Sanders booed by House Democrats
Source: Politico
Sen. Bernie Sanders is still talking like a guy who's running for president. But frustrated House Democrats who booed him at one point during a morning meeting say it's time to stop.
With the Democratic convention just weeks away, Sanders still hasn't endorsed one-time rival Hillary Clinton and dodged questions about when he would during a tense meeting Wednesday morning with House Democrats.
"It was frustrating because he's squandering the movement he built with a self-obsession that was totally on display," said one senior Democrat.
After delivering his opening remarks which touched on Sanders favorite issues including campaign finance, Wall Street reform and trade lawmakers inside the meeting pressed Sanders during a tense question-and-answer session on whether he would ultimately endorse Clinton and help foster party unity.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/bernie-sanders-booed-house-democrats-225161#ixzz4DdvgZTp2
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)Why is he so upset about not winning?
Why his insistence that he be the candidate because he "had the best chance of beating Trump?"
He is hanging on by his fingernails for every last moment of the spotlight.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Now he says elections aren't about winning.
What the hell?
Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #5)
Post removed
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)prime example why we have to win! The destruction of the VRA by the Roberts Court is a very good reason why we have to win elections. Elections matter because they decide who gets to run the country, and I really, really don't believe anyone outside of the racist pockets in this country want tRump to be president.
Response to ehrnst (Reply #1)
Post removed
TRoN33
(769 posts)cprise
(8,445 posts)Too bad.
Nitram
(22,663 posts)Not a mystical fantasy tour to instant utopia. Bernie is rapidly becoming not only irrelevant, but also a liability. He's got to do more than "defeat Trump" - he needs to support the Democratic candidate for president.
TRoN33
(769 posts)Bernie can choose to support anyone he wants to. He never asked his supporters to elect someone because he respect individuals' rights of whom they wanted to support. Now... About you... I find you to be too demanding and attempt to command people to vote for Hillary which is considered as trait of authoritian. Go away.
bjobotts
(9,141 posts)bjobotts
(9,141 posts)voucher schools. This is how we change or force a discussion. Bernie is an idealist who believes dems can once again return to its roots and stand for the middle class. It's not an issue and Bernie says he will do everything in his power to make sure Trump does not become president so why are so many dems trying to tell him what to do and when to do it. I refuse to tell him to support issues he rejects and to do whatever he can to get these issues dealt with. The people who treat him so disrespectfully should be ashamed for being so divisive trying to make an issue out of a non issue. House dems should be booing Lyin' Ryan
HeartoftheMidwest
(309 posts)They don't care about the issues....they just want Her to win.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)christx30
(6,241 posts)As someone striving to get into the middle class, I know how important that it exists. But I'd rather Hillary get into the White House than I care about idealism. The next president is going to nominating at least 4 members of the Supreme Court, whose influence is going to last 15-20 years. It needs to be HER nominating the next SCOTUS, and not Trump. Can you picture the horror of a Trump SCOTUS?
If the enemy is Trump. Idealism is great. I love it. But winning elections and effecting public policy is better.
Response to christx30 (Reply #259)
Post removed
G_j
(40,366 posts)though I clearly hear what you are saying.
For myself, I have weighed the evils. Not a Buddhist, but in agreement, the least harm is the best for all. Sorry, Donald...
lark
(22,993 posts)I have to say his luster is dimming. These days it seems to be all about him, personally, not at all like he was in the beginning. He said originally he'd support the candidate when they won enough votes, he's not keeping his word. So sad. I really thought he was better than this, am deeply disappointed in my former hero.
sangfroid
(212 posts)nt
roody
(10,849 posts)It is not about him.
Pauldg47
(640 posts)lark
(22,993 posts)Hence my dismay.
Pauldg47
(640 posts)floriduck
(2,262 posts)Response to bjobotts (Reply #150)
Post removed
downeastdaniel
(497 posts)MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)forest444
(5,902 posts)Someone should fax them the DU General Election season guidelines.
intersectionality
(106 posts)When I read your message!!
forest444
(5,902 posts)Glad you liked it.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,129 posts)Jack Bone
(2,023 posts)Thanx 4 the laugh!!
forest444
(5,902 posts)Besides: it looks like they need those guidelines more than we do.
Javaman
(62,435 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)Peacetrain
(22,836 posts)She was already out of the race and working for the ticket..
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)2 1/2 months before the Democratic convention.
You've been fed misinformation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/08/us/politics/08dems.html
Renew Deal
(81,801 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)....endorsed Obama.
In the 2016 calendar, that would have been three weeks ago. People like to compare 2016 to 2008, how about comparing everything in 2008 to 2016?
Beacool
(30,244 posts)She immediately set out to help Obama and campaigned very hard for him. At the convention she released her delegates so that Obama could be nominated by acclamation.
She showed class and grace in defeat. Sanders should take note.
Just saying..........
newthinking
(3,982 posts)about more.
It is telling that this shit is still happening. Sanders has stopped campaigning and is not saying anything about Clinton. Why then should people be so rushed to see him shut up and not finish the process that he and those who voted for him have earned the right to finish it at the convention?
I just don't get the problem with that.
Javaman
(62,435 posts)Rose Siding
(32,623 posts)That was June 27, 2008
The convention was August 25 - 28
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Democratic_National_Convention
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)with Obama before the convention.
TeamPooka
(24,155 posts)Is Bernie, as a statesman, literally able to do anything like this?
Clinton Stops Roll Call, Calls To Nominate Obama
Peacetrain
(22,836 posts)newthinking
(3,982 posts)I don't get what this kind of behavior is about except for people's pride. No doubt the ones who boo'd were never interested in the change that Bernie represents in the first place. This sounds extremely personal and childish, and I view it as one more thing that we need to turn around.
I am absolutely sure that those senators hurt themselves with many of their constituents by doing this. There is no rational reason at this point not to maintain decorum.
puffy socks
(1,473 posts)Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...Bernie Sanders got results:
Hillary Clinton on Wednesday proposed a plan to eliminate college tuition for most families, a topic pushed by Democratic presidential primary rival Bernie Sanders.
Under the plan, families making $125,000 or less will pay no tuition at public, in-state universities and colleges.
The plan will be phased in over five years, but families earning $85,000 or less will immediately be able to attend an in-state college or university without paying any tuition, reads an announcement on Clintons website.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/286641-clinton-backing-tuition-free-college
Renew Deal
(81,801 posts)A bold position with nothing accomplished.
xocet
(3,870 posts)Orrex
(63,083 posts)xocet
(3,870 posts)Orrex
(63,083 posts)No offense, but such futile efforts are little more than fan service and window dressing.
Please explain how it's better.
WhiteTara
(29,676 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
Orrex
(63,083 posts)I count three Sanders-sponsored bills that became law during Sanders run from 1991 through 2016.
Do you have a handy list of the other 204 that became law? Was he the sponsor or primary co-sponsor of those bills, or was he simply a name on a list?
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)Here is a list of the 207 bills which Bernie Sanders sponsored or co-sponsored which became law:
https://www.congress.gov/member/bernard-sanders/S000033?pageSize=250&q=%7B%22congress%22%3A%22all%22%2C%22bill-status%22%3A%22law%22%7D
Orrex
(63,083 posts)In other words, being a co-sponsor doesn't mean much more than "was also alive and breathing at the time.
In other other words, Clinton sponsored as many bills that became law as Sanders did. She also cosponsored 74 bills that became law.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)I'm not aware of any websites which track that.
Orrex
(63,083 posts)Being a cosponsor is kind of like being an associate producer, or offering a hearty "me, too" from the gallery floor.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...for any bill he co-sponsored, just that he was acting as part of a team which got things done.
lapucelle
(18,037 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...one of the original cosponsors or a later cosponsor. I don't think it's an important distinction but the other poster seems to think it is.
lapucelle
(18,037 posts)Sanders is either the sponsor or the primary co-sponsor of the bills on the page.
Or try it this way.
https://www.congress.gov/member/bernard-sanders/S000033?pageSize=250&q=%7B%22congress%22%3A%22all%22%2C%22bill-status%22%3A%5B%22law%22%5D%7D
Go to the menu on the left and click on the link for "Sponsored Legislation"
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)"Sponsored" and "Cosponsored." Are you seeing a third category of "Original Cosponsor"?
yurbud
(39,405 posts)Pauldg47
(640 posts)Your pretty sharp Eric!!
Pauldg47
(640 posts)drray23
(7,587 posts)drray23
(7,587 posts)drray23
(7,587 posts)Like the poster did for senator sanders we end up with 3 sponsored and 74 cosponsored for her eight years as senator.
Pauldg47
(640 posts)drray23
(7,587 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)This is what so many do not seem to see.
He is not fighting the same battle all the rest are. He speaks a different language.
He is NOT doing this for himself. He is doing it for all human beings.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)who never had to work with him to get things done.
I'll believe them about Bernie Sanders.
Pauldg47
(640 posts)chwaliszewski
(1,514 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)I didn't know much at all about him, not details anyway, until he started running for president.
It was clear to me from the beginning that this man is different. He is what a politician should be, what a servant of human beings really is..
Response to pangaia (Reply #33)
Post removed
pangaia
(24,324 posts)I have never been a member of any cult.
You just proved my point. You, like so many others, have no earthly idea what he is talking about or doing. I wish you did.
Orrex
(63,083 posts)Sanders' supporters have embraced the Sanders-as-Messiah imagery for many months, so you simply look ridiculous by pretending that it doesn't exist.
And that bit about having "no earthly idea" is a load of shit, pretending that Sanders' supporters have some special wisdom or enlightenment that the uninitiated simply can't grasp. That's the kind of sanctimonious crap that clinched him a mention in history's footnotes, and that kind of enlightenment caused many of his supporters to miss the registration deadline for the primaries.
The primary is over, by the way, and your candidate lost, not least because of the bullshit superiority complex trotted out nonstop by his acolytes.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)I was one, but he is being an asshat.
Orrex
(63,083 posts)I was wrong to generalize. The great majority of Sanders' supporters are honest and rational people of integrity, and I shouldn't broad-brush as I did.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)I just wanted it to be known where I stand. I am disappointed in this- he should be out there supporting HRC, just like she did for Obama in 08. Trump must not just lose, he must be crushed in a landslide of epic proportions.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Oh well. I don't mind.
I doubt you will get alerted on that, even though it goes against the TOS.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)not any particular Bernie supporter.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)That I can understand. About it being Bernie, I mean. After all, you of course don't really know me at all, so I understand, then, how you wouldn't be calling me an asshat. I appreciate it. I was called an asshole here, once however.
By the way, I know what an asshole is, but what is an 'asshat?'
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)like a football bat, an asshat is pretty useless.
On edit: I don't think Bernie is useless, but ever since that word slipped into our lexicon I have liked it.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)So... if it is useless, why not just call Bernie an asshole?
I mean, an asshole has its uses, right?
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)when you posted. I just like the sound of the word, and I tend to use it in place of asshole. I also use assclown because of the movie Bad Santa.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)although sometimes I may feel like it..
I never saw Bad Santa
I tend to enjoy foreign films, especially Chinese and Japanese.. Kurosawa, Kitano, Kobaysahi, Guoxing, Kaige, Huo Hsiao-Hsien- well, he is Taiwanese..do you know his "A City of Sadness?"......and the like.
merrily
(45,251 posts)"Asshat" though insulting, seems to me a shade less vulgar and crude than a rectum reference. It was used a lot on a political board I posted on until 2008.
However, as far as I can recall, I never used "asshat" to refer to a DUer, just to jerks I never met, even online.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Much better than I can do.
Or is that just the meme of the week?
HeartoftheMidwest
(309 posts)He's been fighting for the same ISSUES for over 40 years ( it's called consistency. )
And he's not losing....but he is being marginalized by those who claim to care so much for these same issues.
Orrex
(63,083 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)I do also.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)Since he is no longer really campaigning and is not talking about Clinton there is really no reason for this except as an exercise in arrogance and pride. Makes them look shitty and I am sure that they did not gain in reputation since many of their constituents are not enamored with beltway "humor" and "posturing".
Pauldg47
(640 posts)...the Hill's email issues going on. This will haunt her throughout her presidency and could even cost her with Trump's big mouth. Please delegates, reconsider your vote. It's not to late.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)But if people need to give him credit for some aspects of Hillary's plan, that's reasonable.
It's good to see a realistic implementation plan for it. Ideas are one thing, getting it to become a reality is another thing.
rtracey
(2,062 posts)Hillary Clinton has always said she supported a plan to eliminate college tuition to some students. She also said she didnt think parents like her or Trump, or her kids or Trumps kids should get free tuition if they can afford it.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)Way better.
Fine and she did say during debates it was subject to change, Its not a Sanders proposal. She has ALWAYS said she wants college tuition to be free to those who can't afford it, but for the rich to pay for it. It doesn't matter if its for 200,000 per year, 50,000 per year etc.... It is not free college to all, which I don't agree with. I feel if rich people can afford it, they should pay....just like taxes.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)Her site said that students would have debt-free college if working 10 hours a week. That only seems possible if they were going to be paid +$100/hr. Usually work study pays 8-12/hr and there are less jobs than students willing to work them.
I am grateful to Sanders and the movement for keeping up the pressure.
Mark Huelsman and Michael Dannenberg, via Demos: Senator Sanders would require states to waive tuition and fees for all students attending regardless of income....
Clintons plan asks higher-income families who wish to send their children to an in-state, public four year college to contribute a reasonable amount for tuition and fees given their wealth. Those funds in turn could help support higher-quality education for everyone.
"I think everyone who goes to a public college or university should be able to do that without having to borrow a penny to pay tuition," Clinton said Monday. "I'm a little different from those who say 'free for everybody.' I'm not in favor of making college free for Donald Trump's kids. I'm in favor of making college free for your grandson by having no-debt tuition."
google the debates..she will say it....
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)She did not explain how her 10 hours a week plan could possibly work when those work study jobs only pay 1/10th of what they need to and not are even available to everyone.
Today's plan is completely different, completely better, and it is thanks to Sanders and the movement for keeping up the pressure. I hope they keep up the pressure through the election and into the next midterms.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)After this, therefor because of this. Sounds better in original Latin, but then you'd realize it's a logical fallacy.
Paper Roses
(7,468 posts)groundloop
(11,486 posts)Bernie, nobody was a bigger supporter than I was. I was behind you every step of the way, unfortunately we didn't prevail in the primary election and now it's time to get past that and think of the general election. While Hillary wasn't my first choice for the nomination it's an undeniable fact that she's the nominee and we have to do everything we can to support her and help her defeat tRump in November. Letting that racist asshole anywhere near the White House would be an absolute disaster.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)If they adopt at least one of the amendments he's advocating at that time, then Sanders will probably endorse next week.
Renew Deal
(81,801 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...with him on college affordability, and his essay that the Democratic Platform draft is good but needs improvement.
I don't know for certain what Sanders will do.
Renew Deal
(81,801 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
The Wielding Truth
(11,411 posts)I would think you would be still supporting his steadfast work. It's not his ego but his determination to an economic revolution that is stopping him from switching to Hillary's campaign.
Once he can go no farther and the job will lead only to getting a Good person in the White House and promoting our candidates up and down the ticket he will be as dogged. Have Faith.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)He is the one who has the courage to keep showing to the world what the reality really is.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)understand the reality of what Sanders is really doing this for.
Response to pangaia (Reply #40)
Post removed
bdwker
(435 posts)MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)anyway, 85% of his supporters are supporting Hillary (more than Hillary's going for Obama). Hopefully Bernie will go away and we can forget all about him.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)ozone_man
(4,825 posts)Not many can speak truth to power like Bernie. That is generally not welcomed by those in power. And in many/most cases, those in power are corrupt. I guess we get to live some more years of that.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)There aren't many here. :> ))
But, that's ok.
He's a thorn in each party's side, but he was never too worried about that.
Sanders is actually facing reality. His detractors want to continue acting out a fantasy.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)we need to get on with making sure trump fails, miserably. Bernie Sanders has power and he needs to get on board so that he can have more influence in our platforms at the upcoming convention. Otherwise I just see him as a sore loser.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)will very likely diminish.
If I walk into a car dealer, like I did today, and tell them, oh a white car is ok ( which it is not because I have had white, black and brown cars for almost 30 years), even though I really want a red car ( which I do), they will never make the effort to find a red car.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)yet HRC must win in the Fall, no other option is viable. We can go round and round about what he means to our Party and who and what change he's fighting for but the truth is, HRC must win in the Fall.......
pangaia
(24,324 posts)she should endorse, with the full, honest intention to fight to carry out, Bernie's ideas, because THAT is what will bring in the most votes. Not business as usual. And that is what has the possibility to turn around the entire corrupt American political system.
and BS has endorsed who?
pangaia
(24,324 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)this is a fight that should be over. The ghosts of Nader seem to be haunting the Party again.....
pangaia
(24,324 posts)What does my proposal have to do with Nader, OR Sanders, for that matter.
I am suggesting that the issues Sanders stands for and has been fighting for his entire life are those that will WIN the election for, actually, any Democrat, especially those having to do with corporatism, control by the wealthy few, and government corruption.
Ccarmona
(1,180 posts)He (along with the rest of us ) didn't know if HRC would be brought up on charges until Tuesday. If she had, he would have been in a strong position to take over as the presumptive nominee.
Walk away
(9,494 posts)and in the end that is exactly what it turned out to be!
Iggo
(47,486 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)when you have been railing for months that you deserved to win.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)welfare of human beings than "winning."
He is fighting a different battle.
demmiblue
(36,742 posts)Chemisse
(30,793 posts)Rather than finishing up in a blaze of glory then shifting the focus onto Clinton.
I think he has lost perspective.
Renew Deal
(81,801 posts)eridani
(51,907 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)If only to hear this:
Well said senior Democrat.
Wonder if the scene looked anything like this:
Gothmog
(143,998 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)floriduck
(2,262 posts)newthinking
(3,982 posts)those less enamored with changing the privileged situation they currently have and see what Bernie represents as a threat to their "welfare".
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)I am glad that Bernie is his own man.
His principled stand on the TPP is a part of why he is holding back his endorsement at this point. Democrats should be learning from these principles, but instead too many seem ready to repeat the Clintonian deception and mistakes of NAFTA in 1993.
The fact that no House Democrat has built a movement akin to Sanders' is a problem, but it's not Bernie's problem. Any Democrat is free to hew closely to the principles that excite the Democratic base. Why did it take an independent Senator to do so?
-app
bluedye33139
(1,474 posts)No Democrat has ever build a movement like Sanders's because Democrats tend to support their own party and to work together for the common good. To build a cult of personality based on hatred for the Democratic party would not be a logical goal for a Democrat in the House.
askeptic
(478 posts)bluedye33139
(1,474 posts)Hyperbole
Hyperbole
Hyperbole
Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)appal_jack
(3,813 posts)Bernie Sanders has not been shy about calling the Democratic Party power structure and elites to account, but I'll just wait here for a single piece of evidence to be presented that his campaign was in any way, shape or form "based on hatred for the Democratic party." Got any? No, I didn't think so.
Was passing NAFTA "for the common good?"
Sure has not turned out that way. Many of us were in the streets and meeting with globalization activists back in the early nineties (and plenty of times since), saying that NAFTA was corporatist garbage. We were ignored by the Democratic Party. Why are they marginalizing and ignoring our (and Bernie's) message about this still? We have 23 years of data since NAFTA passed.
-app
pangaia
(24,324 posts)their own common good.
askeptic
(478 posts)in 3 weeks.
ehrnst
(32,640 posts)It depends on whether Bernie is able to actually accept and inspire people who don't walk lockstep with his ideas.
It doesn't look like it though.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregsatell/2016/06/10/the-science-behind-bernie-sanders-failed-movement-explained/
Response to appal_jack (Reply #25)
G_j This message was self-deleted by its author.
kentuck
(110,947 posts)This is not helpful.
Peacetrain
(22,836 posts)kentuck
(110,947 posts)Peacetrain
(22,836 posts)You are on your way to Vietnam..really brought back some memories for me too.. especially that clabber can with worms in the bottom.. I swear we used one too.. and the cane poles.. the only thing missing was the the lightening bugs in the mason jars with grass at the bottom on a hot night.. you and I walked some very similar roads as little kids.. though I have been out in the midwest most of my life.. but I am really enjoying it.. Here is one for you.. moon pies and red rock or rc cola.. the miners mid day meal..
stopbush
(24,375 posts)Sanders also weighed in at a press conference on the FBI's decision not to recommend charges against Clinton for sending classified information over her private servers as secretary of State.
"I think youve heard me say from Day One that there is a process in terms of the investigation regarding Secretary Clinton and the emails," Sanders said. "Yesterday was an important part of that process. Now we wait to hear from the Justice Department."
Really? "Now we wait to hear from the DoJ?"
Unbelieveable.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/bernie-sanders-booed-house-democrats-225161#ixzz4DeDhyVnP
Response to stopbush (Reply #28)
Post removed
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Does he actually think Lynch will press charges anyway?
He seems so confused.
stopbush
(24,375 posts)What is he hoping for? That she'll go back on her word and return an indictment, thus ushering Sanders into the nomination?
I really don't understand what he thinks he has to gain by making such statements.
Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)ehrnst
(32,640 posts)on reality. A privileged perspective.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)murielm99
(30,655 posts)We do? Why? To encourage repubbies and diehard berniebots to continue to believe in the indictment fairy? Someone should have asked him to clarify that statement.
Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)
Post removed
bravenak
(34,648 posts)I honestly think most politicians have this problem
Beacool
(30,244 posts)The object is precisely to win the election. How does he think that Democratic policies can be implemented if Hillary and down ticket candidates don't win their elections?????
He deserved to be booed.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)And that was what he basically said in the House meeting.
Triana
(22,666 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)ROBERT L. ALLBRITTON
Executive Chairman and CEO
Among many other things, "...Robert serves on the Board of Directors of the Lyndon B. Johnson Foundation..."
Are you implying that simply because this came from Politico that the incidents described didn't happen?
CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)For the rest of us, elections are absolutely about winning. You can't enact any of the plans you want to make this a better country without winning. It's sort of step one of politics.
This confirms Bernie has no idea what he's doing.
ReasonableToo
(505 posts)His work is not done.
Would also like anti-fracking and anti-insurance giveaway/pro-singel payer planks.
pandr32
(11,446 posts)He was given some input for the Democrat Party platform as a courtesy. He appointed some representatives to fill the seats--he was allowed five--not the majority. If he doesn't formally endorse Hillary Clinton quickly he will not be able to speak at the convention. He is trying to speak to members of Congress and getting booed.
Besides, there will have to be trade deals. He can vote on them as they come up in the Senate. Ditto for everything else he doesn't like, and on things like gun reform, too.
ReasonableToo
(505 posts)People said he had no shot but could influence the platform and bring the party further left.
The booing reflects on them.
The party could have adopted anti-TPP platform but didn't. The pro-TPP folks are the ones that should be booed at this point.
We CANT go into the next 4-year term knowing that TPP is likely to pass.
The GOP fought world-wide human rights resolutions because we'd "give up our sovereignty". We can't give our right to govern and protect our environment away to multi-national corporations.
This is a big deal and I don't blame Bernie for not giving up on us even though we've given up on him. We've given up on the Democratic Party if we don't fight against TPP.
He's fighting for his grandkids and mine.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)I don't even have grand kids, or children, at least not by blood.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)He lives the words of Dylan Thomas every day....
I wish I were that strong.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)"Do not go gentle....."
pandr32
(11,446 posts)Sorry, Bernie but we already did. We all did. Lynch has already stated she would abide by the recommendations from the FBI and they found nothing criminal and so, Bernie, there will be no charges.
It is over.
Quit heading to Congress with your Secret Service detail pretending you might still become President...somehow. No wonder you are getting booed by Representatives there. You are not the leader of the Democrats or of Congress. Set the SS free and make peace with the party you joined in order to run for POTUS. You got beaten fair and square...and by a huge margin.
dembotoz
(16,734 posts)KPN
(15,585 posts)NoMoreRepugs
(9,257 posts)Chakaconcarne
(2,383 posts)Bernie has been more loyal to democratic causes than most... he'll come around. He just has to finish what he's set out to do... I don't see any huge division in the party by him hanging on. We can't pretend to fully understand his intentions. We've trusted him in the past to do good work for us...why not continue to trust him? Quit bashing him for Pete's sake...he serves us well.
Festivito
(13,452 posts)Controversy is interesting. Otherwise, it's just a bunch of speeches. Yawn!
I can understand that there are some Hillary partisans that would do nearly anything to have Hillary as president, even to the point of ruining our convention and hurting our chances in November. She's that important to them.
I say: Let's look like we are pro-voting, pro-due process.
jalan48
(13,797 posts)Now there is something to boo about-you know- a real issue.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Bernie on that as well. They were of course wrong and all of them admit that today.
reflection
(6,286 posts)askeptic
(478 posts)maybe Bernie's supporters will flock to Hillary after a public booing, but, personally, I just don't think this is how you get Bernie's supporters on board. If you project disrespect to the candidate, it just might be taken personally. What do you think?
Ilsa
(61,675 posts)to the Clinton camp after SBS lost. I don't hold it against her, but I don't enjoy the company I'm in.
KPN
(15,585 posts)Booing Bernie for putting pressure on the Party to stand up for the middle class? Really? Seems to me that these are the egotistical folks, not Bernie.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Plus, I seriously doubt they actually understood what Bernie was saying.
Or even worse, maybe they did.
coco77
(1,327 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)The rest were hardcore Greens & Libertarians who were never gonna vote for her anyway.
askeptic
(478 posts)thanks!
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)never going to support her, or any other Democrat for that matter.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1510418
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)That source wasn't sourced either.
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)You know, it'd be one thing if he were to acknowledge Clinton as victor of the primary process and mention that he looks forward to endorsing her at the convention or something, but he's still talking like he's a competitor even though the race has been run and he lost. A lot of people, including myself, don't care to have their intelligence insulted that way.
To all the people saying Bernie is fighting for a principle etc., that's fucking bullshit. You don't advance your principles by rejecting reality or declining to acknowledge unpleasant facts. Also, you need to ask yourself why Sanders doesn't believe in the principle of making sure his supporters are fully informed instead of putting half-baked policy prescriptions up on his website. Sanders seems to be great at telling people what they want to hear, but has little or no interest in actually making anyone better informed.
stopbush
(24,375 posts)Stuckinthebush
(10,816 posts)His will be a campaign studied for years on how not to end a run for the white house. He is rather irrelevant now and getting smaller.
He will get a few lines in the platform and declare victory. Sad.
Geronimoe
(1,539 posts)Booing Bernie is not sn effective way to win Bernie voters.
Bernie has more pledged delegates than either Obama or Hillary had in 2008. Possibly representing 46% or more of the party.
pandr32
(11,446 posts)...so what's your point? It was a much closer race between Hillary Clinton and Obama in 2008 than it was between Hillary Clinton and Bernie in 2016.
MisterP
(23,730 posts)ConservativeDemocrat
(2,720 posts)Hell, *HE* didn't even step up to sell single payer in his own state, choosing to blame Democrats when it failed.
Tell you what, guy. You stop bashing the Democratic party, and I won't point out that Sanders has accomplished very little of anything real on the national scale, other than making it more likely for Republicans to win.
- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
SHRED
(28,136 posts)That we can express our disgust and distrust of Bernie but not Hillary?
The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)Sanders would get behind the winner, and that the admins were mistaken in this assumption. Probably a good faith mistake. Who knew Sanders would continue to be so obsessed with his campaign that came in second?
I thought Sanders had a better connection to how politics operates than he actually does. I thought the problem was a minority of his supporters. The problem is that he has to have it his way or no way. That isn't how democracy works. Best we know this about him now rather than later.
Orrex
(63,083 posts)The loser of the primary is consciously harming the campaign of the winner. Does DU have some rule against commenting on that?
harun
(11,348 posts)Most of us are just holding our tongues (and noses).
anigbrowl
(13,889 posts)I'm sure if you tried to beat him up you'd probably succeed because you're so amazing and clever.
Lucky Luciano
(11,242 posts)His endorsing without him really believing he will fight for the things he thinks we need would be shallow. Bernie isn't shallow. If he does endorse, I will take it to mean that HRC truly will fight the good fight.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)Spineless to the end.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)And admit he only joined the Dems to run for president and now that it's over he wants to go back to being independent? Nobody would hold it against him, and he'd be 100% free to do his own thing?
Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)
Post removed
totodeinhere
(13,034 posts)over Sanders supporters to support Clinton. And it won't help them get control of the House back either.
Squinch
(50,773 posts)anyway. Hillary has already united the gain-able BS supporters behind her.
The "you need to show adulation for BS or his followers won't unite under Hillary" threat never did make much sense, and now the numbers have proven that it will never be an issue.
totodeinhere
(13,034 posts)But how enthusiastic will that support be? Will they get out on the street and work for Hillary and donate money to her? This is much more than a poll that shows most Bernie supporters voting for Hillary.
Squinch
(50,773 posts)have plenty of supporters who - wait for it - vote for her.
Thanks for your concern, but she'll be fine.
kacekwl
(6,993 posts)She'll be fine right ?
Squinch
(50,773 posts)just silly.
The "hubbub" as you call it is due to the fact that he is an immense annoyance. He's like the houseguest that you can't get rid of and who complains about their accommodations all the time. The guest who does that complaining while the host is fighting the crazy neighbor down the street who is threatening to blow up the house. The host doesn't have time for the houseguest's bullshit.
And yes, she will be fine.
kacekwl
(6,993 posts)but glad to see him and some others here sticking around to keep on Hillary and the democratic party to do what they said they would durring the campaign. We kinda fell for the I got it from here with President Obama. Don't want that to happen again.
Squinch
(50,773 posts)sheshe2
(83,319 posts)Obama said "We are the ones we have been waiting for". Where were you?
kacekwl
(6,993 posts)allowing the repubs to gain control of congress and state offices all over the country. I voted DEMOCRATIC in every election since I was of age apparently not every Democratic did. President Obama had a chance to do great things and I believe he has but we democrats did not press him as hard as we should.
totodeinhere
(13,034 posts)Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Well, let me be more precise: No one is demanding adulation of Bernie. Given the attitudes on the brave new DU toward anything remotely negative about Clinton, I wouldn't want to over-generalize.
Squinch
(50,773 posts)Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Most people who supported Bernie will vote for Clinton. Some definitely won't. There's a group in the middle that might still be persuaded either way. You completely disdain them, but my guess is that your candidate is a lot smarter than that and is not writing them off the way you would.
Any candidate faces the problem that you can't please all the people all the time. Clinton knows that she can't completely adopt Bernie's program or she'll alienate many of the more conservative voters, but she also can't do a complete Etch-A-Sketch pivot to the right. Barring that complete pivot, Bernie will endorse her. There's no "threat" that he won't unless she does something completely unforeseeable. Nevertheless, despite Clinton supporters' readiness to impute messianic adoration to Bernie's supporters, the fact is that his endorsement will have some influence but won't automatically deliver all his voters. The conduct of Clinton and the Democratic Party will also have some effect on how many of the Bernie supporters end up voting for Clinton.
Squinch
(50,773 posts)Hillary."
It's been tossed around a lot, and it is dumb.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)Your term "threat" has a connotation of something improper: "You better do X or I'll break your arm." That's a far cry from "You better do X or I won't vote for you" (or other people won't vote for you).
The rules of this board are that any warm body with a " D)" after its name is to be supported, but individual Sanders supporters are under no such obligation. Furthermore, it's certainly within the bounds of permissible discussion, even here, to talk about different actions that Clinton and the Democratic Party might take to get more votes from the people who supported Bernie. You're free to disparage that effort, but I suspect that the Clinton campaign strategists don't share your dismissive attitude.
Squinch
(50,773 posts)won't vote for Hillary" are talking out of their asses. BS supporters WILL vote for Hillary. Or at least 82% of them have said they will.
So when someone says, "You better do X or BS supporters will not vote for Hillary," they are speaking a non-truth, and a stupid one at that.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)You and I are in agreement that most of Bernie's supporters will vote for Clinton, but some won't. Where we differ is that you seem to think those lines are cast in stone. I think there's a group in the middle that hasn't decided yet, plus some people in each camp who might yet change their minds, depending on what happens.
Obviously, no one could say that Clinton will get the votes of all of Bernie's supporters or of none of them, depending on whether she or the party does action X. Nevertheless, it's a legitimate subject for discussion to analyze the choices that will influence the decisions that some of those voters make.
For example, trade agreements are an important issue to many people. It's clear that Trump will tout his opposition to agreements that Clinton has in the past supported. There are steps that Clinton and the party could take on this subject. Will the platform oppose TPP? Will it at least oppose any plan for a lame-duck vote that would let legislators vote in favor of what big business wants without having to answer for it in the 2016 campaign? Will Clinton go beyond making a tepid statement of opposition and intensely lobby her allies in Congress to reject the TPP? The answers to these questions will affect how (or whether) some of Bernie's supporters vote. Of course, it's also true, and probably more important, that strong opposition to the TPP would blunt Trump's appeal to the Rust Belt workers whom he needs to flip states like Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Squinch
(50,773 posts)That platform won. She has made more concessions to the loser than any winner in memory. She has won over 82% of BS's supporters.
Going after the remaining voters would hurt her more than it would help her, because they are, by definition, an unviable fringe.
Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)
Post removed
left-of-center2012
(34,195 posts)He's just diminishing himself by clinging on.
He's like that house guest who doesn't know it's time to go home.
Urchin
(248 posts)His cause is just beginning. And the proportion of voters who support what Sanders stands for, will continue to grow until they are the majority.
billpolonsky
(270 posts)A few observations on this primary from a "foreigner" so you can totally disregard these comments cause what do foreigners know anyway.
What I've seen can be summed up in a few sentences. This is in no way a complete list.
The defeated must be on his knees
the defeated and his followers must be discredited
the defeated must pledge fealty to the "chosen one"
the defeated will not speak with his own voice
the defeated must not speak
the defeated will be blamed for any misstep of the chosen one.
the defeated never really happened...
What Hillary Clinton does with her presidency ( she will win) is for history to decide. I hope she decides to work with Bernie Sanders and the 46% of the Democrats that voted for him.
actslikeacarrot
(464 posts)...but you have described America perfectly. It's not enough that I win, someone else has got to lose! And lose big.
sangfroid
(212 posts)Don't worry, we will.
NanceGreggs
(27,813 posts)... about the US political system is a lot.
The defeated (in this case Bernie) should acknowledge their defeat, and congratulate the winner.
The defeated and his followers should stand behind the nominee instead of insisting it's their way or the highway.
The defeated should fully endorse and support the candidate - as Bernie himself said he would do when he entered this race.
The defeated can speak all he wants - no one is stopping him. And obviously the defeated can make a fool of himself by continuing to speak as though he won, when everyone knows he lost - and lost by a wide margin.
The defeated never really happened? Oh, I assure you that few people will forget how this particular "defeated" candidate continued to make demands of the winning candidate, as though he is in any position to do so.
If you want to understand how "the defeated" act with grace and dignity while putting aside their own loss in order to fully stand behind the chosen candidate, I suggest you look at how Hillary conducted herself after she lost to Obama. She was tireless in her efforts to ensure that her former rival was elected POTUS. She campaigned for him vigorously, and never lost sight of the fact that putting a Democrat in the White House was far more important than her own ego.
HRC was far closer to Obama in delegates/votes in 2008 than Bernie ever was. And yet she conceded without issuing demands of Obama, without insisting that SHE be heard, without withholding her endorsement in an attempt to have HER demands met.
Had Hillary acted the way Bernie is acting now, she wouldn't be on her way to the White House. She'd forever be known as the "defeated" candidate whose ego couldn't accept that she'd lost - a sure sign of never having had the intelligence. self-discipline, and fortitude to lead a nation.
Bernie, by his own words and attitude, will go down in history as not only the "also ran", but the "also ran" who kept insisting that he was "still in the race" long after the winner of that race had been decided by the voters.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)The difference is that, in 2008, there was almost no ideological difference between the two leading candidates. Obama, in a post-election interview, commented on how liberated he felt when he was going up against McCain, because he finally had a plethora of substantive issues on which to distinguish himself from his opponent.
In 2016, by contrast, Sanders has been substantially to Clinton's left on many issues. That's how he went from single digits in the polls to 40-some percent of the vote.
That points to the other important difference. In 2008, both Clinton and Obama were running primarily to become President. Each thought, with reason, that s/he had a good chance of being nominated and elected. This year, Sanders didn't enter the race with any such idea. He pulled many more votes than he expected. His real purpose was not to further his personal ambition but to press certain issues, i.e., to ensure that there was a genuine debate in which many progressives' disagreements with Clinton were given voice.
Bernie is continuing what he's been doing for more than a year now. He's raising issues that the corporate media would completely ignore if he didn't make a stink. That also happens to be the course of action by which he can do the most to bring about the defeat of Republican candidates all up and down the ballot.
sangfroid
(212 posts)Apparently a lot of our political system is "based" on what you think should happen. Ms. Clinton is the presumptive nominee, which means everyone presumes she will be the nominee, not that she is. Neither side has actually won or lost until we have a convention.
Oh, I remember a lot of discussion about grace and dignity coming from the PUMA crowd. Like they said, you let us worry about our candidate's grace and dignity.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)FourScore
(9,704 posts)Newsflash - they haven't been.
Squinch
(50,773 posts)harun
(11,348 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)harun
(11,348 posts)I don't care who anybody endorses.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)the progressive caucus. How do you quantify that? If there are, as you say, 68 members...how do you know they "supported" him?
harun
(11,348 posts)So they play along.
A lot of the Progressive Caucus aren't fighting for progress.
Ellison is, a few others.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,207 posts)all "68" of them did. That's just not even close to being true. Conspiracy theories aside, most of them supported Hillary Clinton. Keith Ellison, Raul Grijalva & Tulsi Gabbard were his progressive supporters. That ain't even close to a majority of the progressive caucus. If you know different, then please do tell.
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)He has said from the beginning that he is in this until the convention - and it seems that he intends to keep his word. While I realize that that is a highly unusual thing for a politician to do... perhaps House democrats and others should take Sanders at his word when he says such things. In the past, I have thought to myself (and said, here) that I think it's time for him to concede. Now though, I'm not so sure. It seems likely to me (though not certain - I do not have a functioning crystal ball) that Clinton will go with a more safe, moderate choice for Vice President, which in itself will not destroy the progressive movement, but it will certainly not do it any favors. There is also the question of the quality of people she will fill her cabinet with - if she does as Obama did before her... anyone who is not troubled by the overwhelming (and growing) power of the corporate and wealthy elite just isn't paying attention.
We are facing a time of economic inequality so severe, that has brought on so much suffering and despair... Sanders hopes to do what he can to counter this. Perhaps he believes he can do more if he stays in this thing until the convention. Perhaps he believes he can win concessions in regards to more progressive agendas.
It's no joke that a small percentage of our population owns most of the wealth of our Country. It's no joke that people making billions of dollars pay less taxes than people making 80 grand a year. It's no joke that corporations seeing record profits have nonetheless received large amounts of yearly tax relief. It is no joke that we have people like Arne Duncan heading up so called "education reform" - and it is no joke that this has had a very negative effect on public education overall - particularly when we consider the lack of funding.
There are still, I think, genuine questions to be asked about what Clinton will/would do as President. I believe they should be asked - and I do believe, as a liberal democrat, that we should engage in this debate as much as we can, to accomplish as much as possible for the poor, the working poor, the middle class - and so on.
I have no reason to think that Sanders will not endorse Clinton either at - or after the convention. He has, however, vowed to remain in this thing until then. Perhaps he intends to keep his word. Constructive criticism is one thing, but accusing Bernie of self obsession when he is, in fact, doing nothing more than keeping his promise to his supporters... well, that doesn't seem constructive to me.
His message remains, I think, idealistic, progressive, noble... and, I think, on the right side of this debate.
It's not just a matter of personality preferences and such things. My political views are largely a result of my life experiences. When you have no health insurance (and no way to get it), health problems that get worse every year, no access to higher education, debt relief, or even, really, the proverbial snowball's chance of progress in your own life... then someone like Sanders might speak very loudly to you. Perhaps his message will resonate more strongly than it would in, say, someone who has a relatively positive economic perspective in regards to their own circumstances.
With that being said... I do not realistically expect a great amount of change in the next few years. I am one of those people who will likely continue to fall between the cracks and escape the notice of pretty much everyone - including politicians. I continue, however, to put my Faith in the message that Sanders has brought, in the movement that he has helped lead. Unfortunately... I believe it will take decades (that it is possible we do not have) for true progressive reform to take root in this Country.
When it ultimately comes down to a choice between Clinton and Trump in the general... I will happily crawl over broken glass to vote for Clinton. She was not my preference, primarily because of economic hardships in my own life and in the lives of those close to me. I do believe that Sanders is a greater advocate for poor and working class Americans. However... I also realize that the American people have spoken as to their preference, overall. So yes, Clinton will almost certainly be the nominee, but I do not see how Sanders is doing any damage to her campaign by remaining in this thing until the end. If anything, he is demonstrating his loyalty to and faith in the causes to which he lays claim.
Just my ten cents.
buddysmellgood
(4,032 posts)I think he is staying in it in order to influence the party platform. Clearly, all Democrats do not agree on the direction of the party. Bernie needs to continue being Bernie.
Hillary will shift to whatever works best to beat Trump.
Does anyone really think Bernie ultimately won't support Hillary?
closeupready
(29,503 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)Ford_Prefect
(7,817 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)I'm pretty sure the new Senators and Representatives get sworn in before the Congress takes up the presidential election.
Although you've posted in a thread about Sanders, your post is an implicit criticism of Clinton, and arguably a violation of the post-June 20 restrictions on what's permitted on DU.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)Which would be tantamount to lying. That's an even MORE serious violation of the terms of service upon which DU was founded.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)If I were making the rules for DU, there wouldn't be implicit censorship, and even the explicit censorship would be much less restrictive than what the actual admins have chosen to impose. Trust me, I didn't alert on your post.
So, what implicit censorship am I promoting?
Of course, your obvious intent was to smear Bernie Sanders, which, explicit rules or not, is still allowed and even encouraged here. For that reason, I doubt that your post will be hidden. I was merely pointing out, with tongue partly in cheek, that, through historical ignorance, you missed the mark and raised a criticism that applies to Clinton but not to Bernie.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)for the confusion - I posted that snippet, and later realized it was very imperfect as an analogy to the incident alleged in the OP, so let's just let it go, and know that I have always been a Bernie supporter, I am now, and barring anything miraculously horrible, I will always like and trust him more than almost any other elected official.
Peace to you, Jim.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)The chief circumstance here is the overall tenor of DU these days. It ain't what it was, to put it mildly.
Peace back atcha!
Response to Cali_Democrat (Original post)
Post removed
ThinkCritically
(241 posts)Or are you just fanning flames? I'm going with the latter.
Jennylynn
(696 posts)avaistheone1
(14,626 posts)I am so damn proud of him!
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)"The goal isn't to win elections, the goal is to transform America," Sanders said at one point, according to multiple lawmakers and aides in the room.
How could he not get booed after saying something so stupid, ridiculous and outrageous?
Oh, Sanders, having trump winning the WH will sure "transform America"
This is unbelievable
Response to lunamagica (Reply #127)
lunamagica This message was self-deleted by its author.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)Actually, he sounds like a guy who thinks he won the primary.
ejbr
(5,852 posts)that frustration goes both ways.
raindaddy
(1,370 posts)who support him.
Looks like many House Democrats are more concerned about pleasing their constants and railroading issues like the TPP, healthcare for all and a $15 dollar minimum wage....
Hillary has a lot of work ahead of her when it comes to convincing Sanders supporters she cares about the issues that are important to them...
raincity_calling
(154 posts)All Bernie supporters understand Bernie's endgame and why he hasn't felt compelled to endorse. For those of you who still don't understand, I recommend you check this out.
I think those who booed him are ignorant. Bernie said he will vote for her (fighting against Trump). Why does he need to actually endorse her? He continues to focus on progressive issues, which is fighting against Trump. I think those who are focusing on Bernie's endorsement rather than issues hurt Hillary more than anything else.
lapucelle
(18,037 posts)Saying it's an endgame doesn't make it an endgame. This is not strategy on the part of Sanders. It's a slow drift into nothingness.
Sanders had a very uncomfortable interview on CNN today in which he was repeatedly asked in what way an endorsement for Hillary would be counterproductive to his platform agenda. Sanders didn't have an answer.
It also doesn't help that some of Sanders partisans are still calling for the prosecution of a person who committed no crime because they perceive that it would somehow work to their political advantage. What kind of people do that?
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Jackilope
(819 posts).... that'd be encouraging and noble.
Sanders energized and has gotten many involved in the political process. People frustrated and with darn good reason. When Democrats boo Sanders and his ideas, they are illustrating that no real change is wanted or will be done.
I have been putting off changing my registration from D to I, just to see if there is any movement left. The boos are red flags to me. The meme pushed about "Bernie ego or in it for him" is also driving me away. I know he is in it to fight for us. The real enemy is the Corporate ownership of both parties. The EGO would be the candidates that sell themselves out and will water down regulation, push fracking kick the can on climate change further down the road, knife us in the back with TPP. They are the ones in it for themselves.
LakeArenal
(28,713 posts)First I think it makes the Hillary camp look like sore winners. To boo anyone is disrespectful. I loved Clinton. Back in 2012 I had a "Clinton 2016" sign in my yard. Even then I thought she is in the pocket of big business. Bernie came along and said all the things I want to hear from a candidate. Many things such as one payer are things Clinton used to stand for.
Now what I think is, Bernie has met with Hillary and they have discussed just exactly how things should play out. They are all showmen. They are going to build the Bernie endorsement up with a big crescendo. Like at the convention, when there is a lot of airtime, drama and pathos.. Bernie is going to surrender with all the pomp and circumstance the new queen deserves. She is going to accept his endorsement on a grand stage. There will be a lot of sweet talk and love.
If the party is divided, it's not Bernie's fault. Contrary to what some Dems think, we aren't sheep. We want to hear the party platform take on as many of Bernie's stances as possible. When others boo, I feel they are booing me.. This continuous dismissal of Bernie Sanders gets under my skin. The boo crowd divides me from them not uniting. We will all support Clinton in the end.. Just hold your water and hold out a welcoming hand.
Lucky Luciano
(11,242 posts)Squinch
(50,773 posts)moved to supporting that winning candidate. That is a historically high number at this point in the election.
The party is NOT divided.
And here's the thing: Hillary won. She has a platform. That is the platform that won. Of course you want to hear the party platform take on as many of Bernie's stances as possible. But that is not how it works. The majority do not have to do what you want, and the majority do not have to sacrifice their winning platform for the loser's losing platform.
Hillary has already given more concessions to the loser than any candidate in recent memory. To give any more would change her winning platform into his losing one. It would lose her more votes than it would gain her, because the 18% of BS supporters who are not now supporting Hillary are, by definition, an unviable fringe.
jamese777
(546 posts)If he fails to endorse the party's nominee at some point in time and tbe nominee is elected president, as party leader the new president could ensure that the new Senate minority or majority leader, Chuck Schumer strips Senator Sanders of his ranking member or Chair position on the vitally important Senate Budget Committee.
Squinch
(50,773 posts)Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Booing the man still fighting for progressive change is a bad move on several levels. Way to alienate your voters, guys. This is not how you win elections, and we really need some big Democratic wins this year.
Squinch
(50,773 posts)And the voters are not alienated. The party is overwhelmingly united behind Hillary. Including 82% of BS supporters.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Other polls suggested that as many as 40 % of Bernie supporters (especially the independents among them) might go third party or sit the election out. That demonstrates a voter alienation. Sure, the party is uniting behind Clinton, but the party accounts for just 30 % of the electorate.
It's a good thing Bernie is keeping the movement together: if it breaks, say hello to president Trump (who is sometimes tying Clinton in the national polls).
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)I see why they're frustrated, but as long as he throws in his support for Clinton after the convention makes it official, we'll probably be alright. A couple of his statements seemed a little out of touch with reality though, like his comment on elections and the FBI investigation. He seems to have a case of political tunnel vision.
pandr32
(11,446 posts)...said Bernie suffers from self-obsession
PoliticalMalcontent
(449 posts)where there are cliques and things like that.
Booing on a large scale could be akin to peer pressure.
It's hard to blaze your own path. It's hard to stand for what you believe in when what you believe in is perhaps different than most. But it's also important to stand for what you believe in. Sanders is accustomed to setting is own path. He ran for congress as an independent (democratic socialist), which put him far outside the norm. He overcame that. I'm sure it may be a point of contention among his peers at times though, despite caucusing with them. It's clearly a point of contention here at times.
The guy at least has solid reasons for supporting her while not flat-out endorsing her. If he flat-out endorses her he loses any sort of ability to speak to what the democratic platform should be (in my opinion) and essentially says "I support everything Clinton does from here on out through November."
I believe that Clinton is only poo-pooing TPP until November. If Sanders feels similarly, perhaps that's why he's reluctant to endorse her.
I found this article to be rather insightful into his thought process. Bernie Sanders Explains The Difference Between "Endorsing" And "Voting For" Hillary Clinton - Politico
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)jamese777
(546 posts)Or Huffington Post or MSNBC.
Don't kill the messenger.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)PatrynXX
(5,668 posts)so this isn't really news. Although it might hurt them in November. I hope not but it could. I know people who will not vote for any Democrat State on down to local that does not support Sanders. I don't hold that view as strict.
Renew Deal
(81,801 posts)They are republicans
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Yallow
(1,926 posts)I am sure these dems are saying to themselves "screw the progressives, we can get Wall Street to fund our campaigns, and give us lobbying jobs when we are booted from office" or something like that. So what if we lose another 100 House seats. We will be "richly rewarded" for doing our part to pass TPP, and the next Wall Street handout bill.
Bernie is trying to save the Democratic Party.
Anyone who disagrees should ask themselves why half the people who can vote don't.
Corporate sellout Dems or Republicans are the same in the non voter's eyes. These folks figure/understand they are screwed regardless who is elected so why bother.
And they are half right.
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)says the booing never happened https://twitter.com/GerryConnolly/status/750710655494139904 Apparently Congressional Democrats aren't perpetual first graders.
klook
(12,134 posts)If such a thing had taken place, any Democrat who'd boo a Democratic presidential candidate would deserve rebuke.
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)lame54
(35,130 posts)he's still got work to do
sammcgee68
(17 posts)Davidthegnome has expressed my beliefs entirely and more eloquently than I ever could. When these comments goes off into some anti Bernie tangent (Save all the hate for the Trump rallies) I do take this hard, After this long the working class people in this country do need some respect from the Democratic party . You know how the middle class has been treated by the Democratic elites for the past 20 years. ( Read Listen Liberal by Frank Thomas if you need to be educated on this fact.) Bernie Sanders has given this Working Class Hero some respect that the Democrat party has not recently given him. .The working class wants a stake in the future of this country and Bernie has been working towards this goal for many years . For this reason , hopefully you can understand our passion, it is not a fluke , he is not a Messiah. I will not actively campaign for her as I did for Bernie I will not walk the walk or talk the talk for Hillary. But I accept the math and will vote for her come November, because the alternative is too bleak to even consider if Trump is elected. Do not sweep us under the rug or dismiss our ideas and beliefs. We want some R E S P E C T and a say in the future of this (Hopefully) great country. I live in Ohio and I hear the talk, You dismiss the working Class people in this country at your own Peril.
johnp3907
(3,723 posts)Seriously?
retrowire
(10,345 posts)It is not self obsession that guides him. People can paint him that way if they want but that's certainly not the case.
Everyone can stop trying to tear this man down now, Hillary got the win ok?
ETA: And you know what? Bernie endorsing Hillary would NOT magically create party unity. It wouldn't. The divide is too wide. It will take a while. And an endorsement from Bernie would not be a cure.
TeamPooka
(24,155 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Peregrine Took
(7,408 posts)if he had one.
Wish they had had the balls to stand up and stand out for their principles if they had them.
LeftRant
(524 posts)It sounds overblown.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)working in small numbers, ergo, electing Democrats on every level make progressive considered by more people.
fbc
(1,668 posts)And the true progressives in this party will make sure they are serving their last terms.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Now that the election has deflated down to nothing but "Trump makes stupid statement about Hillary" it's good to remember there is someone who cares about important things..... and some Dems need to go.
senz
(11,945 posts)DianaForRussFeingold
(2,552 posts)4 minute clip at Liberty University
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)DianaForRussFeingold
(2,552 posts)I'm sure he didn't agree with FDR on the internment of Japanese Americans-- But let's talk about what we all agree on..trying to stop Trump from becoming President! http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512242525
senz
(11,945 posts)Thank you.
reign88
(64 posts)Let's all boo a man who's done nothing but state what he believes the entire time. He's doing exactly what he told people he would do for ,onths now, and now because he's not the liar we are all used to seeing, we're angry?
It's unreal. We hate him because he's doing what he said and because he's not the typical slimy politician who says one thing while convenient, and when he loses, changes to the new flavor of the day.
That's just...depressing.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)LOL
merrily
(45,251 posts)Democrats praised Sanders to the skies until he had the "nerve" to run in a Democratic primary for which they had other plans.
Do they think booing Sanders will get him to do what they want or attract his supporters, many of whom left the Democratic party before he ran or were indifferent to politics because they believed in no politician?
Self defeating conduct is not usually something smart people use or cheer.
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)Keep fighting for progressive policies.
senz
(11,945 posts)and some people hate him for it.
That's their problem.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)If he doesn't tame his raging ego and concede to endorse Clinton within the next few days, he'll have no power in the Senate and no influence in the new Clinton administration. And rightly so.
4dsc
(5,787 posts)EOM.
seabeckind
(1,957 posts)Bernie wants to talk about process and issues,
met with deaf ears by those who boo him cause he's not a team player.
Not because of his message because they never hear the message. He tries to bring up what he sees as problems facing the country and they chant timeline at him.
I think they would be more successful if they listened and provided an adult debate.