HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Sanders stumps for Mello ...

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:13 PM

Sanders stumps for Mello in Omaha, stirs national debate about definition of a progressive

Last edited Fri Apr 21, 2017, 04:59 AM - Edit history (1)

Source: Omaha World Herald

By Roseann Moring

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders thinks Omaha mayoral candidate Heath Mello is part of the Democratic Party of the future.

But some Democrats don’t agree - they argue that Mello's opposition to abortion disqualifies him from being called a progressive. Sanders’ endorsement of Mello sparked a national debate Thursday among Democrats that touched on the future direction of the party.

At a three-hour rally at the Baxter Arena with speakers from a variety of backgrounds and several musical interludes, Sanders laid out his vision for the country. And he said it involves a Democratic party that "stand(s) up for voters in 50 states, not just the West Coast and the East Coast."

"Omaha, are you ready for a political revolution?" he said.

FULL story at link.

Read more: http://www.omaha.com/news/politics/sanders-stumps-for-mello-in-omaha-stirs-national-debate-about/article_284457a1-a7d1-5d79-ae2e-9c8bc68ea31e.html



Details set for Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker’s appearance in Omaha to campaign for Stothert: http://www.omaha.com/news/politics/details-set-for-wisconsin-gov-scott-walker-s-appearance-in/article_be2f262e-7b5b-582e-a65b-245ac0366b34.html

The coalition of D's showing support for Heath was impressive. Planned Parenthood, Latino, First (Native) American, anti-Keystone XL, NE AFL-CIO, Omaha teachers association, Jane Kleeb, State and county party, and several more.

Bernie was last




NE AFL-CIO

116 replies, 11198 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 116 replies Author Time Post
Reply Sanders stumps for Mello in Omaha, stirs national debate about definition of a progressive (Original post)
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 OP
brush Apr 2017 #1
George II Apr 2017 #2
Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #72
Eliot Rosewater Apr 2017 #101
brush Apr 2017 #113
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #3
brush Apr 2017 #4
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #5
brush Apr 2017 #6
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #8
brush Apr 2017 #9
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #22
onenote Apr 2017 #24
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #25
femmedem Apr 2017 #31
onenote Apr 2017 #43
all american girl Apr 2017 #36
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #38
all american girl Apr 2017 #40
onenote Apr 2017 #45
lapucelle Apr 2017 #35
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #37
lapucelle Apr 2017 #44
Demit Apr 2017 #49
karynnj Apr 2017 #51
Demit Apr 2017 #55
karynnj Apr 2017 #64
Demit Apr 2017 #69
karynnj Apr 2017 #73
Demit Apr 2017 #83
karynnj Apr 2017 #84
lapucelle Apr 2017 #62
karynnj Apr 2017 #68
lapucelle Apr 2017 #89
karynnj Apr 2017 #91
lapucelle Apr 2017 #95
karynnj Apr 2017 #96
lapucelle Apr 2017 #100
lapucelle Apr 2017 #105
George II Apr 2017 #79
susanna Apr 2017 #114
InAbLuEsTaTe Apr 2017 #80
brush Apr 2017 #86
democrattotheend Apr 2017 #115
brush Apr 2017 #116
WIProgressive88 Apr 2017 #7
GulfCoast66 Apr 2017 #10
lapucelle Apr 2017 #46
AJT Apr 2017 #11
Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #75
musette_sf Apr 2017 #85
tammywammy Apr 2017 #108
geek tragedy Apr 2017 #112
still_one Apr 2017 #15
obamanut2012 Apr 2017 #30
Blue_Tires Apr 2017 #47
mcar Apr 2017 #56
Cha Apr 2017 #65
all american girl Apr 2017 #16
LanternWaste Apr 2017 #61
Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #74
JudyM Apr 2017 #90
sheshe2 Apr 2017 #103
geek tragedy Apr 2017 #111
JI7 Apr 2017 #12
still_one Apr 2017 #14
Cha Apr 2017 #17
JI7 Apr 2017 #20
Cha Apr 2017 #21
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #26
Cha Apr 2017 #28
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #34
NurseJackie Apr 2017 #53
NurseJackie Apr 2017 #54
FSogol Apr 2017 #57
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #106
sheshe2 Apr 2017 #104
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #107
NurseJackie Apr 2017 #58
Cha Apr 2017 #63
Fast Walker 52 Apr 2017 #27
Cha Apr 2017 #67
Fast Walker 52 Apr 2017 #82
Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #76
still_one Apr 2017 #13
lapucelle Apr 2017 #42
still_one Apr 2017 #60
tmr Apr 2017 #18
karynnj Apr 2017 #52
InAbLuEsTaTe Apr 2017 #81
lexington filly Apr 2017 #19
JCanete Apr 2017 #23
obamanut2012 Apr 2017 #29
WePurrsevere Apr 2017 #32
Demit Apr 2017 #50
WePurrsevere Apr 2017 #59
Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #78
WePurrsevere Apr 2017 #87
Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #92
WePurrsevere Apr 2017 #94
Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #98
WePurrsevere Apr 2017 #99
maxrandb Apr 2017 #33
delisen Apr 2017 #39
Kashkakat v.2.0 Apr 2017 #41
Demit Apr 2017 #66
Demsrule86 Apr 2017 #77
Foamfollower Apr 2017 #48
bekkilyn Apr 2017 #70
NurseJackie Apr 2017 #71
killbotfactory Apr 2017 #88
NurseJackie Apr 2017 #97
Sienna86 Apr 2017 #93
Thinkingabout Apr 2017 #102
mikehiggins Apr 2017 #109
Omaha Steve Apr 2017 #110

Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:30 PM

1. I'm sick of this shit. Now we're supposed to back pro-lifers. Some progressive you got there, Bernie

Instead of backing a mayoral candidate in Nebraska, why the hell wasn't the new outreach chairman in Georgia backing Ossoff for an immediate addition to the Dems total in Congress?

Ossoff missed winning that special election seat by 2%. Bernie could've helped but he's in Nebraskaand backing a pro-lifer for mayor no less while questioning Ossoff's progressive credentials.r.

Bizarro world here we come.

WTF, outreach chairman Sanders?

Indefensible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:42 PM

2. Ossoff only needed 3600 more votes, that's how close it was. It's not only that...

...he couldn't bother, it's that he didn't even know if Ossoff was progressive. As you point out, that would have been a seat in Congress, and a slap in the face to trump. But now he's in Nebraska campaigning for a pro-lifer for a mayoral election?

This is ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:19 AM

72. So somehow Ossoff is not about taking back this country?

It is a house race for crying out loud...who gives a damn about a mayoral race?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #2)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 06:18 PM

101. But if you accept some real harsh realities about who some of these people really

are, it makes more sense.

I cant say anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #101)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 11:41 PM

113. I kind of get what you mean by harsh realities.

Do some of these people really want the Dems to get control of the house?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:48 PM

3. We have no D from NE in Congress Heath winning mayor puts Omaha back in play (long game)

Pro lifer that got the original bill amended to be less restrictive.

From the story: The version of Legislative Bill 675 that became law, on a 40-5 vote, was viewed as a compromise measure. As introduced, the bill would have required a woman to look at the ultrasound image.

Mello’s campaign said he signed onto the bill to support the compromise version.

And

Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez was originally scheduled to appear at the Omaha rally, but Ellison appeared instead.

Nebraska Democratic Party Chairwoman Jane Kleeb said that the switch was the result of a scheduling issue and that Perez is appearing today in Georgia with congressional candidate Jon Ossoff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #3)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:52 PM

4. Your whole post never mentioned Sanders

Why was the outreach chairman not in Georgia backing Ossoff where we could have gotten an immediate new Dem in the congress instead of some speculative "long game" possiblillty that may happen in the future?

Again, WTF, outreach Chariman Sanders?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #4)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 10:59 PM

5. Thanks for writing off NE where Obama got an EC vote in 08


And nothing since!

And he said it involves a Democratic party that "stand(s) up for voters in 50 states, not just the West Coast and the East Coast."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #5)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:10 PM

6. Are you serious? There was an opportunity to gain an IMMEDIATE seat in Congress in Georgia

I repeat, AN IMMEDIATE SEAT.

If Ossoff had won he'd be in Congress now. That's way more important than campaigning for a pro-lifer in Nebraska for mayor — NOT FOR AN IMMEDIATE SEAT IN THE CONGRESS.

God, we need to get our priorities in order.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #6)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:18 PM

8. Are you serious???


Somebody that got over 70% of the D vote in the primary would be much more help than the one with less than 30%. Agree?

http://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/primaries/georgia

CANDIDATES VOTE PCT. DELEGATES

Hillary Clinton 543,008 71.3% 73

Bernie Sanders 214,332 28.2 29

Jane Kleeb NE State Party Chair asked Bernie to come. Have we heard Bernie was asked to go to Georgia?

Important enough that Gov. Scott Walker is coming to help the mayor that got less than 50% in the primary field.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #8)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:32 PM

9. Sorry you don't get it. An IMMEDIATE SEAT IN CONGRESS WAS AT STAKE...

to vote against trump and Ryan's agenda.

The outreach chairman should've have made it his business to do everything he could to gain that seat, whether he was asked or not.

In fact, he shouldn't have had to be asked. He's the NATIONAL OUTREACH CHAIRMAN, which means Georgia is part of his responsibility. He should have explained the importance of the Georgia race to the people in Nebraska and switched his plans to Georgia.

Let's see — a mayoral seat in Nebraska or an additional Congressional vote in DC against trump and Ryan's right wing schemes for the country?

Hmmmmmm?

Not even close and not rocket science either.

I'll take the immediate Georgia Congressional seat for $200, Alex.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #9)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 04:50 AM

22. You didn't answer the question


Do you agree there is a Southerner with more pull in Georgie that can help? Wonder why she didn't? Where is the scorn for sitting this out?

She was speaking in NYC last night (in LBN). I don't see where she mentioned Ossoff.

It could very well be Bernie was asked NOT to help because of the below 30%.

I do get this is important. Marta and I both donated to Ossoff.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #22)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 05:38 AM

24. It's not a zero-sum game.

I can accept your arguments for why party leaders stumping for Mello makes sense.

But there are things called airplanes. There is no reason why Sanders couldn't have also put in an appearance in Georgia. Yes, he finished well behind Clinton there. But are you seriously suggesting that we have a road to success if we write off the tens of thousands of Democrats who did vote for Sanders in the primary? If he had showed up and said that he stands with John Lewis in supporting Jon Ossoff and that Jon Ossoff is needed in Congress, it would have sent a powerful message to a group of voters who are suspicious of the Democratic party but reachable.

Sanders got only 35 percent of the Democratic primary vote in Virginia. Yet the Sanders-endorsed candidate in the race for the nomination for governor has clearly benefited from that endorsement. Staying away from Georgia based on primary results makes no sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #24)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 05:46 AM

25. He may have been told stay away


Funny you give the 70 percenter a pass on this.

Was Bernie told to stay out with his socialist label and all?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #24)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 06:37 AM

31. I think Omaha Steve is right: he was probably asked not to campaign in Georgia.

As we've seen here, Sanders is polarizing and his presence might have hurt more than helped.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to femmedem (Reply #31)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:34 AM

43. excuses, and lame ones at that

I'll eat my hat if Sanders was asked to stay away. Tens of thousands of Democrats supported him in the presidential primary. Why would a candidate turn his back on those voters in a close race?

And I see there was no response to the Virginia example, a state where Sanders also was swamped by Clinton in the primary but one in which Sanders' endorsement has been helpful to a candidate. Do you think Sanders' endorsement of and campaigning for Clinton was a mistake?

If Sanders wanted to support Ossoff, why would he make a public statement that he doesn't know anything about Ossoff?

As for Clinton not campaigning for Ossoff, she's not campaigning for anyone and John Lewis, as powerful a surrogate for Clinton as could possibly exist in Georgia, was front and center for Ossoff, so I think that message was sent.

Here's another fact: in 2016, the Democrat running against multi-term incumbent Tom Price captured over 38 percent of the vote -- more than any other opponent Price has faced. And that candidate managed to do so while being completely invisible. No campaigning. No fundraising. No one knew what he looked like. He was outspent $2 million to ZERO. That's right, he got 38 percent plus against an incumbent Republican in Georgia without raising a fucking dime. The district isn't what some people seem to think it is. Its a district in which Barack Obama did better in 2012 than in 2008 -- how many of those are there? Its around 30 percent minority. It has a 93% high school graduation rate and a median income of over $72,000. Jon Ossoff is Jewish for heavens' sake. It's not as deep red as folks imagine it is, which is why Ossoff was able to come so close. Would Sanders' support put him over the top? I think so, but I don't think it would have hurt him just as Sanders support for a candidate in Virginia isn't hurting that candidate.

So don't tell me Sanders putting in a good word for Ossoff would have hurt Ossoff. The Repubs already were trying to tie Ossoff to Pelosi, Sanders and a "far left agenda" in order to rally their base. For those going door to door, finding those Sanders supporters and being able to say, yes, John Lewis and Bernie Sanders agree that we need Jon Ossoff in Congress would have been a good thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #22)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:11 AM

36. I'm just throwing this out there....

but I thought Bernie was better with the white Trump voters, and no that's not snark. And you know what, please stop it with the Hillary stuff. Bernie s the outreach person. That is his job. (you can use her name....I promise you blow up )

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to all american girl (Reply #36)


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #38)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:18 AM

40. Please, please, please stop blaming Hillary. This is Bernies job, not her's

She's lending her voice in different ways, but he is the outreach person. This blaming Hillary for everything needs to stop. Now, again, I thought Bernie was better received by white trump voters, which Georgia has a good deal there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #38)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:40 AM

45. Should Sanders not have endorsed Clinton in the general

y'know -- socialist label and all that?

Did Sanders campaigning for Clinton in Michigan rally republicans to vote against her?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #8)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:05 AM

35. You know how this works.

It is the duty of Democrats no longer in office (or who have been recently defeated) to step back, not impose themselves on the party, and do what new leadership asks of them. It is the job of of the newly named Outreach Chair to at least bother to do a little research.

This idea the an Outreach Chair needs to be courted or invited to do outreach is ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #35)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:12 AM

37. Was he told by the candidates campaign to stay out?


http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/20/politics/hillary-clinton-lgbt-center/

And last night Hillary called for supporters to focus on the 2018 midterm elections. Why not 2017 too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #37)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:39 AM

44. It's almost ridiculous at this point.

Maybe some journalist should question Hillary about her troubling omission of a mention of special elections in her remarks.

Something tells me that had Ossoff's campaign asked Sanders to stay away, the Outreach Chair would have made sure that we know about it. He's never been shy about stuff like that, and he didn't mention it when explicitly asked why no endorsement was forthcoming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #35)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:50 AM

49. I agree with this.

If the Democratic party is going to create an Outreach Chair, then the person in that position should do outreach. Reaching out is an active, not a passive, activity.

To hold a party position and say you don't know much about a party member running for a high-profile office is an affront. THIS is how you do politics? I don't think so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #49)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:07 AM

51. The Democratic party did not create an Outreach chair, the Senate did

It made him a junior part of the Senate leadership team. His work with Schumer against the attacks on health care are an example of that.

There is no way that he can do his job as Senator and campaign full time. Not to mention, there was a reas on the Clinton campaign did not send him to the South.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #51)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:36 AM

55. I believe that's called splitting hairs.

The Democratic leadership in the Senate gave him the position. Does that suit you better?

When Sanders was interviewed about his new position, he said “Real change doesn’t take place on Capitol Hill. It takes place in grassroots America."

That tells me that he himself considers the position as reaching out to people, not just talking on the Senate floor. That means going out to where the grassroots are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #55)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 09:16 AM

64. True, but my point is that it may be issues, more than elections - as he did on healthcare

A few months ago, there was an argument on whether the chair of the DNC had to be a full time job. Now, you are suggesting that Sanders, through his outreach role, should be out for ANY race. Wouldn't the candidate himself have a say in who comes to get people to vote for them. What about the DCCC, with the defined role of winning House seats.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #64)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 09:29 AM

69. So far it is only speculation that Ossoff didn't request Sanders' help.

It's just as possible he asked and Sanders ignored him. None of us know.

One bone of contention in this thread is that Sanders quite unnecessarily cast doubt on whether or not Ossoff is progressive. Alternatively, his "I don't know" could be taken as "I don't care." If it was unintended, it was clumsy. Either way, that's some bad outreach. It's not doing the Democratic party any good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #69)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:21 AM

73. Or, he was asked a question for which everything depends on what your definition of "progressive is"

Not to mention, there is some context to whether that label is popular in Georgia - and whether Ossoff himself has claimed it. You may know the answer to the last two - I don't and it may be possible that Sanders doesn't know either. With a brief look at his about page on his web site, https://electjon.com/about-jon/ , I do not see the word "progressive". I see a focus on good government, anti corruption and serious national security/foreign policy interest and accomplishments. (Actually, I like that better. It is honest and matches his history. This is NOT to say that he is not progressive, but that is not his emphasis - from a cursory look at his web site. I would note that the anti corruption/good government emphasis of Senator Kerry was one of the things I most admired in him.) Looking at his priorities page, I think he would be a great addition to Congress, even if he would represent a very blue area. However, he is closer to liberal Democrats who others have argued are not particularly progressive, especially as he is not against trade deals -- he wrote his thesis on one.

The first one is complicated as I do not think there is a clear, agreed upon definition. While I think everyone has near the same definition of what liberal is, there were always arguments of which Democrats were "progressive". Looking at some ratings of Senators posted in the past showed that the lists were all over the map. Some almost seemed to equate progressive with libertarian. Others contrast it with "DLC". Others make the determination is how trade is viewed. In addition, "progressive" was taken up by many to mean "liberal" -- because it polled better.

A quick, "I don't know" might have been an answer that does the least damage. As to clumsy, there are many possible clumsier responses -- including if Bernie would have said that Ossoff's views are extremely progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #73)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 11:04 AM

83. No, the only definition of progressive that's relevant in this situation is Sanders', not mine

He's the one who was asked the question. He's the one who's always stressing 'progressive'.

As long as we're speculating about responses that might have been worse, how about we consider what responses might have been better? More supportive of the party he's supposed to be out there publicly supporting? The kind of boilerplate stuff that politicians with over 30 years of being a politician can say in their sleep?

"He's a good liberal." "He's a good Democrat." "We share the same goals." "We share the same beliefs" (and, if that sticks in his progressive craw, "We share *many* of the same beliefs."

Sanders' response was not a positive any way you look at it.

And—do the least damage?? That's what we send an Outreach guy out to do? Hopefully not too much damage? Oh, this is all gonna go just great.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #83)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 11:23 AM

84. OK, Sanders' definition is very likely based on his economic vision

Likely the same reason that Sanders would not have thought Clinton with her history of backing many trade deals as "progressive". He would though agree with her on many "liberal" values she had. If that is his definition -- then from what I see on the website - unlike Bernie Sanders, Sherrod Brown and others, Ossoff is not a progressive in that mold.

However, as I said the word has had various definitions -- up to one recent politician saying it is about making progress.

Not to mention, NO ONE ever viewed that it was Senator Klobuchar who had the outreach function before Sanders as the Outreach woman. No one expected her to rally voters on every election -- even if it is not a Senate one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to lapucelle (Reply #62)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 09:27 AM

68. It is a SENATE leadership position, Schumer broke the position Senator Klobuchar had in half

Sanders position is a new one, representing half of the "Steering and Outreach Committee" now chaired by Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota. Klobuchar will chair the steering committee next Congress https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/11/16/senate-democrats-tap-bernie-sanders-lead-outreach/93960822/

Th article says it is a Senate leadership position. In speaking of it, Sanders speaks of issues that he would support on the grassroots level.

I was named today part of the leadership, I think my title is to head of outreach efforts and that is something that I take very seriously," he said, "so I think again whether it’s the Supreme Court, the fight against bigotry, the fight for climate change our job is to bring millions of people together.”

During a Nov. 10 interview with USA TODAY, Sanders called for Democrats to get out of D.C. and engage working people following Democrat Hillary Clinton’s loss of the presidential race to Republican Donald Trump. Sanders said the party must put equal energy into mobilizing grassroots support outside the Washington beltway as it puts into work inside the beltway.



No one argued that Amy Klobuchar should personally get involved in races across the country, it is telling that many people - who all coincidentally were strong HRC supporters are blasting Sanders over his not going to Georgia -- when it is entirely possible that Ossoff asked both Sanders and Perez to not come and to not publicly support him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #68)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 02:51 PM

89. It is a Senate Democratic Caucus/Conference Committee

which is far from the same thing as a Senate Committee.

If it were a Senate Committee, Schumer would not have had the power to unilaterally restructure it.

If it were a Senate Committee, Sanders would have been named the ranking member (rather than chairman) because Democrats are the minority party in the Senate. (Sanders currently holds the title of ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee which is a Senate Committee.)

If it were a Senate Committee, it would be chaired by and include members of the Republican Party which currently holds the Senate majority.

If it were a Senate Committee, it would be listed as one of the Senate Committees in the relevant sources, like senate.gov
https://www.senate.gov/committees/committees_home.htm

Sanders holds the chairmanship of a Senate Democratic Caucus (Conference) committee. The Senate Democratic Caucus/Conference is NOT the same thing as the Senate.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10028960385

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_Senate_committees

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Caucus_of_the_United_States_Senate

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #89)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 03:05 PM

91. the role is as part of the Senate Democratic leadership

Your word salad is absolutely beyond belief. This is like saying that Schumer being the Minority leader is not the "Senate".
Nothing I said suggested it was a standing committee of the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #91)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 03:45 PM

95. It's not word salad.

It's detail and nuance based on facts straight from the .gov sources. It's also complex, but certainly not beyond comprehension. The Outreach Committee has a political role, rather than governmental role. Because it's a new committee as well, Sanders has the opportunity to define the mission and set the parameters. Why would you limit him so?

If you think Sanders should confine his outreach efforts to senators, candidates in senatorial elections, and voters choosing senators (i.e. things that have the word "senate" in them), then you are assigning him a remarkably limited and parochial influence. And if that's what you believe is his job, perhaps you should advise the Senator to stop reaching out to voters in small mayoral elections. It's beyond the scope of his outreach as you define it.

And by the way, Schumer is both the Senate Minority Leader (a governmental role) and the Leader of the Senate Democratic Caucus (a political role). Those are not my opinions. Those are facts. Distinctions are hard, but they are important.

There's lots of information out there, for those who can be bothered to do their homework. But perhaps a reluctance to make the effort to learn what one does not know is symptomatic of a trend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #95)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 04:08 PM

96. Word salad with government links

There is NOTHING you said that I did not know for decades! What is opinion on my part is that if Senator Klobuchar had kept that role, you would be completely silent. What is clear is that you blame Sanders for stopping the perfect HRC campaign. Ignoring that even had there been no competition worth talking about in the primaries, ALL the same issues would have been used against her.

Not to mention, you ignore that part of the outreach is issues and supporting grassroots on issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #96)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 06:14 PM

100. So the Outreach position is not limited to the Senate.

I'm glad you finally see that.

However, I'm still not clear on why someone would describe information as "facts that I have known for decades" in one breath and "word salad" in the next.

At any rate, I'm still not buying a farfetched explanation predicated on the convoluted construction of a word in a title for what even WaPo characterizes as "strange behavior".

I've heard it said that ignore is my friend. Let's see.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #51)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:30 PM

105. Chuck Schumer, in his role

as Senate Democratic Conference Leader, created the Outreach Committee and appointed Sanders chairman.

The Senate doesn't create caucuses or conferences and their committees; different interest/advocacy groups and political parties create them.

While caucuses and conferences may be multi-partisan (like the CBC), it is the members of the caucus who determine eligibility requirements and the selection of leaders. The founding members of the conference or caucus are the creators of the group. The legislative body (i.e. the Senate or the House) neither has a say in their creation nor a say in how they conduct their business.

Even for those who think that they have known these facts for decades, a refresher course never hurts. Salad is good for you.

Certaines personnes ne comprennent jamais rien toutes seules, et c'est fatigant de toujours leur donner des explications.

Le Petit Prince

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #8)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:35 AM

79. Jane Kleeb was very outspoken last year against our Presidential candidate even AFTER...

...the primaries were over (in case someone want to alert this as re-fighting the primary)

So a State Party Chair who didn't wholeheartedly support our Presidential Candidate invites someone who isn't a Democrat (as he proclaimed himself two nights ago while seated next to our Party Chairman) to campaign for a mayoral candidate of a city (which isn't even the capital of Nebraska) who is not pro-choice, one of the cornerstone issues of the Democratic Party. Seems odd to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #6)


Response to brush (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:47 AM

80. Puhlease! Bernie has done more to help the Democratic Party than any other leader in recent memory.

Show some respect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to InAbLuEsTaTe (Reply #80)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 11:49 AM

86. The problem is, Sanders giveth and taketh away.

He has good ideas in his sound bites then he cancels them out with his attacks on the party.

And ultimately the divisiveness gets us nowhere, which is why this and other threads are here.

He needs to stop the bashing of the party. It went on all through the campaign and continues.

If he was on DU he'd get hides with his trashing of Dems.

So you're ok with him backing someone who put forward bills to try to control women's bodies?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 25, 2017, 11:44 PM

115. This guy doesn't sound like a "pro-lifer"

First of all, anyone who supports choice should not use the term "pro-life." That frames the debate on their terms. Call them anti-choice, or my new favorite: pro forced childbirth.

But the candidate Bernie is backing has said that he is personally opposed to abortion but does not seek to restrict it legislatively:
“While my faith guides my personal views, as mayor I would never do anything to restrict access to reproductive health care,” Mello said in the statement.


What is the problem with that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democrattotheend (Reply #115)

Wed Apr 26, 2017, 08:58 AM

116. Ultrasound

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:14 PM

7. Funny how those who often speak out against so-called "purity tests" whenever any sort of objection

is raised against Democrats who back Republican-lite economic policies are perfectly fine with imposing their own purity test with the issue of abortion. Interesting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WIProgressive88 (Reply #7)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:50 PM

10. Can't believe I just read this here.

You are equating a debate about proper economic policy with that of basic human rights!! We democrats have lots of economic disagreements...universal Medicare, guaranteed income, guaranteed housing and the list goes on. We can work those out in time.

But you are seriously comparing those to a woman's right to control her own body? Really? What next?... if we are more flexible on civil rights laws we might win more races in Mississippi?

If you truly feel that there is really no difference in compromising on economic issues vs basic rights there is a piney sight that is more suited to your beliefs.

If I have misread your post I apologize but you were pretty articulate in your meaning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GulfCoast66 (Reply #10)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:42 AM

46. "Purity tests for thee,

but not for me!"

How nice it must be for those entitled to define amorphous terms to suit their whims.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WIProgressive88 (Reply #7)

Thu Apr 20, 2017, 11:55 PM

11. I feel the same way. I am pro-choice but there are

people who truly look at abortion as murder. No one agrees on everything. There are people I know who are very progressive, they are pro gay marriage, pro universal health care, they are loving and caring people, but to them abortion is murder. I understand that women can't go back to being forced to carry a fetus, that so much anti-abortion support is really a way to control women, but the minds of anti choice people can't be changed unless they become informed and they won't become informed by republicans. We should accept those we have some basic disagreements with and work on informing and educating them.

We talk big about a "big tent" but we seem to be more fractured than the GOP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AJT (Reply #11)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:25 AM

75. People who violated women's civil rights are not 'good' Would you call people who

are 'decent' and support us on economic issues but just can't stomach racial equality 'good people'? And while I would vote for a pro-life Democrat over any Republican...the Democratic party needs to support women's right which are civil rights and not throw women under the bus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AJT (Reply #11)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 11:25 AM

85. "there are people who truly look at abortion as murder"

There are people who truly look at people of color as genetically inferior.

There are people who truly look at LGBT people as sex deviants and criminals.

I don't want ANY of these people in MY tent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AJT (Reply #11)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:46 PM

108. If someone feels abortion is murder then they shouldn't have one. Problem solved. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AJT (Reply #11)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:28 PM

112. That's nice, but no one who is anti-choice is progressive. Period. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WIProgressive88 (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 01:52 AM

15. The problem isn't support for Mello over the republican, in spite of his anti-choice positions,

It is his lack of support for Jon Ossoff by claiming ignorance regarding Ossoff's progressives credentials.

The information on Ossoff is not that difficult to find, and except in extremely rare cases, the Democratic candidate is going to be better on the issues than the republlican.

In the case of Ossoff it is a no brainer:

https://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/04/19/1654449/-Jon-Ossoff-on-the-issues-presented-in-a-way-Bernie-Sanders-can-understand

That is why purity tests are a double edged sword

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #15)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 06:36 AM

30. 100% this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #15)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:42 AM

47. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #15)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:39 AM

56. This!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #15)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 09:18 AM

65. Precisely, still_one.. and thank you so much

for that link.. I've been passing it around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WIProgressive88 (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 01:55 AM

16. Women health rights are not a purity test, the are human rights. What is so hard to understand about

Why is it OK to put our rights on the line, as if the are secondary? This is not expectable...I'm so angry with your crap statement. Thanks for saying that our rights don't matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WIProgressive88 (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 09:09 AM

61. It's also funny that people conflate a platform with purity tests when convenient to their own bias.

It's also funny that people conflate a platform with purity tests when convenient to their own bias.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WIProgressive88 (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:23 AM

74. Abortion access is a civil rights issue...

Women's issues are civil rights issue...and I know for sure...women's support of the Democratic party is a crucial factor in winning elections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WIProgressive88 (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 02:59 PM

90. Good point.

Perhaps the key to principle is not the principled position, itself, as much as the person holding it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WIProgressive88 (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:01 PM

103. Our Choice Our Rights Our Bodies Our Voice

We are half the voting block and you seem to be saying we are just a purity test. This is not an economic issue this is our basic human right.

You can call them a Democrat yet you cannot call them a progressive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WIProgressive88 (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:26 PM

111. U mad bro?

 

I mean, how dare those women act like their civil rights are non-negotiable?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 12:02 AM

12. This shows that Sanders is not demanding purity or even progressives since Mello is not progressive

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #12)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 01:41 AM

14. Ya Nailed it JI7.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #12)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 02:51 AM

17. Yet BS calls Mello a "progressive"..

Sanders voiced his support for Mello in a statement published Wednesday by the Wall Street Journal. “If this fellow wins in Nebraska, that would be a shot across the board, that in a state like Nebraska a progressive Democrat can win, that will give hope to folks in other conservative states that perhaps they can win as well,” he said.

https://rewire.news/article/2017/04/20/why-is-dnc-embracing-aggressively-anti-choice-democrat/

And, Jon Ossoff actually is one.. but BS "doesn't know him"..

Jon Ossoff on the issues, presented in a way Bernie Sanders can understand

snip//

Women’s Heath & Planned Parenthood”

Ossoff is an unapologetic supporter of the concept of women being able to make their own decisions regarding reproductive health care, and Ossoff is a strong supporter of Planned Parenthood.

What a concept for a "progressive"!!!

snip//

National Security”

•Ossoff has promised to “oppose unnecessary military intervention overseas and...only support the use of force where US national security is at stake”
•Ossoff opposes the use of torture
•Ossoff has called for an investigation into "Russian interference in American politics”
•Ossoff referred to the Iraq War as “reckless”

Much More.. https://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/04/19/1654449/-Jon-Ossoff-on-the-issues-presented-in-a-way-Bernie-Sanders-can-understand


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #17)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 03:43 AM

20. he shouldn't refer to him as a progressive

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #20)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 03:49 AM

21. I know.. it's ridiculous

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #21)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 05:55 AM

26. Is Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) a progressive???


I know.. it's ridiculous

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/omaha-mayoral-candidate-under-fire-says-he-would-never-do-anything-to-restrict-access-to-reproductive-health-care_us_58f8e868e4b018a9ce590a84

It’s unclear if that distinction will help him regain the support of groups that have moved against him. It aligns with the position of some Democrats like Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who have expressed personal opposition to abortion rights but have promised not to legislate based on those views. Mello, however, has already legislated based on those views and is now pledging not to do so again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #26)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 06:24 AM

28. Heath Mello is "Aggressively Anti-choice" Dkos pulled their endorsement..

And, that's fine for a Dem like this to be running in Nebraska.. but he doesn't get to be labeled "progressive" while Jon Ossoff is dismissed by BS, as the director of outreach, like he couldn't care less who he is.

Why Is the DNC Embracing an Aggressively Anti-Choice Democrat

snip//

He was endorsed in 2010 by anti-choice group Nebraska Right to Life.

Heath Mello has sponsored a range of anti-choice measures, including a 20-week abortion ban.

musette https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8955986 https://rewire.news/article/2017/04/20/why-is-dnc-embracing-aggressively-anti-choice-democrat/

Heath Mello is a sponsor of the final version of a 20-week abortion ban approved by the governor in 2010, and cast anti-choice votes in favor of requiring physicians to be physically present for an abortion in order to impede access to telemedicine abortion care, and a law banning insurance plans in the state from covering abortions.

Try that ol Establishment Planned Parenthood.

snip//

The Daily Kos, which describes itself as “a news organization, community, and activist hub,” pulled its endorsement of Mello after revelations about the Democrat’s stance on abortion. The site said it had been unaware of Mello’s anti-choice stance, but that “as soon as we learned this information, we withdrew our endorsement, because this legislation clearly runs contrary to Daily Kos’ deepest values, including our support for women’s reproductive rights and our staunch opposition to laws that in any way impede women’s access to reproductive health care.”


But BS calls Mello a "progressive".. who is "..Aggressively Anti-Choice"..

Sanders voiced his support for Mello in a statement published Wednesday by the Wall Street Journal. “If this fellow wins in Nebraska, that would be a shot across the board, that in a state like Nebraska a progressive Democrat can win, that will give hope to folks in other conservative states that perhaps they can win as well,” he said.

https://rewire.news/article/2017/04/20/why-is-dnc-embracing-aggressively-anti-choice-democrat/

And, Jon Ossoff, who is Pro-Choice, actually is one.. but BS "doesn't know him"..




"Jon Ossoff on the issues, presented in a way Bernie Sanders can understand"

snip//

Women’s Heath & Planned Parenthood”

Ossoff is an unapologetic supporter of the concept of women being able to make their own decisions regarding reproductive health care, and Ossoff is a strong supporter of Planned Parenthood.

What a concept for a "progressive"!!!

snip//

National Security”

•Ossoff has promised to “oppose unnecessary military intervention overseas and...only support the use of force where US national security is at stake”
•Ossoff opposes the use of torture
•Ossoff has called for an investigation into "Russian interference in American politics”
•Ossoff referred to the Iraq War as “reckless”

Much More.. https://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/04/19/1654449/-Jon-Ossoff-on-the-issues-presented-in-a-way-Bernie-Sanders-can-understan

Jon Ossoff took the high road in Georgia.. I hope he wins so badly.. Nancy Pelosi was there for him as was Samuel L Jackson.. Hollywood came out for him! Alyssa Milano and Christopher Gorham got the Vote out!

We'll never know if a few positive words instead of dismissal could have made the difference from the "most popular politician in America".

Not sure why BS wouldn't want to have gotten to know Jon Ossoff who would have immediately gone to Congress if he had won 50% and, we would have had one more Dem to fight the Fascistrumps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #28)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 06:48 AM

34. Hillary was OK with Kaine and his anti-abortion past


Seems there is a double standard here.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/tim-kaine-abortion-predicament-225053

But he hasn’t always advanced policies directly in line with those of abortion rights advocacy groups. He pledged in his 2005 gubernatorial campaign to reduce the number of terminated pregnancies in the state by promoting adoption and abstinence-focused education. That cycle, the state NARAL chapter ripped Kaine’s GOP opponent, Jerry Kilgore, as “an extremely anti-choice candidate” but still withheld its endorsement of Kaine because he “embraces many of the restrictions on a woman’s right to choose.”

In a 2007 NARAL scorecard, Kaine was described as a “mixed-choice” governor and his state got an F grade thanks in part to a number of laws and other policies restricting access to abortions. Two years later, Kaine upset both local and national reproductive rights groups by signing a law that authorized the sale of customized “Choose Life” license plates. Kaine argued he was supporting free speech, but his critics complained that the law would fund pro-life organizations and didn’t square with another very important hat that he was wearing at the time: Obama’s personally picked head of the Democratic National Committee.

Kaine brings many other attributes as a running mate, including a widely respected reputation for bipartisanship, after serving just under four years in the Senate, and his own proven political chops winning three straight statewide races in the critical battleground of Virginia. But the hot button issue of abortion, where he has a much more nuanced stance than many of his fellow Democrats, is the baggage he carries.

“People use labels all the time,” Kaine explained in a recent interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” an exchange emblematic of the challenge he faces in talking about a politically volatile topic where his religion conflicts with his policy stance. “I’m kind of a traditional Catholic. Personally, I’m opposed to abortion, and personally, I’m opposed to the death penalty.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #34)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:23 AM

53. Oh please! Stop it! There's no "double standard" at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #34)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:24 AM

54. Did Kaine want to OUTLAW abortion? (Yes or no.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #34)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:43 AM

57. Smears aside, Kaine has a 100% LIFETIME rating from NARAL & Planned Parenthood. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FSogol (Reply #57)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:32 PM

106. Perfect from 2013-2017 NOT in 2005 etc


His perfect record is for US Senate from 2013 to 2017. Look at his record before that including raising $ for anti-abortion groups on state car plates.

His record is not a smear. Sterling AFTER he got in the US Senate: https://votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/50772/tim-kaine

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/tim-kaine-abortion-predicament-225053

By DARREN SAMUELSOHN and DANIEL STRAUSS 07/04/16 07:23 AM EDT

But he hasn’t always advanced policies directly in line with those of abortion rights advocacy groups. He pledged in his 2005 gubernatorial campaign to reduce the number of terminated pregnancies in the state by promoting adoption and abstinence-focused education. That cycle, the state NARAL chapter ripped Kaine’s GOP opponent, Jerry Kilgore, as “an extremely anti-choice candidate” but still withheld its endorsement of Kaine because he “embraces many of the restrictions on a woman’s right to choose.”

In a 2007 NARAL scorecard, Kaine was described as a “mixed-choice” governor and his state got an F grade thanks in part to a number of laws and other policies restricting access to abortions. Two years later, Kaine upset both local and national reproductive rights groups by signing a law that authorized the sale of customized “Choose Life” license plates. Kaine argued he was supporting free speech, but his critics complained that the law would fund pro-life organizations and didn’t square with another very important hat that he was wearing at the time: Obama’s personally picked head of the Democratic National Committee.

Kaine brings many other attributes as a running mate, including a widely respected reputation for bipartisanship, after serving just under four years in the Senate, and his own proven political chops winning three straight statewide races in the critical battleground of Virginia. But the hot button issue of abortion, where he has a much more nuanced stance than many of his fellow Democrats, is the baggage he carries.

Major abortion rights groups and some of their allies on Capitol Hill are tip-toeing around the prospect of a Clinton-Kaine ticket.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Reply #34)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:10 PM

104. There is a huge difference to not agree with abortions...

and another to sponsor laws that severely restrict a woman's right to chose. The most difficult decision a woman has to make and Mello wants to add to her pain by being FORCED to view an ultrasound an hour before her abortion. One hour.

Huge difference Steve. Huge.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #104)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:42 PM

107. Mello voted for and the less restrictive amendment passed


See reply #106. Then get back to me. Kaine restricted and raised money for anti-abortion groups calling it free speech.

From the largest news gathering agency in Nebraska yesterday: http://www.omaha.com/news/politics/bernie-sanders-stumps-for-heath-mello-in-omaha-stirs-national/article_284457a1-a7d1-5d79-ae2e-9c8bc68ea31e.html

By Roseann Moring / World-Herald staff writer Apr 21, 2017 Updated 8 hrs ago

Snip: In 2009, the version of Legislative Bill 675 that became law, on a 40-5 vote, was viewed as a compromise measure. As first introduced, the bill would have required a woman to look at the ultrasound image.

Mello’s campaign said he signed on to the bill to support the compromise version.

Mello, who is Catholic, said he remains pro-life. (Just like Kaine)

“While my faith guides my personal views, as mayor I would never do anything to restrict access to reproductive health care,” Mello said in the statement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #28)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:55 AM

58. You're correct, Cha ...

You're correct, Cha ... in some states, some regions, some counties, some cities... candidates who run as Democrats need to strategically adjust if they hope to win. I've got no problem with that. It's a fact of life, a fact of politics, it's what we have to do in order to pursue, capture or maintain a majority. (Look at West Virginia, for instance. Ugh! Personally, I'm not thrilled with him, but-hey, you know what... I also live in the REAL WORLD and I'm mature enough to accept reality and to be happy for what we have.)

In any case... that's not the point... what TRULY bugs the living shit out of me is the duplicity, the double-standard where someone who clearly IS NOT progressive, gets to be characterized that way. Contrast that with the VERY REAL POSSIBILITY that the DEMOCRATS could have had ONE EXTRA VOTE IN CONGRESS (right now, TODAY!!) and our party's "outreach" fell flat on its face... not giving a whit about it.

I mean, seriously now! Come on! WTF is going on?? Why would someone with Ossoff's progressive creds be dismissed and ignored like that? This is especially disturbing considering what's actually at stake and what we COULD HAVE HAD, right now, in hand... without having to do a run-off.

I'm just not seeing the wisdom in any of these decisions. How can our party expect to make gains if the "outreach" is so sporadic and unpredictable?

Heaven help us all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #58)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 09:14 AM

63. There is no wisdom involved.. it seems to be some kind of

Strategizin'!

"Contrast that with the VERY REAL POSSIBILITY that the DEMOCRATS could have had ONE EXTRA VOTE IN CONGRESS (right now, TODAY!!) and our party's "outreach" fell flat on its face... not giving a whit about it.

I mean, seriously now! Come on! WTF is going on?? Why would someone with Ossoff's progressive creds be dismissed and ignored like that? This is especially disturbing considering what's actually at stake and what we COULD HAVE HAD, right now, in hand... without having to do a run-off."

I love reading that 'cause that's how I'm looking at it.. just written in your inimitable way.

It doesn't make any kind of sense but there it all is.. written down with dismissive quotes and everything. Especially being the Director of Outreach.. and not his job to know who Jon Ossoff is? Maybe I don't know what "outreach" means in this capacity?

And, even Jon Ossoff's statement about "labels".. that was the essence of grace.. just like his stance on the issues that are important to us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #12)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 05:57 AM

27. so the definition of a progressive is flexible, and includes anti-abortion candidates

 

Glad Bernie cleared this up for us!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fast Walker 52 (Reply #27)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 09:23 AM

67. "Aggressively Anti-Choice candidate"..

Why Is the DNC Embracing an Aggressively Anti-Choice Democrat

snip//

He was endorsed in 2010 by anti-choice group Nebraska Right to Life.

Heath Mello has sponsored a range of anti-choice measures, including a 20-week abortion ban.

Heath Mello is a sponsor of the final version of a 20-week abortion ban approved by the governor in 2010, and cast anti-choice votes in favor of requiring physicians to be physically present for an abortion in order to impede access to telemedicine abortion care, and a law banning insurance plans in the state from covering abortions.

snip// Dkos pulls their endorsement of Heath Mello

The Daily Kos, which describes itself as “a news organization, community, and activist hub,” pulled its endorsement of Mello after revelations about the Democrat’s stance on abortion. The site said it had been unaware of Mello’s anti-choice stance, but that “as soon as we learned this information, we withdrew our endorsement, because this legislation clearly runs contrary to Daily Kos’ deepest values, including our support for women’s reproductive rights and our staunch opposition to laws that in any way impede women’s access to reproductive health care.”

musette https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8955986

https://rewire.news/article/2017/04/20/why-is-dnc-embracing-aggressively-anti-choice-democrat/

And, that's fine for a Mayoral candidate in Nebraska.. but, then he says he doesn't know if Jon Ossoff is "progressive" who is Pro Choice.. and he isn't prepared to back Democrats just because of.. "a party label.."..




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #67)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 11:04 AM

82. he sounds bad, but I am a fairly big tent Democrat and am ok with different types of Dems

 

just don't call them "progressive"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #12)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:28 AM

76. which makes me wonder what doe Sen. Sanders want?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 01:38 AM

13. I can understand support for Mello over the republican, in spite of his anti-choice positions,

because in general, a Democrat is going to be better on most of the issues than the republican. That is a question of pragmatism.

However, for that same person to claim ignorance regarding Jon Ossoff's progressive credentials is not acceptable. You cannot claim ignorance when there is plenty of information out there where Ossoff stands on the issues, and especially for the special election in the 6th district in Georgia which has generated so much publicity:

https://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/04/19/1654449/-Jon-Ossoff-on-the-issues-presented-in-a-way-Bernie-Sanders-can-understand


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to still_one (Reply #13)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:26 AM

42. Then why not endorse Ossoff?

Why not endorse the one Democrat over his Republican opponent?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lapucelle (Reply #42)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:57 AM

60. Exactly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 03:11 AM

18. Uh...

If I'm reading this correctly, this post refers to Mello as anti-Keystone XL, but, as Senator, he signed a letter of support, addressed to Kerry, in 2014.
Link to copy of letter: https://t.co/btvhUn1Vup
So, did something change between then and now? Has he publicly withdrawn his support? Genuinely asking.

Also..aren't we supposed to be all for criminal justice / police reform? In Feb 2016 -- right around the height of police involved shootings, Mello introduced a bill that would allow police to withhold body cam footage from the public if it's not part of the investigation-- we all know that for full and fair accountability, all available footage must be released. Link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/ketv.relaymedia.com/amp/article/nebraska-police-senators-grapple-with-body-camera-policy/7658213

So I'm having a really hard time understanding exactly what being a "true progressive" is all about. And I'm baffled by Bernie's sudden willingness to compromise on ideas since throughout the entire campaign, compromise was a no no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tmr (Reply #18)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:14 AM

52. Clinton said some positive things as late as 2013

Then in 2015 or 2016 said she was against it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #52)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:51 AM

81. Yup, following Bernie's lead... again!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 03:18 AM

19. Mello's vote to "compromise" a woman's right

of choice, free of shaming or coercive efforts to manipulate her decision-making, makes him a non-starter as a progressive or any form of Democrat as far as I'm concerned. Failing to stand for pro-choice laws and attitudes is a red line for me, and millions of women. My belief is we cannot afford any backward step on this issue at all. Be Catholic, cherish your personal beliefs. But if you cannot support the beliefs and needs of Democratic women: do not run for office as a Democrat. If our rights aren't worth fighting for then the candidate isn't worth our votes.

We need to win races on every level of government in every state. Yet no race is worth our prostituting out core values. No matter who endorses a candidate.

I'm pretty fed up with candidates like shoes in a couple of sizes and we're supposed to pick the one who makes our feet bleed the least!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 05:33 AM

23. I'm getting everything second-hand. Mello's record, according to another article, doesn't sound good

when it comes to women's rights, even if the one about the ultra-sound is apparently(and I can't personally vouch for it) not forced ultrasound legislation prior to abortion, but forced presentation assuming an ultrasound had to be or was elected to be done, other votes and bill SPONSORSHIPS? seem to be a big problem.

What I don't want to claim is that I have all the information, because clearly I don't. One big question is why is the state's planned parenthood endorsing Mello? Why is the DNC?

Granted, Sanders has supposedly set a different standard for his endorsements, and if Mello is as bad as some of this reporting has suggested on women's reproductive rights, I would like an explanation from Sanders as to why he thinks this is an issue that is compromise-worthy. If he thinks we can't overcome pro-life silliness with a strong economic class message, then yes, while I understand that people may be particularly rigid when a candidate's beliefs contradict their own faith, this move doesn't instill me with confidence that we can reach people without further dividing our own. And this isn't simply putting the matter of women's rights off, held in hiatus, this may be a candidate who is regressive on this matter. That takes us backwards. It does the kind of pandering I've said we HAVE to get away from. It muddies our own idealism, rather than to build our coalitions on our ideals in these states where people have precious few beacons.

Even if I think money is the root of all, that if we win on that we can more easily win on every other front, I can't see how making message sacrifices of this magnitude is going to help get the Democratic party on the same page. It isn't just conservative rural white Americans who don't understand that we need to fight back in a waging class war. And we can't win on that issue if we can't galvanize behind it. If Sanders is fairly or unfairly, the face of economic justice, then a move like this could harm efforts for economic justice. And I say that as a Sanders fan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 06:35 AM

29. To hell with this -- Ossoff "may not be progressive"?

BUT A FECKING ANTI CHOICER IS?!

Ugh -- Bernie Sanders needs to check himself and his privilege at the door.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 06:39 AM

32. Why is Planned Parenthood backing this candidate if...

He's anti choice for women?

While I'm a bit disappointed that Bernie's backing him, I'm much more so if PP is. If he's anti choice than PP should have zero to do with him. IMO they should only put time, energy, reputation and funds into backing those that are for women's reproductive autonomy.

The DNC including those with an anti-choice stance under the 'big tent' is one thing since I get the 'politics' that might be behind it but PP backing someone who is... wow. I'd really like to know their reasoning behind doing so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WePurrsevere (Reply #32)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:02 AM

50. Possibly because he has vowed to support "reproductive healthcare"

and PP's mission is all of reproductive healthcare, not just abortion. He claims he won't let his personal beliefs interfere. He's trying to thread the needle here, but other Dem politicians are doing that, so far successfully, such as Tim Kaine, and Bob Casey in PA. With PP's whole existence under attack, I guess they support Mello because they'll take any help they can get. It's tactical.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demit (Reply #50)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:56 AM

59. Thank you. If he does as he says, I'm fine with that.

As you mentioned other good Dems even progressives are for a women's autonomy while personally, often for religious reasons, are against abortion. As long as they stay out of a woman's right to privacy in making choices for her own life and body I won't take a stand against them on their 'personal' beliefs and choices.

As for PP being more than about abortion I've backed them for decades, used to use them for my reproductive healthcare needs and sent my daughter's there when it was time for them to need those same services so I'm a bit familiar with all they do beyond abortion. I also know that the abortion option is an extremely important and threatened service that I don't want them to compromise on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WePurrsevere (Reply #59)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:32 AM

78. The point for me is why waste time and money with a mayoral candidate when

with a little effort, we might win Georgia 6.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #78)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 11:55 AM

87. Hopefully time and money will be invested in Georgia 6 too.

As for why the time and funds on a mayoral candidate, I'm not a mind reader but my SWAG is that since he's young he's probably being wooed and groomed for something bigger than mayor of Omaha like perhaps governor? There could be a long term goal of changing NE from red to blue?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WePurrsevere (Reply #87)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 03:06 PM

92. We have limited resources...a race like the mayor race when we need all hands on deck

to take Congress back is a waste of time and money. Plus one should not endorse an anti-choice candidate...sure vote for any Dem over any republican, but no need to endorse such a candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #92)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 03:24 PM

94. I wish I understood why they do what they do...

I don't see the long term game plan so all I can really do is hope that there's a very very good one that will get us in control in large enough numbers to fix the huge mess that the poo flinging monkey in chief is going to leave smeared all over everything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WePurrsevere (Reply #94)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 04:58 PM

98. I don't see how this is part of the plan...unless the plan is to piss off women

and waste money on a mayoral race when the House is in play. We need the House to stop Trump...a mayors race not so much...I wish Howard Dean was in charge...now he knew how to win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demsrule86 (Reply #98)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 05:34 PM

99. Howard Dean definitely knew how to win...

IMO he was the best head of the DNC in my lifetime (so far).

I'm hoping that Perez and Ellison working together can get the DNC back on track and am willing to 'watch and see'. So far I'm not feeling very convinced that they will but time will tell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 06:42 AM

33. I didn't know Bernie was a Democrat

did he change his party affiliation again?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:16 AM

39. Sanders in Boston Adopts Right Wing Talking Points on Liberal Elites

Last edited Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:54 AM - Edit history (1)

and misrepresents Clinton's statement in primary. Democratic Party and Clinton on Sanders "enemies list?'

Am I a Liberal elite because I believe women's rights are human rights?

Nebraska is a caucus state; the Omaha caucus voted for Sanders. I think the caucuses are elitist.
The new office of Head of outreach is also elitist.

(CNN)Bernie Sanders criticized Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign in Boston Friday night at a progressive rally alongside Sen. Elizabeth Warren, saying the Democratic nominee's loss revealed the need for the "fundamental restructuring of the Democratic Party."

The Vermont senator also said some Democrats believe the voters who backed President Donald Trump are racists, xenophobes and "deplorables," a word Clinton famously used.
"I do not agree," he said.
"It wasn't that Donald Trump won the election, it was that the Democratic Party lost the election," Sanders added.
He ran through Democratic losses in recent years -- checking off the Republican-controlled House, Senate, governor's offices and state legislatures -- before saying that Republicans are "a right-wing extremist party who has an agenda that most Americans soundly and roundly disagree with."
"How in God's name do they win elections?" Sanders said. "And the reason is, in my view, that the time is long overdue for fundamental restructuring of the Democratic Party. We need a Democratic Party which is not the party of the liberal elite but a party of the working class of this country.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/31/politics/bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren-boston-rally/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:19 AM

41. How many of yall read the article - tired of this either-or bs. One can have personal beliefs that

life begins at conception without being "anti-choice."

Spoze I could call myself anti-abortion and pro-life.... but I firmly believe that the way to eliminate most abortion is safe, effective birth control (developing new methods if need be - keeping sperm from egg is not rocket science). This is exactly how a so-called "prolife" candidate could be in support of Planned Parenthood, and a progressive. Statistics clearly indicate that fewer abortions are associated with women's rights incl. legal abortion and accessbility to birth control, and equality in educaiton and income.

And it would require more of a cultural shift that gets people to own and take responsibility for their own sexuality. I think the religious right is actually a CAUSE of so much of the fear and ambivalence in both men and women - that creates unwanted and unplanned pregnancies... The religious right's stupidity and fear around sexuality is just one of many reasons why I would never ever align with them politically, never in a million years.

IMHO, until a cultural shift happens, and given that there are different cultural and spiritual beliefs around the beginnings of life.... women should not be prosecuted or harrassed with vindictive requirments and should indeed be sovereign over her own body.

SO WHAT DOES THAT MAKE ME HMMMMM? A pro-life pro-choicer or what????????

Yeap, it's a rather nuanced view and I dont expect yall to agree or even understand it, but let's have it be part of the conversation. At the very least it should be possible to work together in coalition with people whose views are different from yours, on the things that you DO agree on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kashkakat v.2.0 (Reply #41)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 09:19 AM

66. My part of the conversation: believe what you want but don't force your beliefs on others.

Don't try to legislate other people's behavior to conform to your beliefs; you are able to follow your beliefs with the law just the way it is.

Btw, I did not have trouble understanding your nuanced view.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kashkakat v.2.0 (Reply #41)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:31 AM

77. That would depend if you plan to force your views on women.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 07:46 AM

48. Campaigning for an anti-choice Dem while ignoring the most progressive candidate seen in years

 

running for the seat in the Georgia 6th tells me much about the Senator from Vermont.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:02 AM

70. For me it comes down to this

Quote from Mello in article:

“While my faith guides my personal views, as mayor I would never do anything to restrict access to reproductive health care,” Mello said in the statement.


Now IF he actually stands by this statement and doesn't use his personal views to legislate against abortion rights, I have no problem with him concerning this issue. I'm not particularly "pro-abortion" myself in many cases, but I would not vote for an anti-choice candidate (dealbreaker for me) because I strongly believe that the government should stay out of it and that the decision entirely rests with the woman, her medical team, and God. Handing this choice over to the government is a big NO.

The big question is whether or not this guy would keep his word once he's in office. If I were voting in this election, I'd have to look deeper and see if he has a history of saying one thing and doing something else. The fact that Planned Parenthood also endorses him though seems encouraging.

It's also possible that this could end up being one of the (few) situations of which I disagree with Bernie. We're not going to agree with even our most beloved representatives 100% of the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bekkilyn (Reply #70)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:17 AM

71. He was endorsed in 2010 by anti-choice group Nebraska Right to Life.

Heath Mello has sponsored a range of anti-choice measures, including a 20-week abortion ban.

Heath Mello is a sponsor of the final version of a 20-week abortion ban approved by the governor in 2010, and cast anti-choice votes in favor of requiring physicians to be physically present for an abortion in order to impede access to telemedicine abortion care, and a law banning insurance plans in the state from covering abortions.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1757865



I hope this helps.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 02:12 PM

88. Sanders and the DNC are supporting a democrat

What a bunch of assholes, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to killbotfactory (Reply #88)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 04:54 PM

97. Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 03:22 PM

93. NARAL supported Tom Kaine

So did a lot of Democrats

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 06:39 PM

102. Guess Bernie does not qualify as a progressive with his views and

Votes on Gun Control. Hey, Bernie, you are not the perfect candidate either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:08 PM

109. Ossoff is a progressive? Maybe so. So what?

Sanders is supporting a Mayoral candidate who was/is pro-life? So what?
It is pretty clear that Sanders doesn't give a rats ass about what other people think about what he is doing. So what?
Cheeto-man is the enemy, folks, not anyone else. Train your ire on the guy who deserves it, not just the guy who doesn't see things the way you do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikehiggins (Reply #109)

Fri Apr 21, 2017, 08:25 PM

110. About that mayor's race




http://www.omaha.com/news/politics/bernie-sanders-stumps-for-heath-mello-in-omaha-stirs-national/article_284457a1-a7d1-5d79-ae2e-9c8bc68ea31e.html

A last-minute addition to the rally was Sofia Jawed-Wessel, an assistant professor of public health and health behavior at UNO, who spoke about her support of Planned Parenthood.

“Rally behind Heath Mello and support the candidate who supports Planned Parenthood,” she said.

As national Democrats discussed whether Mello is a true progressive, Stothert painted him as too liberal. She held a press conference Thursday before the event to call Sanders a liberal and a socialist.

Stothert said she expected the tone of the event to be “toxic” and a “Debbie Downer.” And she talked about her upcoming campaign event with Republican Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. “There’s a lot of excitement about him coming to town.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread