halls in WV about jobs and how the government can provide a social safety net we’re awesome.

[George II]

28. I can't wait until he does a town hall in Vermont.

[sharedvalues]

31. Come on, is that necessary?

No need to snipe at him. He’s trying to help the working and middle class everywhere in America. And he’s done a lot for Vermont.

Let’s stay positive!

[George II]

34. Who is sniping? He's a Senator from Vermont.

[Eliot Rosewater]

77. Trying to help who?

I cant say anymore or it will be deemed "refighting".

[Tavarious Jackson]

174. Both of my senators do many many town halls

Infact one of mine one an award for the most.

[OregonBlue]

36. My exact thoughts. Those people in West Virginia were so impressed that a politician had

come to listen to them, not to lecture them. They couldn't believe that he wanted to help solve the problem, not make false promises or throw money at it. He was so great at communicating with them and I think he could teach a lot of our "Progressives" how to talk to people who are hurting and voted for Trump because they wanted a change. He never once talked down to anyone and he never once used "politics speak". Bernie is the first person I have seen speaking to a room full of white southern Republicans who made them see that his party was the party of change.

I was so impressed, and I was a Hillary supporter. I can't believe that we are not all asking for Bernie to come to our states and teach us how to reach out to those who are poor and angry and conservative.

[EffieBlack]

55. Correction: outreach to the WHITE working and middle classes

He thinks outreach to black and brown people is "identity politics."

[Eliot Rosewater]

79. Thank you.

[OregonBlue]

151. Are you saying you think Bernie is a racist? I haven't really ever thought of him like that.

[EffieBlack]

155. No, I'm not saying that.

I don't think he's racist. Just insensitive and clueless.

[George II]

22. Nope, that is NOT what he was asked to do in the capacity of Party Chair of Outreach.

[sharedvalues]

32. Positive please

[George II]

35. Huh?

[Progressive dog]

168. This is what Bernie was actually asked to do

"The chair of outreach is a member of the small Senate Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee. According to the committee's website, it focuses on "fostering dialogue between Senate Democrats and leaders from across the nation." Members of the committee serve as liaisons between Senate Democrats and the advocacy groups and intergovernmental organizations that want to work with them."
https://www.bustle.com/articles/195635-what-does-the-chair-of-outreach-do-bernie-sanders-earns-leadership-role-among-senate-democrats

key words-dialogue (means Bernie listens to others as well as preaches): Senate Democrats (plural, not just Bernie)

[George II]

20. Do you know what the job of "Party Chair of Outreach" entails?

[KPN]

133. Was it defined? No, so it's basically opinion

or preference. But yes, I do. it entails reaching out to people to get them engaged in the party. I suspect you probably have a more establishment, traditional, hierarchical slant to what it entails however; something more along the lines of public relations, public spokesperson job. I doubt whether that was What Schumet had in mind when he asked Sanders to take on the role.

[George II]

152. No it doesn't. It actually has very little to do with reaching out to people other than....

....other Democratic Senators.

[KPN]

157. Oh, well, I'll accept that with proof.

[George II]

158. In that case, I'll accept your inferred function of the job "with proof". See how that works?

[dlk]

6. Bernie is not a Democrat

It's my understanding this site's purpose is to support Democrats. While Bernie's stand on certain issues is welcome, he has repeatedly declined to join the party. Let's focus Democrats and how we can support them.

[seta1950]

13. YES

I agree 100% bernie is not a democrat.

[PaulX2]

184. And Why Is Bernie Not A Democrat?

Ever wonder?

[sharedvalues]

14. Issues! Lets be constructive

Bernie has done a lot for progressive issues like wealth inequality.

Let’s talk about how he’s calling out the Koch brothers for supporting this president. Not about his past or future party affiliation.

[democratisphere]

41. Unfortunately talk didn't do much when the wealthiest just got 82%

of the value of the taxcuts.
.

[Eliot Rosewater]

81. He has? What laws has he had passed in this area?

I honestly dont know. I keep hearing this but I dont know.

It is very difficult to research this, i keep finding bills he was co sponsor of but overall it is pretty hard to figure out, for me at least.

[Honeycombe8]

128. Aren't there some moderate Republicans who want pro-choice, better health care,

and things like that? Should we support them, too?

Do we support those who are Democrats...or anyone who supports some of the issues in the Dem Party Platform, regardless what party they are? Make your choice.

[Roy Rolling]

30. Cult of Personality

If Democrats choose their leadership based on personality instead of issues we are no better than Republicans. This OP asking for focus on issues, but is still getting responses on Bernie's lack of party purity--- wrongly assuming progressive issues are carved in stone and permanently embedded in a particular politician.

As long as the focus is on political personalities and not the progressive values Democrats champion, Democrats will be playing a game framed by Republicans. And that game of popularity is determined mostly by $$$ in politics enabled by Citizens United.

STOP PLAYING THE CULT OF PERSONALITY GAME WITH REPUBLICANS!!! Democrats don't have HEROES, we have public servants.

[sharedvalues]

33. Thank you! We have public servants not heroes

Exactly.

[Trumpocalypse]

67. Great post!

Unfortunately there are many on the left who indulge in the cult of personality.

[leftstreet]

102. +1

Excellent post

[mythology]

116. Except the OP isn't asking us to focus on issues at large

They are specifically asking us to focus on which of Bernie's issues we should focus on. Those things may or may not overlap with the issues I want to focus on.

[Sophia4]

145. Then talk about what issues you agree and disagree on and why you hold your opinion.

I strongly support single payer insurance as well as affordable college and trade school or other post-high-school education for all.

I also think that in this time of artificial intelligence and technology that we could never have imagined in the past -- technology that makes many time consuming jobs irrelevant and never to be replaced -- we need to think about the disparity in wealth.

In Los Angeles, homeless people are everywhere. This is not a California problem. We just happen to have excellent weather for those who have to sleep on the street or in tents and under freeway bridges. It's a national problem. And it is due to the terrible disparity in wealth and the large number of people who would have had good jobs 50 years ago but have been pushed out of jobs that pay a livable wage.

Maybe not everyone agrees totally with Bernie's solutions to problems, but those who do and don't need to talk about the issues that he and others like Robert Reich and many others are raising.

If in our democracy, we do not rise to discuss our views on the issues (not just candidates), then we will lose our democracy. Democracy is fragile and easily lost to demagogues when the conversation turns from issues to personalities and politicians.

That's what got Trump elected. Focusing on the politicians and not on the issues.

And jobs are a big issue that many Democrats don't discuss. I'd like to hear some ideas on this website about how to deal with the jobs issue, the balance of payments issue and other such issues because those are the issues that Trump won on. Sad to say I don't think Trump offers real solutions on those issues, but what are Democrats suggesting?

[KitSileya]

195. Funny then, that the OP doesn't seem interested in discussing the issues

Unless one fawns over Bernie Sanders. I posted several examples of direct policy positions on the issues the OP mentioned, yet I haven't gotten one reply from them..

[Honeycombe8]

129. We also have party affiliation. That's what I thought this forum was about. ??? nt

[Sophia4]

146. I started a thread the other day asking everyone here why they are a Democrat.

The answers were wonderful, truly inspiring.

We are Democrats because of our human values, values that we put above personal wealth and status.

Party affiliation means much more to me than just the name of a party. It means shared values. I have neighbors who were for years registered as voters in one of the minor parties that exist in California. They re-registered as Democrats because they supported Bernie. In the November election, they voted for Hillary because she is a woman.

Party affiliation for me (as a lifelong Democrat) is about shared values.

I personally welcome affiliation with all who share my values. There aren't many Republicans who fall into that category nowadays, but in the past I sometimes ran across one or two.

I figure if a person shares the values of the Democratic Party and the Democratic Party welcomes them and listens to them, even if they aren't registered Democratic, they will be persuaded to vote Democratic based on their values. We just have to approach them in the right way.

So that is my view on what you are saying about party affiliation. That is my experience.

[Sophia4]

141. Excellent post!

[progressoid]

191. Democrats don't have HEROES?

[democratisphere]

38. Thank you dlk for pointing that out.

It does matter!

[Voltaire2]

39. The TOS for this site explicity identify Sanders as a "Democratic Public Figure"

Don't bash Democratic public figures

Do not post disrespectful nicknames, insults, or highly inflammatory attacks against any Democratic public figures. Do not post anything that could be construed as bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for any Democratic general election candidate, and do not compare any Democratic general election candidate unfavorably to their general election opponent(s).
Why we have this rule: Our forum members support and admire a wide variety of Democratic politicians and public figures. Constructive criticism is always welcome, but our members don't expect to see Democrats viciously denigrated on this website. This rule also applies to Independents who align themselves with Democrats (eg: Bernie Sanders).

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

This rule is ignored by a group of posters here, and it is not helpful that they do this. It alienates the very large number of Democratic voters who supported Sanders in the primary. It is idiotic wallowing in the misery of last year's electoral disaster.

[Jim Lane]

52. You're right on all counts.

All too many people here appear not to know this. I hope that, by providing a link instead of just pontificating, you've helped educate a few of them.

Unfortunately, if there others who know it perfectly well but who choose to indulge their personal prejudices instead, no amount of education will do any good.

[Arazi]

99. A timely reminder. I hope this thread can stay civil

[snowybirdie]

53. Right

He needs to join the Democratic Party. He's splitting voters. We need cohesion to defeat the fascist in the WH.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

126. From The Official Senate Democratic Leadership Page

See those names??




See that guy??

[LiberalLovinLug]

187. "For all intents and purposes, Bernie Sanders is a Democrat."

https://www.democraticunderground.com/125912901#post1


"For all intents and purposes, Bernie Sanders is a Democrat."

[LexVegas]

8. ...

[Sienna86]

9. Amen. Lets talk about the issues we want to move forward.

We can talk about many candidates and their flaws.

[sharedvalues]

18. +1

[katmondoo]

10. I am done with Bernie

Sorry that I voted for him in the primary

[Freedomofspeech]

12. Me, too.

[sharedvalues]

16. Issues! Why did you vote for him then?

And what candidates today embody the values you voted for?

Maybe Robert Reich will run. He’s been clear eyed about the problems of wealth concentration.
Obviously Liz Warren.

[mountain grammy]

26. I think, had Hillary chosen Warren or Bernie as VP

She’d be Madame President right now. I believe turnout would have neutralized Russian interference. Just the opinion of this old lady. Unite and we win.

[Voltaire2]

40. I agree entirely.

[Bluepinky]

44. Yes, I think Hillary should have chosen Bernie.

Nobody inspires people like Bernie does.

And he accepted no corporate money in his campaign, which is where we should be going.

[EffieBlack]

61. Nobody turns off people like he does, either

[Bluepinky]

62. To each their own. I find him inspirational.

[EffieBlack]

64. I understand and respect that

My point is that while he may inspire and motivate some, he drives a lot of other people away. And since the people who love him aren't the only ones that matter - we need the support of a diverse group of voters - he doesn't really bring much value if it all ends up a wash.

[meadowlander]

94. You can say the same thing about Hillary.

The point is that we need to move past the messenger and focus on the message because endless sniping at the other group doesn't accomplish anything.

[EffieBlack]

98. People said that about Hillary all the time.

But since she got nearly 4 million more votes than Bernie and 3 million more votes than Trump, that argument falls flat.

I'd love to move past the messenger. It would be much easier to do if this one particular messenger would move on himself. I'm sure people would feel the same way if Hillary Clinton were inserting herself into Democratic politics in the way that Bernie is.

[Sophia4]

149. I think that Hillary also should be playing more of a role in politics.

We need to bring the discussion to the issues. Right now it is almost always about Trump. Even if the discussion about Trump is negative, it pushes out the discussion we need to be having about issues. Hillary could help with the issues discussion.

[EffieBlack]

154. That would be great. But every time Hillary utters a peep

Certain Democrats tell her to shut up and go away. And then they go back to making goo-goo eyes at Bernie.

[Sophia4]

156. It looks odd that she is not part of the discussion.

I hope she is well.

I think that both she and Bernie and others have important roles to play in the ongoing political discussion. We need all these voices.

All we hear are Republicans.

[R B Garr]

169. Why are you implying Hillary isnt well?? Isnt that a JPR

conspiracy about Hillary’s health?? Let’s stick to reality. Just because a woman sits out politics doesn’t mean she’s sick.

I don’t only hear Republicans. A suggestion again is to watch the current news like MSNBC where they talk about current issues that matter—Republicans have some real problems.

[Sophia4]

180. I'm sorry if I was unclear, but I think Hillary is very well, and I certainly did not

intend to suggest she is in any way unwell.

I would like to hear more from her. That is all.

[EffieBlack]

178. Damned if she does, damned if she dont

When she says something, she’s an ambitious, whining harpy who refuses to exit stage left gracefully. When she doesn’t say anything, she shirking some duty.

I think Hillary should do whatever she damned well pleases. She’s earned that right. And I don’t blame her if she doesn’t want to get back in the arena. She offered her best, busted her ass and we kicked her in the face and blame he her for not being perfect (“She was a FLAWED candidate!”).
And now we keep telling her to shut up and go away. I’m amazed she hasn’t told us all to go screw ourselves.

She doesn’t owe anyone squat.

[Tipperary]

80. Yep.

[Sophia4]

148. Think of the alternative -- Trump and Pence.

That's what we ended up with.

Hillary won the popular vote -- but not in the key states -- so now we have a far worse alternative than a Bernie vice presidency would have been.

Choices are important.

I'm sure the guy Hillary chose for her vice president is very nice, but most people, especially West of the Rockies knew nothing about him. He did not exactly attract enough votes to the ticket from the Midwestern states. Bernie very well would have.

It's politics, not a popularity contest.

[Omaha Steve]

45. I agree

K&R for the OP!

[EffieBlack]

60. I don't agree

Bernie was a very divisive figure in the party. And while many people loved him and would have been thrilled to have him on the ticket, that might have been offset by a lot of people who were disgusted by him and would have been very demoralized had he been put on the ticket.

He also would have been perfect foil for Trump and his folks. They would have made mincemeat of him and, never having really been in the barrel, I doubt he would have handled it well and would have turned a lot of people off.

In my view, Bernie on the ticket would have made it unnecessary for the Russians to put their thumb on the scale. He would have dragged the ticket down all on his own.

[Eliot Rosewater]

83. Unfortunately the comments about identity politics just goes right over the head

of most white folks because it does not effect us, but POC pay close attention to this stuff because they live it daily.

We are so far from ending racism it is ridiculous.

[pandr32]

92. I am disappointed that some here are still blaming HC for Trump

...especially here on DU.

If she had done this, or had done that some miracle would have happened and the Russian tampering would have been overcome. Sure. Most former Sanders supporters went on to support Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine.

Truth: HC won the Primary and then went on to inspire and turn out people all over the country who voted the Clinton/Kaine ticket as well as Democrats to the Senate. Polls before the election day and exit polls during the election all pointed to a win. If you want to believe votes in the key swing states were not tampered with while more and more evidence points to the fact that they were, well...

[EffieBlack]

100. THANK you!

If only Hillary had done this or done that or not done this or not done that, the GOP would have just left her alone and allowed her to run in a fair race because they wouldn't in a million years have found something else to gin up, lie about and beat the drums about.

[pandr32]

110. Agreed. Cheating efforts continue in every way imaginable

We need to start telling the truth instead of blaming a remarkable candidate who very likely won those swing states and should be in the White House right now along with a majority of Senate Democrats in Congress.

[Omaha Steve]

111. Clinton takes blame for loss in new book: It was my campaign. Those were my decisions

BY JULIA MANCHESTER - 09/06/17 07:17 AM EDT

Former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton in her new book takes responsibility for her shocking loss to President Trump in the 2016 presidential election, writing, "I was the candidate."

"I go back over my own shortcomings and the mistakes we made. I take responsibility for all of them. You can blame the data, blame the message, blame anything you want, but I was the candidate," Clinton writes in her upcoming book, "What Happened," which was obtained by CNN.

"It was my campaign. Those were my decisions," she continued.



http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/349362-clinton-takes-blame-for-loss-in-new-book-it-was-my-campaign

[pandr32]

118. She is that kind of person

This in no way undermines what I wrote. HC knows that she needed to address the apparently "loss" without appearing to throw stones or make excuses. This was also written before we learned more about what happened.

[NCTraveler]

131. Her strength really shines through...

As she puts so much on her own shoulders. Great share.

[Omaha Steve]

139. She got my vote

And Marta's!

[NCTraveler]

140. +1 nt

[mountain grammy]

162. I'm not blaming her at all.

She's my age. I've had my eyes on her ever since Bill was governor of Arkansas and while she was First Lady and I've admired and supported her, but often disagreed with her.

Yes, she won the primary and also the election, in my opinion, but there's no doubt a large part of her support came from Bernie supporters. I think she would have lost if Bernie hadn't brought people out in the primary, but with 46% of voters not voting, the fix was in . Hillary was predictable when she chose Kaine, He's a good guy, but is now co-sponsering a bill to once again deregulate the banks. I ask you, is this in line with Democratic thinking? Certainly not mine.

[pandr32]

176. "The fix was in?"

Are you referring to the primary or general? What do you mean?

[mountain grammy]

179. The general of course

Do you honestly think if turnout was high elections could be manipulated like this one was?

[pandr32]

196. There was a huge Republican drive to suppress voter turnout

The voter ID laws are considered to be a huge factor in low turnout in the crucial swing states, along with lots of other efforts in voter suppression and to throw people off the rolls. It was a piece in the mastermind puzzle to give Trump the election.
We need to change this.

[mountain grammy]

197. Yes, I know and agree

but the biggest ratfuckery of all is the Electoral College.. used by conservatives since the beginning. In 2016, it effectively disenfranchised 3 million American voters and allowed the theft of at least 3 swing states.

[pandr32]

198. You could say that (as you did) or...

that Republican ratfuckery is used in pretty much all our institutions. The biggest concern for me is that a Supreme Court vacancy could arise while Republicans still control Congress.

[questionseverything]

142. yes united we could of overcome the rig

hc instead choose a safe pol that wouldn't upstage her

pride before the fall sort of thing

[Sophia4]

147. Agreed!

[Adrahil]

11. Okay, let's talk about the issues. Bernie can GTFO, though. NT

[sharedvalues]

15. Wealth inequality! Its destroying America.

[mountain grammy]

24. Yes, agree

The very heart of every issue.

[Blue_true]

49. No one here disagrees with that.

The question is how do we solve that problem? That is where disagreement starts.

[George II]

57. "Wealth inequality"? What was his net worth before his 2016 campaign and what is it now?

[sharedvalues]

78. How is this post focusing on Democratic values and issues?

I'm trying to talk about issues-- for example wealth inequality and how we fix it. It's not useful for us to dwell on individuals.

[Adrahil]

76. Agreed.

We need to raise the marginal rates on the richest Americans by a LOT, IMO.

[Eliot Rosewater]

84. Yep, so tell us what would YOU do if you could. That is how this works.

[sharedvalues]

90. I like Piketty's idea: we need a wealth tax

https://inequality.org/research/business-case-annual-wealth-tax/

The most interesting examination of economics over the last three decades has been Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the 21st Century. But hardly anyone has taken Piketty’s policy proposals seriously, mainly because Piketty himself framed them as overtly redistributional and described them as utopian.

...

But Piketty nearly got it right. A properly structured annual wealth tax could equalize effective tax rates between labor and capital, while simultaneously stimulating more productive capital allocations — and, in the process, job creation.

The right wing propaganda machine has worked desperately to discredit Piketty. But he's right on target. The Koches should have to pay 1% of their net worth yearly to the government as payment for the services the government provides -- schools, the military, police, roads -- to allow their businesses to function and that give them the chance to amass wealth.

[Eliot Rosewater]

91. Great idea, first though we have to get rid of the tax plan the nazis just implemented

and to do that we have to take back control of not just the House, not just the House and Senate, but the House, Senate AND yes, the White House.

NOTHING changes until we put people with D's after their names in ALL 3, to the point that we have not just control but a super majority and that all has to happen before you can even reverse the damage already done let alone do something like this.

Question is how do we do that, do we primary sitting powerful democrats and run progressives who according to the polls and demos are less likely to win than the moderate Democrat they are challenging?

Do you think THAT is the way to accomplish control?

[sharedvalues]

95. Yes I think two things are needed: turnout, and stop propaganda

First, on voting:
This is a majority-Dem country. GOP has relied on voter suppression for years to win. If we turn out voters, we win. That's exactly what happened in the VA-Gov race (huge Dem turnout!) and in AL-Sen (Doug Jones: huge turnout). (As for center-liberal vs. economic progressives, it depends on the district. Yes, progressives where possible. Centrists where not. All Dems, though.)

So: Resist. Organize. Register voters. Canvass. Vote.


And second, we need to fix American public debate, which has been co-opted by a billionaire-funded rightwing propaganda machine. That's a little harder, but we can start at a grassroots level: tell all your friends and family that watching the lies and propaganda on Fox and Limbaugh are unacceptable, and they need to stop. I'd go further: watching Fox harms America.

And I don't love everything about Bernie; he has some clear downsides. But he has at least one upside - he's a good speaker! And he's willing to go out and advocate for progressive ideas.

The hardest part about voting won't be in 2018, it will be keeping up the effort in 2020.

[Eliot Rosewater]

96. I fear that you are glossing over the problem of primarying democrats

or running less likely to win progressives, etc.

Here is what we need to do, put ANY democrat no matter who they are in ANY seat anywhere.

THEN, once you take BACK the country, you can elect some people you have pure ideological agreement with.

Until I hear people agree to that, I will assume they dont get it.

[sharedvalues]

97. Any democrat in any seat - I'm on board with that

I agree with that.

[Eliot Rosewater]

101. Oh great then, I suggest we preach that and ONLY that until we achieve that.

Do you see why? If we talk to our friends and neighbors about the need for a $15 MW and that $12 isnt enough, we blow it, right?

If we talk about how great this progressive over here sounds but according to the polls and demos she or he will have a tougher time of winning, then I say dont support that person in the first place.

Sounds like you agree, good.

You see my problem is I know, I dont believe, I dont think, I KNOW certain high profile people and talk show hosts/talking heads are working directly for Putin, and if I am wrong the only thing I am wrong about is the direct connection.

Let me explain, if an outcome benefits our enemy and we all agree the election did, they anyone who contributed to that outcome in any way is guilty of assisting our enemy.

So I am at the point now where I dont care whether or not the people I suspect of this are directly connected to Putin or not, the outcome is the same as if they were. Someday my allegations are going to become known truth, but my fear is it will be too late.

Just like I can promise you votes were either flipped or not counted on election day, on the ground, in those 4 states.

No I wont name names.

[sharedvalues]

104. I'm for a $12 MW.

But I'm still going to tell people that American billionaires are trying to destroy the government to cut their own taxes.

We have a winning hand. We have GOP billionaires actively trying to screw the middle and working class to put more money in their own pockets. The only reason some voters don't know that is because of propaganda. Sticking to that message, and working on turnout, is going to lead to a blue wave in 2018.

[Tribalceltic]

17. Russian Interference..

... in elections is destroying America!

[sharedvalues]

23. GOP-billionaire funded right wing media has a bigger influence

The Russians didn’t help.
But if not for Fox and Limbaugh and Hewitt and Heritage and the NRA and SPN and ALEC and Breitbart and Wash Ex and Wash Times and Cit U and Jud Watch and Sinclair— the Russian intervention wouldn’t have worked.


Right wing propaganda, funded by GOP billionaires who wish to destroy govt to cut their own taxes, is destroying this country. We can fix it- tell anyone you know who watches Fox that it is propaganda designed to get votes for billionaires.

[yellowwoodII]

21. Thank you.

What does it mean to be a "Democrat?" Bernie represents many ideas that I would like to see the Democratic Party incorporate.
I will (and did) fall into line to vote for a "Democrat" if that is the only choice. But I'm not necessarily happy about it.

Here in Illinois, for instance, the Democratic Party has chosen (for us) a three-time billionaire for governor without waiting to see whom we would choose in the primary, even though we have other very good choices.

[sharedvalues]

25. Thanks for supporting democratic ideas

But be careful with that second paragraph - it’s unnecessarily defeatist. First, there are a few Dem billionaires who care about the country. The GOP donor billionaires that are the problem care only about themselves and cutting their own taxes- they don’t care who else gets screwed. We’re lucky to have Bloomberg and Steyer on our side, even if they do a lot less than the Koch network.

Second, Illinois has a Dem primary coming. If you care - organize! Vote! Stay positive.

[jodymarie aimee]

27. I idolize the man

and only wish Wisconsin could claim him...if you haven't noticed, we got the worst of the worst here.

[sharedvalues]

29. While Bernie advocates fair shake for all

Wisconsin shows what happens when we allow billionaires to buy our political system. Bernie’s right on this: until we get money out of politics we’re going to have a lot more Scott walkers who don’t care who they hurt as long as their billionaire donors are satisfied.

[Equinox Moon]

37. Thanks for the post

Bernie does good work and has helped this nation.

[zentrum]

42. Yes, would love...

…..a Democratic leader to talk about what exactly is the Democratic message on economics?

Is it just that the minimum wage should be raised? And even that is not very vocal or wide spread. Obama-care? They're afraid of Medicare for all.

I've gotten really confused since 17 of our top Democrats voted with Republicans to roll back bank regulation.

Sincere question—I really am unclear on the Democratic message on economics. And if it's not clear to me—then for sure it's not clear to any of the Trump voters. They actually believe that Trump is the candidate that "cares" about them. This is outrageous. How did it happen?

[Equinox Moon]

46. I too would like to understand why Dems voted to roll back bank regs.

Maybe you would be interested in starting a thread on this topic. It would be a good discussion. And maybe a list of the 17 Dems so we can call our reps and ask their office about it.

[zentrum]

51. Here they are.

Warren has called them out.

Bennet (D-CO)
Carper (D-DE)
Coons (D-DE)
Donnelly (D-IN)
Hassan (D-NH)
Heitkamp (D-ND)
Jones (D-AL)
Kaine (D-VA)
King (I-ME)
Manchin (D-WV)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Nelson (D-FL)
Peters (D-MI)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Warner (D-VA)

Note that Kaine was Hillary's running mate.

I really, really don't get it.

And considering that Kennedy is apparently stepping down from the Court this summer, our electoral system will become even more monied and corrupt. This is as serious if not more serious than all the Russian involvement.

[rgbecker]

163. This issue and the response of these 17 goes to the heart of the problem.

I can't believe the voters in these Senator's states are looking to deregulate banks. I can't believe any of the 40% of registered voters who don't vote are suddenly going to vote for these Senators because of their vote/stand on bank regulations. WTF is going on other than simply this: These Senators don't give a shit except to retain their donations from Bankers. And to think there are people here on the DU that advise you not to look for candidates to challenge them in Primaries.

Democrats need to get people to vote this November to retake the Congress, both houses. No one is going to bother if they can't tell the Democrats from the Republicans.

[zentrum]

167. Agree. At least

……Gillibrand whom I've been furious at ever sine the Franken situation, voted against this bill.

There is no excuse for these 17. They know very well that the banks are incapable of policing themselves.

[jalan48]

43. Bernie's ideas pose a direct threat to many wealthy and powerful interests including those on

Wall St. and the big banks. For them, this isn't about spreading or even debating Bernie's values, it's about destroying Bernie and what he stands for before his ideas can take hold. Do we really think Putin is the only powerful person who is working behind the scenes to affect the outcome of our elections?

[Blue_true]

47. Bernie talks but does little to no action.

Talk when he has actually done more that talk and ride the backs of democrats.

[Jim Lane]

56. He just took the ACTION of voting against this odious banking bill

That's more than 16 D-after-their-names Democrats could manage to do (see #51).

If you mean that Bernie has failed to use his power as a Senator to sign an executive order establishing Medicare for All, well, I guess you got him dead to rights.

[Squinch]

177. So did the vast majority of Democrats. If you have a problem with those Democrats who did NOT

vote against it, then talk about that. It has NOTHING to do with BS. And please don't pretend that his not voting for them makes him some kind of savior who is better than the Democrats or doing more than Democrats. That's just ignorant.

[Jim Lane]

185. You've missed my point.

I was answering this charge in #47:

Bernie talks but does little to no action.

In that context, no one can credibly assert that "It has NOTHING to do with BS."

You go on to write:

And please don't pretend that his not voting for them makes him some kind of savior who is better than the Democrats or doing more than Democrats. That's just ignorant.

I agree. It's also ignorant to state or imply that I said anything of the kind. This tired old Bernie-as-savior straw man is really getting boring. It's one step away from calling his supporters "cultists" (which I've also seen on DU). Most of us don't actually regard him as a savior or even as infallible.

Among Senate Democrats, the vote on the banking bill was 16-31, so just under two-thirds voted against it. I wouldn't say of any of those 31 that they did "little to no action." Most people on this board wouldn't say that. It's only when there's yet another Bernie-bashing subthread that we need to point such rather obvious facts as the importance of a Senator's votes.

[Squinch]

188. And yet you only named one person by whom we should be impressed for taking that action.

And bully for you that you don't see him as infallible or a savior.

PS, as far as his being a man of action because he didn't vote to screw up our economy, you hold him to a very low bar, don't you?

[Jim Lane]

192. I named only one person because only one person was smeared.

You add: "PS, as far as his being a man of action ..." Well, rather obviously, "man of action" is your phrase, not mine.

You persist in refusing to acknowledge the context of what I wrote. That context is the charge made against one specific person in #47: "Bernie talks but does little to no action."

So please clarify for me -- do you agree with that statement?

If you look at the issues mentioned in the OP, the problem is that any U.S. Senator, especially one who's in the minority, has a limited scope for action. Neither Bernie nor anyone else can unilaterally enact single-payer health care, for example. Republicans are of course in better shape. Mitch McConnell can control the flow of legislation to the floor; Senators who chair committees or subcommittees can convene hearings. For the rest, though, the principal action they can take is voting. Bernie usually votes the right way. In fact, he's a more reliable Democratic vote than are some of the D-after-their-names members of the Democratic caucus.

[Squinch]

199. Ugh. So much of the same old same old bullshit. Really, I just can't stand this conversation any

more. Worship him all you like. Just don't expect my party to embrace him.

[EffieBlack]

63. He's all talk

But he's hardly to be found when really needed.

Just ask any civil rights activist fighting on Capitol Hill how much help Bernie has been in the trenches when it really mattered. He votes the right way - hardly a profile in courage given his constituency - but these fights take more than just a vote. And he barely lifts a finger when it comes to doing the actual hard work.

[Eliot Rosewater]

87. There was a time I would slam you for what you just said.

I would have promised you nobody in politics works harder on civil rights than Bernie.

But I would have been wrong.

Al Franken, now he was a civil rights activist big time.

But I did some research as you apparently also have done and the truth is different.

[EffieBlack]

93. Exactly

Bernie's civil rights record is ok, but it's nothing to get excited about. Yes, he was arrested 50 years ago during a college protest. That's nice. It was a good start. But then he engaged in the ultimate white flight and skeedaddled up to the whitest state in the country, where he pretty much parked himself until he decided to descend from on high to lecture the rest of us about civil rights.

He burned his butt with me when he and his supporters not only tried to convince us that he was some great civil rights savior - as if we had to be told who was and wasn't our champions - but had the nerve to look down their noses at REAL civil rights heroes. The arrogance and entitlement wrapped into their approach literally made me sick to my stomach.

What is really telling is that whenever I ask anyone what action Bernie has taken in the last 50 years to advance the cause of civil rights for people of color that required him to take some personal or political risk, I either get the played out list of irrelevant things like "co-sponsored a bill," "spoke out in favor of non-discrimination," "endorsed Jesse Jackson" - hardly the acts of a profile in courage - or, more likely, just crickets.

You're right - Al Franken WAS a profile in courage. It breaks my heart that his own party ran him out of office. What a disgusting spectacle.

[MaryMagdaline]

108. Well said.

It was telling women, gays and minorities to sit down and shut up about civil rights while the boys talked about the "real issues" of economic inequality affecting the WWC. As if women and minorities (especially minorities) needed to be schooled on economic inequality. White Men were just finding out about the ruling class banksters ... did Bernie really think AA and Hispanics didn't know how the banking class f'd them over their entire lives?

It wasn't Bernie's front end messsge ... it was the backend that hurt. He could not unite the whole group ... he had to slap down the base.

[EffieBlack]

143. You nailed it

[betsuni]

153. +1

[Docreed2003]

182. I said this in another thread last night

My most eye opening moment came several months after the election when Mark Thompson was discussing Bernie on his Sirius/XM Progress show “Make it plain”. I don’t remember the name of the specific activist, the interview was months ago, but Mark told them that he had been very excited about Bernie early on and reached out to his people numerous times to bring him on the show and they refused. The activist followed up by saying that was exactly the response several civil rights activists received when they reached out to the Bernie campaign during SC. Essentially, they were told their help wasn’t needed. To me, that was truly eye opening and revealing, and frankly changed my view of Sanders significantly

[Blue_Adept]

48. Who?

Oh, yes, my biggest regret of a primary vote I've made.

[Docreed2003]

65. Right there with you

[ehrnst]

54. Actions speak louder than words.

I think we should equally focus on tactics and policy, without which, a politician is simply another citizen talking.

And if we do differ on strategy from someone with the same goals and values, who might actually have a more realistic method of getting to the goal, we should not be calling them "corrupt" or "corporatist."

That doesn't get anything done but venting.

[kstewart33]

58. I agree we should talk about the issues.

However, when Bernie is linked to those issues, the entire conversation falls apart.

So let's agree to talk about the issues, but please, not about Bernie. Because it just doesn't work. Too many Dems in our community and nationwide are simple too pissed off about Bernie. He's not the answer.

So why not a compromise? Followers - don't link him to the issues. Those ticked off - don't trash him.

Because the issues are the most important.

[Heartstrings]

59. You could say

Bernie and I have "shared values"..he's on our side, guys, regardless of the (I) after his name!

Thank you for this op, sharedvalues!

[ismnotwasm]

66. Ideas and implementation of ideas are two different issues

Sanders didn’t offered plans that would actually work. Sure he sounds good to quite a number of people. His math never added up. I suppose there is something to be said for overreaching—put forward the very best fantasy platform and let compromises come later, and I think everyone can get real here and admit compromise is one thing that Senator Sanders is actually good at. He often played middleman between Democrats and Republican to get legislation passed, in his status as an independent.

Where Sanders fails, and fails large— outside of legislative reality, is outreach amongst people of color, particularity African American women, Nina Turner notwithstanding. I can’t emphasize this enough, but the “base” of the Democratic Party is not newly energized young people, who are still not committed to the Democratic Party—although I feel we can do a better job including them—but people of color, especially women. We will NOT win without them, and we will NOT win them by continual references to White angst.

So ideas are great, I love them, but the bridge between ideas and peoples lives—literally—shouldn’t be a bridge to far.

[EffieBlack]

69. Nothing you said anywhere in here is a lie

You are dead on in every respect.

You are right about painting the big picture and then compromising. But the problem is that the people who try to actually put the big picture in play by making realistic compromises get attacked as sellouts. Until they learn that the ONLY way to actually effect change is to compromise and move forward incrementally, they will always be stuck demanding pie in the sky but getting zip.

Unfortunately, Bernie doesn't tell them this - and when other people try, we're also trashed as sellouts.

[ismnotwasm]

74. And thats the elephant in the living room so to speak

When wildly inappropriate and inaccurate information is disseminated, targeting the very people who have worked their asses off for years is not spoken too, and spoken out, against, by leaders we have a huge problem.

Obviously we do. For all that Trump lies every day of his life and lies egregiously, and he still has people accepting and supporting him, we on the left have our own problems that tend to deal with half truths and innuendo. How do we address this? How do we overcome this? Criticism, targeted criticism is valuable. Memes and broad categories that leave out detail are not. And yet here we are. In this context I could lay out terms that have lost meaning “neoliberal” comes to mind, and there are many more, but I’m tired of it. I’m angry and I have no patience left for bullshit, for racist subtexts, for overt sexist crap that the disingenuous simply deny is real.

[kcr]

68. It's not about the issues

I agree with most of those issues. It's not the issues I have a problem with. It never was.

But Bernie Sanders isn't really about the issues either. I'm really not enjoying President Trump right now. Bernie Sanders needs to go away.

[Squinch]

70. The issues are Democratic issues. Most of them were in the platform before Bernie said a word.

Let's talk about this: what the fuck good does this man do to the Democratic party?

Answer: absolutely none.

What does he do that makes future Trump elections less likely?

Answer: nothing. He makes them MORE likely.

He needs to go away and stop dividing Democrats. Democrats who keep acting like he is the messiah, and the source of all that is worthy in the Democratic party need to wake up and realize that NONE of that stuff is down to him and he is NOT a Democrat.

[sharedvalues]

71. This discussion rings true to me: Economy that works for everyone. 0.01% should pay their fair shar

Start at 2:54 (before that isn't that relevant; at that point there is a clip of his speech)

?t=153

[Squinch]

73. That has been a Democratic value since before you even knew Bernie's name.

He does nothing but divide. The Russians can see this. Why can't his acolytes?

If we could get Bernie OUT of the discussion, we can get back to the discussion of the issues. But as long as you have his name in the discussion, the discussion will be about him and not the issues. That's who he is. That's what he does.

Here's my question to you: if you really wanted to talk about the issues, why did you need to bring his name into it at all? If you are concerned about the division his name sows, why did you make his name part of your "issues" discussion? If you want to talk about the issues, then do that. But don't tell me this thread was not meant to be all about the wonderfulness of Saint Bernie.

I have no interest in his cult of personality. I no respect for those who have so little sense of Democratic history that they believe he invented issues and positions that the Democrats have pushed for years.

[sharedvalues]

75. OK, so let's focus on that. I want economic fairness

We can have a conversation about economic fairness and reducing wealth inequality.
And we can note that Bernie supports that (didn't invent it, for sure - see FDR. but speaks well on it today). Then we can discuss which Dem candidates for future elections will also support it.

That's a conversation about issues and values, not about any individual. That's what we should be doing - talking about issues not dwelling on any one person. That's all I'm asking for.












(p.s. I didn't vote for BS; I voted for HRC. And given what I know now I probably wouldn't have changed that vote. I think BS speaks eloquently about core Dem values. But I worry he's got some dirt in his closet that would have taken him down. And he did hire Tad Devine. All that said: I don't care about HIM or any individual. I want to focus on Dem values.)

[Squinch]

88. Who here does not want economic fairness? What Democrat does not want economic

fairness? Why do we need to note that Bernie supports it when we don't need to note that pretty much every Democrat supports it, pretty much every Democrat fights for it every day and it is a very basic tenet of Democratic policy?

When you require that we give Bernie a pat on the head for every Democratic value, then yes the conversation IS about an individual. And it is about an individual who has done nothing practical to forward economic fairness. His disgruntled followers helped to get a president elected who pretty much squashed the prospects for economic fairness for the foreseeable future.

If you truly want to talk about how to counteract Trumps and the republicans' dismantling of all programs that forward economic fairness, then start another thread and keep Bernie's name off it.

As it stands, this thread is just another example of misguided Bernie worship.

[Squinch]

172. Who got nominated? Who got at least that much done? Who had an actual track record of

getting actual help for the poor and middle class.

There is not as much support for your "real progressive pushing the envelope" as there is for a practical Democrat who can actually get shit done. That much, at least, we know for a fact.

And ETA: in this conversation, I am not the one who is "refusing to understand" facts.

[EffieBlack]

86. You mean Bernie didn't invent it?

[yardwork]

113. Correct. The Democratic Party platform is highly progressive.

We need to promote what we say, not misrepresent it.

[Qutzupalotl]

72. The tax on Wall Street

was a tax on high-frequency trades, a miniscule per-transaction tax proposed by my congressman (DeFazio-OR), slightly increased to pay for college tuition. Ordinary investors would pay very little tax on trades, since they typically make only a few trades at a time. But large firms with the massive computers necessary to make thousands of trades per second can effectively control stock prices, at the expense of the small investor. So the playing field is tilted heavily against the little guy.

Bernie and DeFazio are right that HFTs distort the market, and should be taxed out of existence. My problem with proposals that operate like sin taxes — discouraging certain behavior through taxes — is that if implemented they have the effect of drying up the source of revenue allotted for another purpose, in this case college tuition. In other words, taxing transactions will have the good effect of slowing down or eliminating the damaging HFTs, and generate huge amounts of revenue in the short term, but greatly diminish revenues in the long term, and dry up tuition funding.

Certainly, it is possible to adjust the amount of the transaction tax to account for better behavior (reducing or eliminating HFTs) and still cover the cost of college tuition. But it never made sense to me to use the funds raised from the tax for something unrelated like tuition; it would be better to use them for a rainy-day fund to bail out Wall Street next time it implodes. Make large trading firms pay for their own bad behavior rather than us taxpayers.

[sharedvalues]

82. Agreed. High freq trading tax makes sense

and it's a good point that you don't want to tie its revenue to any single program.

Good case for HFT tax is made here:
http://www.epi.org/blog/lessons-french-time-tax-high-frequency-trading/

[rgbecker]

165. I'd argue these transactions should be taxed just like sales tax.

How is it every sale but stocks and bonds is taxed?

[brer cat]

103. Why?

Why "should" our focus be on his ideas? Why should our future candidates have to pass a litmus test on which of his ideas they will support? If you want to discuss issues, why is "Bernie" in your OP a dozen times (not to mention he, his, him)? Why can't you discuss ideas or issues without your Bernie crutch? Why, if you care enough about the Democratic Party to join DU, do you ignore the more than 280 Democratic members of Congress to talk about one Independent Senator? More importantly, why should we discuss ideas instead of solutions or policies that actually have a chance of being enacted? Why can't you write a constructive OP rather than another tiresome harangue trying to cram Bernie down our throats until we gag?

[sharedvalues]

105. ? I'm here to talk about wealth inequality.

I'm happy Liz Warren came out against the bank deregulation bill.

And I'm unhappy that Kaine and Warner are for it (despite being from a state that leans blue).

That's all being constructive.

[brer cat]

112. Then that should have been your OP

instead of blah, blah, Bernie, blah, blah, Bernie. You can fool some of the people some of the time.

[Squinch]

115. Exactly. Passive aggressive Bernie transparency.

[betsuni]

161. +1

[Cha]

109. Damn! Brer Cat, Well Said!

Mahalo!

[yardwork]

114. This, 10000 times

[sheshe2]

138. Thank you, brer.

[EffieBlack]

144. Well, damn!

[Maven]

150. Thank you. These arent Bernies issues.

If you want to talk about issues, you don’t need to mention Bernie ten times.

Totally transparent.

[rgbecker]

166. I think Bernie keeps comng up when Democratic issues are discussed

because Bernie is out there discussing the issues! As is Senator Warren. Meanwhile we get nothing from so many of our other Democratic leaders. As pointed out above, 17 of our Democrats are voting for Bank deregulation as if there is any working class voter in the country who is looking to support a candidate who votes for that! Hate Bernie all you want, but he is the clear voice for progressive issues and that is why he is the go-to leader. As Warren gains her voice and others step forward you will see ther names come up when issues are discussed. What we are not seeing is Hillary Clinton. The right wing cabal has stolen her voice.

[mvd]

106. Good thread!

He has for sure moved some of those things into the mainstream. During the convention and in the platform, they were talked about more than before. One of his most important issues is getting corporate influence out of politics. That influence has driven Democrats to the right.

[leftstreet]

107. DURec

[4now]

117. I am only going to vote for Democrats

[KitSileya]

119. Health care.

- Defend and expand the Affordable Care Act, which covers 20 million people.Hillary will stand up to Republican-led attacks on this landmark law—and build on its success to bring the promise of affordable health care to more people and make a “public option” possible. She will also support letting people over 55 years old buy into Medicare.

- Bring down out-of-pocket costs like copays and deductibles. American families are being squeezed by rising out-of-pocket health care costs. Hillary believes that workers should share in slower growth of national health care spending through lower costs.

- Reduce the cost of prescription drugs. Prescription drug spending accelerated from 2.5 percent in 2013 to 12.6 percent in 2014. It’s no wonder that almost three-quarters of Americans believe prescription drug costs are unreasonable. Hillary believes we need to demand lower drug costs for hardworking families and seniors.

- Protect consumers from unjustified prescription drug price increases from companies that market long-standing, life-saving treatments and face little or no competition. Hillary’s plan includes new enforcement tools that make drug alternatives available and increase competition, broaden emergency access to high-quality treatments from developed countries with strong safety standards, and hold drug companies accountable for unjustified price increases with new penalties.

- Fight for health insurance for the lowest-income Americans in every state by incentivizing states to expand Medicaid—and make enrollment through Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act easier.

- Expand access to affordable health care to families regardless of immigration status. Hillary will expand access to affordable health care to families regardless of immigration status by allowing families to buy health insurance on the health exchanges regardless of their immigration status.

- Expand access to rural Americans, who often have difficulty finding quality, affordable health care. Hillary will explore cost-effective ways to make more health care providers eligible for telehealth reimbursement under Medicare and other programs, including federally qualified health centers and rural health clinics.

- Defend access to reproductive health care. Hillary will work to ensure that all women have access to preventive care, affordable contraception, and safe and legal abortion.

- Double funding for community health centers, and support the healthcare workforce: As part of her comprehensive health care agenda, Hillary is committed to doubling the funding for primary-care services at community health centers over the next decade. Hillary also supports President Obama’s call for a near tripling of the size of the National Health Service Corps.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/health-care/

[ismnotwasm]

123. Boom boom boom

[Cha]

130. Thank you for Hillary's site on the Issues,

Kit!

[KitSileya]

120. College

- Every student should have the option to graduate from a public college or university in their state without taking on any student debt. By 2021, families with income up to $125,000 will pay no tuition at in-state four-year public colleges and universities. And from the beginning, every student from a family making $85,000 a year or less will be able to go to an in-state four-year public college or university without paying tuition.
- All community colleges will offer free tuition.

- Everyone will do their part. States will have to step up and invest in higher education, and colleges and universities will be held accountable for the success of their students and for controlling tuition costs.

- A $25 billion fund will support historically black colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, and other minority-serving institutions in building new ladders of opportunity for students.

- The one-quarter of all college students who are also parents will get the support they need and the resources they deserve.
Debt won’t hold you back

- Borrowers will be able to refinance loans at current rates, providing debt relief to an estimated 25 million people. They’ll never have to pay back more than 10 percent of their income, and all remaining college debt will be forgiven after 20 years.

- Delinquent borrowers and those in default will get help to protect their credit and get back on their feet.
To reduce the burden for future borrowers, Hillary will significantly cut interest rates so the government never profits from college student loans.

- Hillary’s plan will crack down on predatory schools, lenders, and bill collectors.

- A new payroll deduction portal for employers and employees will simplify the repayment process—and Hillary will explore more options to encourage employers to help pay down student debt.

- Aspiring entrepreneurs will be able to defer their loans with no payments or interest for up to three years. Social entrepreneurs and those starting new enterprises in distressed communities will be eligible for up to $17,500 in loan forgiveness.

- Hillary will take immediate executive action to offer a three-month moratorium on student loan payments to all federal loan borrowers. That will give every borrower a chance to consolidate their loans, sign up for income-based repayment plans, and take advantage of opportunities to reduce their monthly interest payments and fees.

Fully paid for: This plan will be fully paid for by limiting certain tax expenditures for high-income taxpayers.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/college/

[KitSileya]

121. An economy that works for everyone

Note: This page is a reproduction of the Hillary for America policy proposal on building an economy that works for everyone.

Despite the progress we’ve made in coming back from the Great Recession, we face a set of core challenges to building an economy that works for everyone—including a political system that is doing too little to help working Americans, an economic system that encourages too many corporations to favor short-term profits over long-term investments, and outdated workplace policies that aren’t meeting the needs of modern families.

As president, Hillary has a five-point plan to meet these challenges:

- A 100-days jobs plan: Break through Washington gridlock to make the boldest investment in good-paying jobs since World War II. Hillary will fight to pass a plan in her first 100 days in office to invest in infrastructure, manufacturing, research and technology, clean energy, and small businesses. She will strengthen trade enforcement, and she’ll say no to trade deals like TPP that don’t meet a high enough bar of creating good-paying jobs. And she will make the U.S. the clean energy superpower of the world—with half a billion solar panels installed by the end of her first term and enough clean, renewable energy to power every home in America within 10 years of her taking office.

- Make debt free college available to all Americans. Hillary will make college debt-free, and she’ll provide relief for Americans with existing debt by allowing them to refinance their student loans.

- Rewrite the rules so that more companies share profits with employees—and fewer ship profits and jobs overseas. Hillary will reward companies that share profits and invest in their workers, and she will raise the minimum wage to a living wage. She will crack down on companies that shift profits overseas to avoid paying U.S. taxes, and she’ll make companies that export jobs give back the tax breaks they’ve received in America. She will defend existing Wall Street reform and push for new measures to strengthen it.

- Make certain that corporations, the wealthy, and Wall Street pay their fair share.Hillary will pay for her economic priorities and avoid adding to the national debt by ensuring the wealthiest Americans and the biggest corporations pay their fair share. For example, she’ll fight for the Buffett Rule, close the carried interest loophole, and impose a new surcharge on multi-millionaires and billionaires.

- Enact policies that meet the challenges families face in the 21st-century economy.Hillary will make it possible for parents to succeed at work and at home by updating outdated laws so they match how families work today. She will fight for equal pay and guarantee paid leave, two changes that are long overdue. And she will provide relief from the rising costs of necessities like child care and housing, while taking steps to provide Americans with greater retirement and health care security.

[KitSileya]

122. Campaign finance reform

Note: This page is a reproduction of the Hillary for America policy proposal on campaign finance reform.

Americans are understandably cynical about a political system that has been hijacked by billionaires and special interests. That’s why Hillary Clinton is putting forward a plan for aggressive campaign finance reform. She’ll work to curb the outsized influence of big money in American politics, shine a light on secret spending, and fight to make our democracy work for everyone—not just the wealthy and well-connected.

As president, Hillary will:

- Overturn Citizens United—the Supreme Court case that unleashed hundreds of millions of dollars in corporate and special-interest money into U.S. elections.Hillary will appoint Supreme Court justices who will protect Americans’ right to vote over the right of billionaires to buy elections. She will also propose a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United within her first 30 days in office.

- End secret, unaccountable money in politics. We need federal legislation to require outside groups to publicly disclose significant political spending. And until Congress acts, Hillary will sign an executive order requiring federal government contractors to do the same. She’ll also push for an SEC rule requiring publicly traded companies to disclose political spending to shareholders.

- Amplify the voices of everyday Americans. Hillary will establish a small-donor matching system for presidential and congressional elections to give small donors greater influence.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/campaign-finance-reform/

[KitSileya]

124. A couple of issues you seem to have forgotten....

Climate change

Criminal justice reform

Disability rights

Gun Violence Prevention

Immigration Reform

Housing

LGBT Rights and Equality

Mental Health

Poverty

Voting Rights

Women't Rights and Opportunities


.....just to mention a few. But don't worry! Our excellent candidate in the previous election, you know the one who got more votes than any other white candidate ever, has it covered. Just check out https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/.

[Cha]

135. Mahalo, Kit, for these Important ISSUES!

[NCTraveler]

125. This is what we should focus on: Bernies ideas

Discussions about no one are held to this strict and high of a standard. No one. The guy has been given special privilege after special privilege and now the scope of conversation about him is to be shrunk even further.

I have been accused of not discussing his ideas when I mention his purity with respect to visa’s has left tens of millions of people living under the radar without proper protections and truly living in fear. Three votes. That’s all that was necessary. I don’t want to hear about the impact he could have as a leader all while listening to a line of excuses as to why he opposed a pathway to citizenship and didn’t have the clout to sway two more people to change with him. How did that little old visa thing work out in the end, Sanders? I can tell you how those you opposed are doing.

It’s all tied together and it is not possible to separate them. His lack of impact as a career politician isn’t justified because he is solid on most of the issues. His opposition to a pathway to citizenship is not justified because he supports Medicare for all.

But the biggest flaw you present is wanting to talk about his ideas only. They aren’t his ideas. They are policy positions shared and promoted by many. That is completely accurate when viewed in the limited context that you want the conversation to be held at.

Let’s talk single payer. Let’s talk a pathway to citizenship. Let’s talk prison reform. None of which are unique to Sanders.

[Honeycombe8]

132. Let's talk party affiliation, too.

It matters what party a politician signs on to and promises to support.

It muddies the waters if you start disregarding that, excusing that, and just looking for someone who thinks like you do on several issues. That could include a number of independents and a few moderate Republicans.

Shall we do that?

I don't like this deal where a particular politician reaps the benefit of being aligned with the Dems (guaranteed votes), but has none of the responsibilities, like backing a Dem bill he may not be 100% in favor of, to support the Democratic Party's position for current and future reasons.

It's all so murky.

[NCTraveler]

136. The trend is really clear.

To this day a lot of people don’t understand that Sanders use of the party is very basic. Since early in his career he runs as a Democrat in the primary and then an Independent in the general. It’s the cornerstone of his career path as a politician.

DU gives him special protections as they do other Democrats. I accept that as a lot of people here like either the man or concept of the man. I’ve respectfully criticized many Democrats here. I’ll do the same when it comes to Sanders. More often no doubt. I think he is squandering a great opportunity to actually have an impact for once, all due to ego.

[ucrdem]

127. "Bernie's ideas" like Medicare for all? That he shops around like a magic bullet

whenever ACA is on the chopping block? But isn't substantially different except in the fact that it's vapor-ware that supports GOP efforts to undermine the Obama ACA?

No thanks.

[Cha]

134. Right! And, John Conyers introduced Medicare

for all in 2003.. so it isn't "BS' idea".

https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/676

ucr

[ucrdem]

137. You got it Cha! And then there was Bernie's brilliant TPP idea

which doesn't look so progressive now that Trump made it happen.

[kacekwl]

159. I love you Bernie but

we have been talking about the issues for year's now. Here's the issue. We a fighting a traitorous political party that will and has cheated,lied,stole elections for many decades now. We must expose them all and what they have done daily,hourly every minute we can. We are outmatched by faux news and RW radio so the democratic party has to find another way. And goddamn it give these lazy don't seem to care people a reason to vote.

[pecosbob]

170. Out of the five top trending threads at DU at this moment

four of them are Dems trashing other Dems.

[Tavarious Jackson]

173. Every Dem candidate for prez endorsed these issues.

Including universal health care. This is not a Bernie thing. Even the disgraced John Edwards talked about it

[betsuni]

175. It is vexing.

[Skittles]

181. I plead the 5th on Bernie

[Kurt V.]

186. Wealth inequality is the biggest issue of our time

I would have said climate change but very unfortunately that boat has sailed.

[NNadir]

190. One of his "ideas" -none of which he actually invented - is one of which I want no part. His...

..."ideas" on guns.