Bye Bye Bernie...There is no economic populism without abortion rights and civil rights.

[Demsrule86]

"To the extent that Democrats are looking for their progressive soul, Sen. Bernie Sanders is not where they should be fixing their gaze. Sanders is clear that he is not a Democrat — except when he needs to be one in order to run for president. Yet he is demanding that the Democratic Party head for what Rebecca Traister last week called “third-way centrist bullshit.”

Economic populism and what are commonly erroneously and dismissively referred to as “social issues” — such as reproductive rights, immigration reform and civil rights for people of color, those who have disabilities, people of all faiths, LGBT people and
women..."

http://www.salon.com/2017/04/24/bye-bye-bernie-the-self-appointed-captain-of-the-democratic-ship-needs-to-stop-chasing-the-great-white-male/

[Sculpin Beauregard]

1. Give it a rest

[Demsrule86]

3. I would like too...but damn it my rights will not be thrown under the bus...

to attract Trump voters. I had stopped even reading certain posts but then came Omaha...sometimes you have to draw a line in the sand...

[calimary]

63. Yep. Agreed. My rights are NON-NEGOTIABLE.

Not on the table. Don't belong on the table. Don't even belong in the same room where that proverbial table is.

[Demsrule86]

94. Not even in the same House with the table...

I like your style.

[J_William_Ryan]

92. Exactly

Jobs and economic growth are pointless absent one's rights and protected liberties.

[cstanleytech]

100. Did you stop to consider though that every time someone starts another thread complaining

about Bernie for whatever reason, legitimate or not that it actually helps him and provides him more free publicity much like how the media helped provide Trump a massive amount of free publicity?
Besides Bernie is just one Senator, its not like he won the Presidency nor is he likely to given his age now so he will spend the rest of his days as a Senator until he retires, dies, or is defeated and the only real power he has is the power people imbue him with by complaining and ranting over him.

[Demsrule86]

102. Did you watch any of the footage from the Unity tour...I think he is planning to run...

but this is about social justice...and our rights are not expendable.

[ehrnst]

104. Bingo. (NT)

[cstanleytech]

107. I doubt he would win and it will probably be for the same reason which is he will

have a hard time getting many of the Democratic parties leaders to support him over someone who actually has been an official and public member of the party for years.

[OnDoutside]

130. Isn't there a rule coming that you have to release your

Taxes before you can run ?

[cstanleytech]

141. Not that I am aware. I have heard a few states are trying that but I am sure

some people will challenge it with the courts and who knows how they will rule on that *shrug*

[CountAllVotes]

5. +1,000 !!

Attempts at breeding dissent does nothing at all to solve a problem & that seems to the case as of recent. Why? I do not know why but my opinion(s) of Bernie Sanders have not changed and posts like this make me sure to keep in mind NOT TO CHANGE!

[Demsrule86]

7. I am not trying to cause dissent...my point is we need to

protect a woman's right over her own body...this is not debatable...Civil rights are essential for any progressive economic agenda. There is no such thing as 'identity policies'...right wing word at that.

[LanternWaste]

31. I too pretend that opinions different than mine are merely "breeding contempt."

I too pretend that opinions different than mine are merely "breeding contempt." The ethical convenience of such allows our comforting narrative to rest safely within our bias.

Anything other than praise is both malicious and an indignity that should not be tolerated in civilized discussion about our tin gods.

[Orrex]

85. Wow.

That was a damn fine post. Well done!

[dchill]

6. +1000

[Demsrule86]

8. I would never have thought it would be necessary to remind progressives

of which I am one that abortion rights are progressive. This is a Salon article not some shady article. And abortion rights is worthy of discussion and should not divide us.

[dchill]

12. "Bye, bye Bernie..."

That's divisive. Do not what we should not.

[CountAllVotes]

13. Good old divide and conquer hard at work around here

[dchill]

19. Indeed. It's almost bot-worthy.

[Demsrule86]

21. Women's rights are human rights.

I will not sit in the back of the bus.

[Demsrule86]

22. It is in the title. I abbreviated it because it was too long.

It was word for word from Salon's article.

[dchill]

24. Salons article is divisive and anti-Bernie.

Enough.

[Demsrule86]

32. It points out some issues which matter a great deal to me and to others...not just women either.

I am in favor of Bernie's economic policies...and agree we have income inequality, but social justice is just as important...we have single payer and a safety net in Europe and look at the bigotry there...economic equality has not fixed this. Thus we must seek both social and economic justice in any progressive movement.

[Demsrule86]

37. It is an excerpted title as the entire one is too long...which is why I have dots after it.

Not my words...

[cstanleytech]

112. But thats just it the Democratic party is made up of "many" people with many different opinions

and its why its usually so strong and what weakened so much this time against Trump was the the arguing between Clinton and Bernie supporters.
Had Bernie acknowledged defeat weeks before when it was clear he would not win the nomination and used that time to help heal the rift things might have turned out differently and we would hopefully not be having Trump as president.

[snooper2]

9. Why, you don't like baklava or something?

Cheeseburger Baklava - Epic Meal Time

[calimary]

127. Looks like donald trump. Proves he's nothing but a meat head.

[JTFrog]

11. No. This is Democratic Underground. We are going to fight for the party and our human rights.

Don't like it?

That's too bad. There are plenty of sites that worship Independents out there you can utilize.

[tallahasseedem]

16. +1

I cannot recommend this enough!

[Demsrule86]

23. Thanks JTFrog

we need to stick together...civil rights for women, POC, LGBTQ etc. are civil right and not ,negotiable.

[betsuni]

26. +1

[musette_sf]

135. + 1 xoxo

Our rights are NOT negotiable.

[Cha]

14. Why should we stop fighting for our Rights? Because

you say so? Not. Gonna. Happen.

[Demsrule86]

25. Pro-choice is in the Democratic platform.

and it is a progressive policy not identity politics which is a hateful right wing word. right?

[Cha]

50. It's insulting.. and I don't pay attention to a lot of what the rwingers

say to smear Dems.. the first I heard of it was reading something BS was going on about.. he can't say anything without insults.

"Class is more important than race".. And, now an "aggressively anti-choice" candidate is more "progressive" than a "Pro Choice candidate".

I know he accused the "Democratic Party of being elite".. That sounds like something the damn monied rw would brainwash into the idiots' heads.. like a limpbaugh thing if I remember correctly when members use to post his latest screeds.

He's wrong and Look at how he's dividing.. losing some supporters, too

[Demsrule86]

67. Yes, Mello isn't weak on choice...he is truly terrible on choice...

His voted to deny abortion rights with a twenty week ban, banning insurance coverage for abortion, and insisting a doctor be present at all times during any procedure...which is a right wing meme to shut clinics down.

[tallahasseedem]

20. How about you as a Canadian, let us American women

decide what we need to "rest" about. Control over our bodies will NOT be one of them.

I see you are new to DU. Women's rights are not negotiable around here.

[Demsrule86]

27. 1000+

[Sculpin Beauregard]

29. Don't school me on democracy and women's rights when your goddamned fucking government

is picking fights across the globe and endangering the entire goddamned planet, congratulating bona-fide fucking dictators and bringing the world to the brink of a nuclear war.

If you can't get Dems to unite enough to stop fascism, then women's rights, gay rights, poor people's rights, dissenter's rights, are gone. Say hello to fascism, and the inability to vote, or protest, ever again.

Get it together or your democracy is gone.

[Demsrule86]

33. You can't unite while throwing more than half the population under the bus.

[Sculpin Beauregard]

43. Imagine that the investigations stall, and the only

thing that could put the US back on track is the next election. Imagine the GOP wins again.

Now imagine never having another election again, because he is firmly entrenched and is never going to be held accountable. Your constitution will be dismantled. This is Bannon's playbook. Remember, Putin has been in power for almost 20 years, not 4, not 8. Protesting is illegal and 'voting' is rigged to keep him in power in perpetuity.
This could happen and I would argue that this is what T and admin are trying to do. The evidence is everywhere. You now have a kleptocratic monarchy and can do nothing to change it, ever again.

There is no do-over after the next election. This is not normal. This is the destruction of your ability to change your govt ever again.

[Akamai]

47. Sculpin -- how wrong you are! Purity is worth it, even if it kills our hopes, our future, our

families! Purity now! Tomorrow! And ALWAYS!!!! (Just some snarkasm, of course.)

[Sculpin Beauregard]

53. Indeed! This is so terribly sad. It will be too late

to save democracy if GOP wins the next election. With the investigations stalled, there is literally nothing else to stop this regime except the next (possibly last, if GOP wins) election.

Democracy is fragile. And it's in your hands.

[WinkyDink]

54. Women's Rights are disdained as some "purity" gauge?

[Demsrule86]

59. They certainly should not be...

[Sculpin Beauregard]

61. How do you think women's rights will fare under

a second Trump administration? A Trump admin that lasts forever? For fuck sake...smh

[Demsrule86]

70. Mello won't help with the Trump regime thing.

So we are to give our rights up for the greater good?

[Sculpin Beauregard]

74. Jesus Christ on a pogo stick, what is better,

a democratic government, where you can carry on fighting for progressive ideals and bring the Trump admin to justice, or a fascist Trump regime where there may never be a true democratic vote again? I can't even...

[Demsrule86]

101. We don't have to choose one or the other...false choice.

We can have a democratic government and woman's rights.

[Akamai]

75. Sculpin - right on the nail! Your post absolutely hits the mark!

[Akamai]

73. Absolute purity about how you want women's rights carried out can be harmful.

Clearly there is some disagreement about aspects of women's rights, although I sure as hell would make contraception free, would have appropriate late term abortions, would have a hell of a lot more centers providing women's services (including Planned Parenthood -- not only would that be cost effective, it is also humane), effective health care for all, etc.

But if our march towards such goals can be thwarted by people raising questions to split us apart, we are lost.

And yes, some of the allies we have along the way may not be as "pure" as we would like, but if we dismiss them all, not only will we fail, but our foes in these matters will be absolutely delighted. Indeed, our foes feed this disagreement -- clearly Republicans and other trolls love it when we divide ourselves.

Shouldn't we ask ourselves whether it makes sense to engage in tactics that our opponents want us to use?

[Demsrule86]

109. I see and that is true of economic policy too right? Only it isn't...

No, just no...any progressive party needs to consider both social justice and economic justice at the same time... and not endorse anti-choice candidates...in Virginia (governor's race), it is particularly galling as Perriello voted for the Stupak amendment which would have ended abortion coverage in the ACA...now there is a candidate running, endorsed by NARAL, Ralph Northam, but Sen. Sanders endorsed Perriello.

[Akamai]

113. I don't know the details, maybe Perriello has a chance of being elected and Northam doesn't.

I don't know about Perriello's voting record, etc.

By the way, about women's reproductive rights -- are you for abortion on demand throughout the course of the pregnancy, even a month or a week before birth? I assume you are not. But women have different views about when to limit abortion, about who should pay for it (I think it should be free, as in many developed countries), etc.

My point here is that even strong proponents of women's reproductive rights have differences of opinion and many of these are strongly held.

But as was noted earlier, if Trump and his ilk win out (maybe for 40 or 60 years), how will that help women's issues?

We are all imperfect and sometimes we have to rely on imperfect allies.

[Demsrule86]

115. I think the NARAL backed candidate will probably win...my fear is this will turn into a battle and

the GOP candidate could win which would be a disaster. I seriously don't think Perriello should have even run...we need to win this seat. I believe women should have complete choice over their own bodies...late term bans are often used to force women to carry dead fetuses... or those with terrible deformities...also sometimes a late abortion is needed for the life of the mother. We can beat Trump without sacrificing social justice. Why is it not OK to accept some candidates who have a different view on economics if this about beating Trump...that could help us win also. But that is a non-starter. It is clear that economic justice is all that matters to some. There can be no progressive revolution without social justice.

Perriello is a particularly galling situation as he voted for the Stupak amendment which would have denied women abortion coverage in the ACA. There is a pro-choice Democratic candidate running so this is not a Democrat vs a Republican situation.

[NurseJackie]

78. You've got it. To some, women's rights are a disposable inconvenience, apparently.

[Demsrule86]

110. How easily they do it...too. Why one would think it wasn't important to them.

[Demsrule86]

62. But of course economic purity can 'kill' our hope...no candidate who is not

on that particular wagon gets an endorsement...but woman's rights now threaten our future...you say? We are too pure you say?

[Akamai]

77. What economic issues do you disagree with Candidate B on? Do you have an exact plan

for taxes you insist on?

[Demsrule86]

119. I don't have any disagreement with progressive economics...but don't think

it is enough without social justice...we can have both.

[Akamai]

128. I think he has had very good reviews from Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and others. Historically this has been

The case.

[Demsrule86]

132. No Mello does not...in fact NARAL wrote a furious letter to Perez and the DNC

And if Perriello is not endorsed by NARAL...but there is a Dem running against him in the VA governors primary who is endorsed by NARAL

[Akamai]

138. I was talking about Bernie Sanders. Maybe I wasn't clear enough. Or am I wrong?

It is easy to impact social organizations later on, and probably that is exactly what is happened to narrow recently, this is they now know that Mello is a hot potato.

But Bernie Sanders has always had high marks from others.

[Demsrule86]

69. Imagine we fail to take the house by one seat...imagine if Osstoff loses

His is the seat that could have won the entire thing...but now we were spending time and money on an anti-choice mayoral candidate who could not help with the house. Why did we waste time on this?

[NurseJackie]

81. Ego?

[Demsrule86]

121. hahaha... The drama...

[tallahasseedem]

40. ROFL!

[Cha]

71. I know, right

tallahasseedem

[WinkyDink]

52. WTH?? This isn't "World Politics Underground." Nor do Democrats currently run the US. Oh, and that

demanding attitude? Yeah, not so welcome.

[Sculpin Beauregard]

65. If you think US politics and policies don't directly affect the entire globe

and most especially your direct neighbours, you are sadly, egregiously mistaken. I have every right to be here as a Canadian liberal. An outside perspective should be welcomed, not shut down.

[GulfCoast66]

137. Outside perspecitives are very welcomed here

Until they are perceived to be minimizing or sacrificing women's rights in the chase for some mythical message that will recapture the House or Senate.

What other sacred Democratic value would you have us abandon to capture the majority. Taken to the extreme chasing votes above all else will can and will lead to southern state democrats abandoning our strong record on civil rights. Because many people here remember when southern democrats did not value civil rights. But they were in the majority and had a strangle hold on both houses of congress.

[radical noodle]

93. I think you may have mistaken us

for the group that wanted trump to win.

[Sculpin Beauregard]

96. Useless talking point that's useless in the face of the creeping fascism that will

be outright fascism if you can't defeat it in the next election. Being 'right' about a historical talking point will be a pyrrhic victory if another GOP govt is voted in. There won't be a do-over if that happens.

[radical noodle]

108. That is not a talking point

it's fact. Do you actually support giving up civil rights to defeat trump? Seriously? Most of us here worked our asses off to beat trump. We will do it again, but that doesn't include giving up every value our party stands for to attract the kind of people who seem to love the fascism you're worried about.

[Sculpin Beauregard]

116. For fuck sake, I'm advocating for enough unity to get you in the White House next election!

And frankly, you're not worried enough about fascism. You think it's business as usual for the next election. It's absolutely not. Trump will use every dirty trick in the book, aided by billionaires and Russia, to keep his power and to shut down any investigation. Nobody will be able to fight back, because any means to fight it will be destroyed or hobbled. You're assuming your constitutional rights will protect you.

He can impose curfews, he can shut down the internet, he can and will control the media, he can make protesting illegal, he can destroy the constitution, he can seize your property and imprison you, he can install his hand-picked judges and lawyers throughout the legal system and many other ways to control people. Do you not see what is already happening? Do you not see how he is not terribly scared of losing power right now, and is indeed flaunting it, emoluments and conflicts of interest be damned? Do you not see how he is creating discord throughout the world? Do you not see how he is treating other heads of state?

What we know for sure is that women's rights will be worse off, not better, with another term of Trump. He will start wars to keep his power, and it will be harder – or impossible! – to remove him.

This has gotten seriously ridiculous. You can't see the writing on the wall.

[radical noodle]

140. Excuse me

but you have no idea at all about how worried I am about fascism or what I think about the next election. The OP was about giving up basic civil rights and you are making things worse, not better.

I don't really need you to preach to me about trump. I was well aware before the election what he would be capable of, and I've certainly not found an iota of reason to believe he will be anything but our worst nightmare and he will become worse as time goes on. Pence would be just as bad.

I have no idea why you're so down on those of us who desperately tried to beat trump last fall, but I think you're preaching to the choir. Given the choice between a Democrat who is anti-choice and a Republican who is anti-choice, I will always pick the Democrat. That doesn't mean I think we should go around saying that civil rights are not important compared to the problems of trump voters. Try lecturing the purists who won't sully their hands by voting for anyone that deviates a millimeter from everything they want.

Welcome to DU.

[ehrnst]

106. Well that's not flaming or trashing Democrats at all. (nt)

[DesertRat]

55. Amen!

Women's rights are not negotiable around here.

[niyad]

90. my rights are non-negotiable, period, end of sentence.

[ehrnst]

103. You mean defending basic health care for women? We're progressives. Why would we stop? (nt)

[LexVegas]

2. "the great white male". Thats basically who I see mansplaining reproductive rights lately. nt

[Demsrule86]

4. I was not even going to read what I considered divisive posts...

but damn it Abortion rights are progressive.

[Cha]

18. I know.. it's glaringly obvious. Like to know where they

think they get off?

[Demsrule86]

44. So tired of defending rights I though were already won a generation ago...nt

[Cha]

66. Interesting who should come along and put that in jeopardy..

Link to tweet

[calimary]

72. True. You don't get to decide what I'm allowed to do with my body.

It's none of your doggone business. You are free to decide what happens to your own body all you want, all the live-long-day. And I won't interfere because it's YOUR body and it's none of MY business.

People who don't want abortions? FINE! Don't have one! Nobody's gonna make you have one if you don't want one. You have that free choice.

Just like I do.

[Demsrule86]

76. Great point...most of us have held our noses...and voted

I voted for Tim Ryan before he had the his pro-choice epiphany...and I don't regret it. He was the best choice..but this is different... our rights are important to any 'revolution'. Pro-choice is a progressive policy and it can not be abandoned by the left for political expediency...just can't happen.

[m-lekktor]

57. Looks like quite a few women sticking up for Bernie in the comments section of that Salon article.

The "its all white guys" supporting Bernie is a myth you all keep repeating over and over.

White WOMEN supported Trump over Hillary I wonder what their problem was.

[Demsrule86]

79. If you read the article you will find that is not really true about women voters...

Women are people and have different views on politics just like men. We don't walk in lockstep.That being said there is a huge push back on this from many women...from what I can see only a few women support having pro-choice rights viewed as expendable.

[NurseJackie]

83. It's like arguing with climate change deniers.

Truly maddening. They refuse to listen. They refuse to acknowledge that women's rights are NOT NEGOTIABLE!

Sad.

[Demsrule86]

123. I am lifelong Democrat and have been boots on the ground...and it is mostly women by the way...and

it makes me sad that so many don't consider my rights important...they consider getting some mythical Trump voter to vote Democratic more important. In the words of Glenn Close (Fatal Attraction, make hubs watch it once a year),I will not be ignored.

[RedWedge]

10. What makes me so mad is that intersectionalism just isn't that hard to understand, or even

acknowledge. His inability to articulate even a nod to that reality is what turns me off.

[Demsrule86]

30. This Omaha thing hit me hard.

I am already fearful of the GOP overturning Roe V Wade...do we have to watch our back too? I think the courts would be more likely to act if they perceived agreement on denying reproductive rights. We have to fight for not just for us but for our daughters and grand-daughters.

[tallahasseedem]

15. EXCELLENT article...

and a definite must read. Thank you so much for posting!!!

[Demsrule86]

17. Thanks so much.

I was a victim of a pro-life doctor...at some point I will post my story...I feel very strongly about pro-life.

[athena]

35. They are not pro-life; they are anti-choice.

"Pro-life" is what they want to call themselves, and we shouldn't go along with their whitewashing of their own hatred. They cannot be "pro-life" when they clearly don't consider a woman's life to be a life. What they want to do would result in the deaths of women -- through back-alley abortions, self-induced abortions, and dangerous deliveries that should have been stopped while the woman's life could be saved. Calling them "pro-life" implies that we agree with them that women's lives don't count.

[Demsrule86]

36. They are anti-choice...you are right...they don't care about babies...just power over women.

[calimary]

80. Exactly. Research has shown that women DIE when they can't access decent health care.

Texas shutting down so many Planned Parenthood clinics has caused the rate of women's deaths to increase rather drastically.

Have some google fun. These are the top three stories that will come up:

MATERNAL MORTALITY RATE IN TEXAS DOUBLED AFTER STATE CUT FUNDING TO PLANNED PARENTHOOD
http://nytlive.nytimes.com/womenintheworld/2016/08/19/maternal-mortality-rates-in-texas-doubled-after-state-cut-funding-to-planned-parenthood/

and

MORE NEW MOTHERS IN TEXAS ARE DYING; EXPERTS CAN’T EXPLAIN WHY
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/09/04/facing-surge-texas-maternal-deaths-researchers-fin/

and

TEXAS HAS HIGHEST MATERNAL DEATH RATE IN DEVELOPED WORLD, STUDY FINDS
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/20/texas-maternal-mortality-rate-health-clinics-funding

... and golly-gee, they just can't figure out why, for the life of 'em.

[NurseJackie]

28. Excellent article. (Loved the writer's headline... perfect!)

[Demsrule86]

34. Thanks!

[Calculating]

38. More divisiveness

We're NEVER going to get a perfect candidate who's perfect on all issues. I'd rather get someone with a mediocre record on abortion, who is great in all other areas, than someone like Trump.

[Demsrule86]

39. Mello voted for a 20 week abortion ban, He voted to require doctors to attend every abortion

a right wing method for closing down clinics. He voted to ban health insurance for abortion ...and because he agrees with Bernie on some economic principles, he was endorsed ...a mayor's race...thrown under the bus for a Mayor's race...while Ossoff who is pro-choice but is not in complete agreement economically with Bernie was not endorsed even though he has a good shot and could help us take back the house! This leads me to think that some believe abortion rights are negotiable. However, they are not.

[tallahasseedem]

41. Mediocre record on abortion?

A woman's right to choose is NOT negotiable...FULL STOP.

[Demsrule86]

42. +1000

[calimary]

82. FULL STOP.

[sheshe2]

105. Thank you!

[MagickMuffin]

45. I was at the Come Together Fight Back Rally

Sen. Sanders said he was for ALL women's rights, equal pay, LGBT rights, civil rights, etc. etc.

I noticed that Salon's Anna March goes on to dictate how the Democratic Party should follow her suggestions!!!

One of the main reasons we lose is because most Democrats don't even bother to vote. As a Precinct Chair I know for a fact that Democrats don't bother voting. I called my precinct voters, in 2008 I had people (Democrats) tell me they won't vote for a n****r! I called 2016 as well and a large percentage of voters told me they were not going to support the Democratic candidate by staying home or writing in a candidate on the ballot. They explained that they did not like Hillary!

How is this anyone's fault except the people who don't or won't vote for the Democratic candidate?

And of course we also lose because of ALL the republicons efforts of suppressing the Democratic process. I'd like to know where are the Democratic Leaders when it comes to these dirty tactics? Why aren't they leading the charge on these issues and making sure our elections are not corrupted?


We are ALL in this together. It is time to COME TOGETHER AND FIGHT BACK!!!

[Demsrule86]

51. I am the resistance...we don't have to throw women under the bus

to fight back...just the opposite.

[MagickMuffin]

64. No ONE is throwing women under the bus

Apparently, nothing I say will make you think about the what I wrote about the Come Together Fight Back rally. I was THERE and Bernie did NOT throw women under the bus. Quite the opposite.

He IS for women's rights ALL of them.

[Demsrule86]

84. He endorsed an anti-choice candidate who is horrible on

abortion rights...and spent much of the speech talking about coming together...as if it was not even a concern...also he said in an interview that we would have to accept pro-choice candidates...but candidates that don't follow his economic policies like Osstoff ...well that is different. Jane Kleeb does not speak for me...abortion rights are front and center period...not just economics.

"Jane Kleeb, the Nebraska Democratic Party chairwoman, helped organize the event for Mr. Mello and has since come under attack for saying that Democrats were “pro-life” and “pro-choice.” She offered no apology.

“If the abortion rights groups are truly serious about cross-issue organizing,” she said, “they should know the foundation of that has to be economic issues."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/21/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democrats-nebraska.html

[Demsrule86]

56. Link to where Anna March says what you say...it is not in my article

You imply it is...just checked. it is not...she does not say this in my article. Please provide a link to what you are quoting. This is not about the 2016 election.

"I noticed that Salon's Anna March goes on to dictate how the Democratic Party should follow her suggestions!!

One of the main reasons we lose is because most Democrats don't even bother to vote. As a Precinct Chair I know for a fact that Democrats don't bother voting. I called my precinct voters, in 2008 I had people (Democrats) tell me they won't vote for a n****r! I called 2016 as well and a large percentage of voters told me they were not going to support the Democratic candidate by staying home or writing in a candidate on the ballot. They explained that they did not like Hillary! "

[NastyRiffraff]

46. The most important sentence in that article:

There is no economic populism without abortion rights and civil rights.

I wish everyone could understand that very simple concept. Unfortunately, Sanders doesn't seem to.

Thanks for posting that article, Demsrule86

[Demsrule86]

48. Thanks for reading it...so important.

cheers!

[retrowire]

49. Got it!

He has to have the title of democrat and be PERFECT.

WELP, TIME TO THROW HIM UNDER THE BUS

Who else we got?!

[Demsrule86]

58. No, he just has to recognize that social justice and economic justice go

hand in hand. We will not sit at the back of the bus...waiting our turn for justice. Women's rights are human rights.

[retrowire]

60. I feel like this attack was used against him in the primaries

He was for women's rights and still is... Yet people kept making it out like he was saying we can only have one of those. Economic issues or women's rights! Can't have both!

I literally never remember him ever saying this. Only his attackers.

Plus, I was just making my statement because the article starts out with the bullshit "he's not even a democrat" argument.

It's just a title people. It's the substance that is democratic, not the title or color.

[Demsrule86]

87. The primary is over...he picks an anti-choice candidates

He doesn't consider abortion rights when endorsing candidate. He picked Perriello in Virginia and Mello in Nebraska... Economics matter apparently but pro-choice rights are expendable. Perriello tried to make it so the ACA did not cover abortion in 2010.

..."Either way, Perriello’s anti-abortion record will be harder to explain. In 2009, Perriello voted for the odious Stupak amendment, a dramatic extension of the infamous Hyde amendment. The Stupak amendment would’ve prohibited insurance companies that participate in the Affordable Care Act’s exchanges from covering abortion. Its stated purpose was to prevent federal subsidies from paying for abortion, since insurance plans on the exchanges are subsidized for most customers. But the amendment was phrased so broadly that it would’ve forced insurance companies on the exchanges to drop abortion coverage for all women."

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2017/01/06/tom_perriello_has_an_anti_abortion_pro_gun_voting_record_and_wants_to_be.html?wpsrc=huffpo

[Volstagg]

95. But it's not like he picked that candidate over another Dem with a more progressive record

He supported the Dem over the REPUBLICAN. What should he do? Support the Republican? Not support anyone? Because as I've read on here, Sanders is blamed for Trump winning because he caused people to not vote. Now he's trying to get a Dem elected over a Repub and that's bad.

[Demsrule86]

98. Perriello is running against another Dem candidate, ‎Ralph Northam, endorsed by NARAL.

You see why I have a problem with these endorsements?

[calimary]

125. Gavin Newsom. Elizabeth Warren. Bill De Blasio. Eric Garcetti.

One or both of the Castro brothers. Cory Booker. Possibly Kamala Harris, once she gets a few years in the Senate under her belt.

We've got some bench strength already, and it's growing. Just have to nurture it along a little bit.

[Gothmog]

68. Great article

[Demsrule86]

89. Thanks so much!

[Lordquinton]

86. I love satire

But it should be punching up, not down.

[Demsrule86]

88. I have no idea what you mean.

[Lordquinton]

124. This thread

Clearly a satirical piece.

[zentrum]

97. Is this for real?

It's such a divisive headline and post that it's hard to believe it cares about the Democratic Party at all, let alone women who live in conservative areas and who yet see Bernie as bringing in voters who will defeat the Republican opposition.

The wording of this piece is so extreme as to seem unreal on a Democratic site.

[Demsrule86]

99. The title was from the article excerpted because it was too long.

I don't think pro-choice rights...women's rights are extreme...nor are they expendable.

[sheshe2]

111. Excellent read.

Thanks, Demsrule.

[Demsrule86]

114. Thank you...I thought it was spot on.

[Oneironaut]

117. Rhetoric like this is divisive and irritating.

Democrats are tired of being told, "Agree with me 100% or you're a terrible person."

[Demsrule86]

118. I don't see where I have ever said any such thing....while we have an a few anti-choice Dems...

pro-choice is a progressive stance and is in the Democratic platform.

[Cha]

143. BS' rhetoric is "divisive".. talk to him

[romanic]

120. This type of decisive crap

Is one of the reasons why we lost the 2016 elections and ended up woth Trump. Keep it up with this bullshit and we'll continue to lose while we still bicker about purity progressivism.

[Demsrule86]

122. Purity for me but not for thee? We must have total lockstep on a certain economic policy...

but women's rights are expendable. Sorry, that won't work. We will have social justice and economic justice as progressive priorities.

[romanic]

129. Who said we can't have both?

Bernie never said that, you Anti-Sanders puritans are the ones squawking the same crap from the primaries.

[Demsrule86]

131. By endorsing two anti-choice candidates...he does say that in a sense.

He endorsed Perriello(VA) and Mello(NE) Perriello is running in a primary for Governor and there is a NARAL approved Dem running against him.

[Cha]

142. Talk to BS about "divisive crap".. he's the one who detailed

the "unity tour" with his "divisive crap".

[Eliot Rosewater]

126. Agreed and when he pushes these divisive candidates on the democratic party

there is an agenda behind it.

I tried to say that earlier but I botched it.

And then I was accused of still fighting the last election. Problem is the last election is not over yet.

The exact same practices by the exact same people used to divide and conquer the democratic party are at work.

[Demsrule86]

133. I think Sen. Sanders has always considered economic populism the most important issue.

[Omaha Steve]

134. Joe Biden once voted for a late-term abortion ban and received low marks from NARAL in 1999 and 2003

https://votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/53279/joe-biden-jr#.WPqT4lPyve0

A lot of Democrats have made anti-choice votes at some point in their life. Joe Biden once voted for a late-term abortion ban and received low marks from NARAL in 1999 and 2003. In other years, he got high scores and his position likely became more progressive over time.

[Cha]

139. That's not the fucking point..

The Democrats unity tour fractured into disunity almost immediately after it began. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont refused to say whether Jon Ossoff, the Democratic candidate trying to win a typically Republican district in Georgia while being outspoken in support of abortion rights, counts as a progressive"

Yeah, that's what we've been sayin'

These men need to get woke..

Instead, these men contend, the party’s focus must be on economics. The glaring mistake they all make, however, is thinking that there is any way to disentangle reproductive rights from economic issues.

"Yet he would happily exclude from the progressive movement even those he formally supports, like Mr. Ossoff, who don’t seem to talk enough about income inequality to satisfy Mr. Sanders."

Tough.. it doesn't "satisfy" BS.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/25/opinion/why-abortion-is-an-progressive-economic-issue.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region



.

[musette_sf]

136. K&R xoxo