Interesting how some Bernie supporters trash the very party he JOINED to try to be president.

[RBInMaine]

Bernie JOINED the Dem party to try to become president because he knew he couldn't win otherwise. And yet so many Bernie fans trash the party that he voluntarily JOINED. Such hypocrisy. So pathetic.

And the thing is, BERNIE would be disappointed. I love Bernie, but some of his supporters are saying things that are just plain off the beam. "Hillary is a war monger." "Hillary is a Republican." And on and on and on. Wild eyed and off the beam.

If the Dem party is so terrible, why did Bernie so recently JOIN it?????????

[cali]

1. I'll criticize corruption wherever it is.

It's beyond irresponsible and naive to not deal with it.

[hobbit709]

11. +1000

[KittyWampus]

96. Except when it's in Sanders campaign. Then it's blame everyone else.

[cali]

136. There is no corruption in his campaign. It is funded by

small donors. Hillary is corrupt.

[LWolf]

130. Agreed. nt

[Ferd Berfel]

144. The Democratic Party was SOLD to the likes of the Koch Bros

by the Clintons ant others. At best, under DLC, THird Way, Blue Dog control, the Party has become the left wing of the republican party.

In order to deal with that, first we have to recognize the problem and who was responsible for that problem.

Unless you are a corporatist and are in the process of pushing the Party even farther to the right -
"It's beyond irresponsible and naive to not deal with it."

[DanTex]

2. They're not interested in fighting a long, tough fight, which is what true change requires.

They want to wave a magic wand, and if that doesn't work, just trash everyone who has been and will continue to fight to improve the lives of Americans.

[mhatrw]

10. Democracy that is not an oligarchic charade is not too much to ask.

How can some people fight so hard for what they know is wrong?

Yes, it is the "system" we have. Pay to play. Period. But that is why we need to confront it head on and fight for a better system. Sanders is the first viable candidate who has forced a discussion of our systemic problems. As Hillary would say, "Americans can't wait for the long, tough, incremental, marginal fight."

[DanTex]

18. If you're talking about CU, both candidates have the same position: it needs to be overturned.

[cali]

20. The evidence that Hillary and Bill are corrupt, isn't just strong, it's overwhelming

And yet, the polite fiction is to just ignore it.

[uponit7771]

67. So is the evidence Clinton caused Benghazi and shot Abe Lincoln :rolleyes:

[mhatrw]

32. I'm talking about the entire pay to play system.

You know, the Clinton Foundation. The revolving lobbyist doors. The Secretary of State hawking fighter jets to India for Lockheed. The whole sleazy mess.

[KittyWampus]

98. Democracy involves people being active all the time. In American it requires party membership

and constant fighting against not only Republicans but those who become entrenched in the Democratic Party.

This is actually true in every organization.

However it also require working and socializing with people you don't agree with and with those who are trying to stab you in the back.

That is why Sanders ultimately will lose.

He is an ideologue like so many of his followers.

He doesn't understand how to work well with others.

[mhatrw]

104. he works great with others. he just does not gladhand the rich. nt

[Hortensis]

137. The hard-slog truth!

To be fair, unlike his more reactionary followers, BERNIE can be pragmatic and sensible and manages to combine his rigid ideology with a respect for truth. Considering where he came from, and with what (basically only his message), Bernie has done splendidly, even if his followers are like yo-yos bouncing between extremes of alt and angst.

Anyway, I'm guessing no one's more inspired by his success so far than he is. If he were a younger man, losing this race would probably just mean he'd run again and again until he did win. As it is, if he loses this nomination he'll no doubt continue his crusade in the Senate. Regarding your last, it'll be interesting to see if he is able to use his new stature and additional power to accomplish more than he has in the past.

[notadmblnd]

147. I'm sorry- I thought the Declaration of Independence said "WE THE PEOPLE" not "WE THE PARTY"

Loyalty is a two way street. Something you got to give in order to get. There are too many Americans that are tired of giving and not even getting the basics.

And you're going to sit here and tell me "WE" must be loyal. I don't think so. SCREW YOUR FREAKING PARTY!

[hobbit709]

12. We're willing to fight as opposed to settle for the status quo and keep losing anyway.

how well has "Not as bad as the other guys" worked out in the last 8 years?

What's the DWS record on how many state and Congressional races she's won?

[DanTex]

17. That last 8 years have been the most transformative progressive presidency

at least since LBJ, and possibly since FDR. And, like I said, if you're going to give Bernie credit for things that will never get through congress, then you give Obama credit for raising the minimum wage, his jobs program, the public option, etc.

[hobbit709]

26. and meanwhile we lost 900 seats around the country

[DanTex]

29. I guess you'd rather play it safe and not go for big changes like ACA.

[hobbit709]

31. YOU are the one that wants to play it safe. I'm not part of the "NO, we can't" crowd like you.

[DanTex]

33. Huh? You just implied that Obama's term was a failure, despite all the huge accomplishemnts,

because we lost some seats.

If you want big changes, like Obama delivered, then there are political risks. I'm looking forward to continuing the progress that Obama made under Hillary.

[hobbit709]

34. Great deflection. I was talking about Hillary and you want to turn it into about Obama.

But it figures coming from the blind adoration contingent here.

[DanTex]

93. LOL.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511101227#post17
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511101227#post26

[hobbit709]

95. you only wish you were funny.

[Empowerer]

66. And the Democrats, as LBJ predicted, lost the South for a generation after the Civil Rights Act

Did that mean it was a failure?

You can't have it both ways. You can't claim, on the one hand, that the Sanders "movement" is impervious to political pressure and pragmatism and willing to take on great risk to make great gains, and then on the other, criticize President Obama for "losing 900 seats around the country" because he followed through on his promise and pushed through historic, groundbreaking legislation.

[hobbit709]

82. Nice deflection. I criticized the "leadership" of DWS.

[Empowerer]

107. DWS wasn't the head of the party in 2010 when most of those seats were lost

So blaming her for losing "900 seats" is disingenuous at best.

Those seats were lost in 2010 and 2014 because progressive Democrats bent on "teaching Obama a lesson" did not go out to vote. Period.

[hobbit709]

112. Progressive Democrats voted. I did and so did all the ones I know.

Who didn't vote were the people that weren't inspired by the lack of a real choice.
The ones who saw no difference between corporate stooge R and corporate stooge D. The ones that see "Not as bad as the other guy" as nothing to get fired up about.

But keep right on blaming the losses on a nonexistent rather than admit the National Party leadership did little to help at the local level. One of the reasons I and many of my friends no longer donate at the national level.

Disingenuous? Like her not supporting a Democrat and openly supporting the Republican running against him.

[Empowerer]

115. Lots of progressive Democrats DID vote. But lots didn't

I remember well the movement of progressive Democrats, furious with Obama over the Public Option and other things they said he did or did not do, who vowed to stay at home and then proudly admitted that they had, in order to "teach Obama a lesson." And I remember being called everything but a child of God on DU whenever I pointed out how foolish this strategy was.

Had progressives voted in 2010 in the same numbers - or even close to the same numbers - that they had in 2008, Democrats would have kept the House, kept more governorships and state legislatures and Obama would have been in a much stronger position moving forward. And, even more important, redistricting would not have resulted in the blatant gerrymandering that guaranteed Republican rule for the next decade.

Funny how, on the one hand, some folks claim that it's about the people, not the leadership. And then whine that the leadership didn't do enough to motivate the people to get out to vote. Leadership is important, but the people have to take responsibility, too. And it doesn't require a strong chair of the DNC for progressive Democrats to know that if they don't vote, Democrats lose and if they do vote Democrats win. In 2010, many progressives WANTED Democrats to lose - they said so very clearly. This cannot be blamed on the party.

And if people didn't see a difference between the Republicans who were running and the Democrats they were running against, that's not the fault of the party. And if they purposely allowed the Republicans to win because they were mad at Obama, that's not the fault of the party.

Moreover, while the DNC is involved in the House, Senate and Governors races, they have little to do with the state and local races - state legislatures, county commissions, etc. And THAT's where much of the power is. State parties help to drive those and individual voters have much, much more say over those races. Yet, in staying home to teach Obama a lesson, these same progressives also sat out the state and local races that have so much impact on our lives - and redistricting. This all made a difference and cannot be put at DWS's feet, no matter how much you hate her.

Bottom line, claiming that this was all DWS's fault - especially when she wasn't even in charge of the DNC in 2010 - IS more than disingenuous - it's outright dishonest.

[mhatrw]

27. Nixon's term was more progressively transformative and you know it. nt

[DanTex]

28. Craziness!

[uponit7771]

71. This is false on its face, the Obama hate is so thick

[hobbit709]

86. That must be the talking point dujour. If you say anything about HRC it's "Obama hate"

and the Bernie hate coming from you and your cohorts is of course as pure as the new fallen snow.

[uponit7771]

88. The poster just claimed Nixon was more progressive than Obama... he wasn't, that's just ODS

[mhatrw]

99. The EPA, OSHA, the Consumer Products Safety Commission, Title IX

What has Obama done again? I realize the bar is very low, so I would be willing to relent if you can come up with anything other than the ACA.

[Empowerer]

145. Those were good moves, but in the context of the times, they were not all that transformative.

Given the tenor of the country at the time, Nixon did not have to fight hard to get any of those things done. They had broad bipartisan support and much of the heavy lifting was done in Congress by a united leadership. Moreover, they were part of a continuum that the country was already on, moving toward more and more toward moderate but progressive change, notwithstanding Nixon's Southern Strategy in the campaign. That movement was stopped with the election of Ronald Reagan who very purposefully halted it in its tracks and turned it back. It has been moving in the backward direction since then - sometimes more gradually, sometimes more quickly and sometimes in a two steps forward, one step back fashion, depending on the political leadership in power. But for the past 35 years, the trend has been moving rightward.

President Obama is working against that tide. He is not operating in the same environment in which Nixon was operating. You cannot compare what Nixon did in the late 1960s and early 1970s with what President Obama has done in the last 7 years in the face of unprecedented obstacles. Given what he has accomplished in the current climate, President Obama HAS been an extraordinarily transformative and progressive President, notwithstanding the naysayers who consistently try to belittle and demean his record.

[mhatrw]

159. I realize all that. All I am doing is pointing out how low the bar has dropped.

The bar has been lowered by the 0.1% who have effectively bought our entire two party system so far that a corrupt Republican arguably managed to usher in more progressive change than our current Democratic president.

[Surya Gayatri]

149. FYI. To help fill your apparent info deficit.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110232721

One of the most comprehensive compilations of PBO's many accomplishments I've ever found...

Seriesly?? Nixon??? Tricky Dick????

How deep into your bag of bloviation did you have to dig to pull that out?



If you had an ounce of self-respect, you would be doing this...

[mhatrw]

161. It's a nice, modest list. Far better than either Bush or Reagan. Maybe better than Clinton.

Carter tried, but never had a chance.

Nixon's term of office was arguably more transformative than Obama's has been in terms of progressive causes.

I give full credit to Obama for getting some good things done amid crazy Repuke resistance of his every move. But the bar has fallen so low that "ending Darth Vader's torture policies" and "using just the Air Force to destabilize the Middle East" now count as "progressive transformation."

[uponit7771]

70. Nah, that would render Sanders chiding petulant cause he didn't get his unicorn the way he wanted

... which it sounds like that's what his campaign is about.

He's not proffered something much better than what Obama has and now he's supposed to get all this past a historically gerrymandered GOP congress

[Armstead]

46. This is just Chapter 2016 of a long tough fight that has been ongoing

You cute little analigy of a magic wand is right out of the cliched playbook that has been used for 35 years to quash liberalism on issues of wealth and power (and often to promote social conservatism too, i.e. DOMA, Welfare Deform)

[bowens43]

84. ridiculous there is a difference between fighting a long fight and giving up before it starts

hillary will DO nothing but kiss corporate ass

[uponit7771]

89. Or realize that there's a historically gerrymandered GOP to deal with!?

[Logical]

110. LOL, dan being dan! Nt

[Bjornsdotter]

152. Post after post

...here has stated that we don't expect magic. We are looking for a candidate who said let's aim for this and try. I'd rather try and try and try than to say "Oh no, that's too hard. We can't do that."

So we have a candidate who says "Let's Try" and one who says " It will Never, Ever happen."

I'm going with the one who says "Let's Try."

[mhatrw]

3. The Democratic party is great. But the party leadership is corrupt and compromised.

If you can't see that, then have fun at your Clinton Foundation fundraisers.

[enid602]

105. Charity starts at home

Anything can be manipulated to appear corrupt. The Clinton Foundation, for example spends 89% of its revenue on some pretty worthwhile charities around the world. In contrast to, say Wounded Warriors, which spends only 59%. Or Feed the Children, which spends 21%.

Raising money for other democratic candidates can also be considered part of the corrupt, 'pay for play' system, if you are inclined to think so.

On either count, it would appear that Bernie is pure as the driven snow.

[mhatrw]

108. direct payments do not have to be manipulated to appear corrupt. nt

[RiverLover]

4. He's been more of a Democrat than most of the declared Dems in congress have been.

He's joining it to make it the FDR party again. The true opposition to rethugs, not capitulators.

GO Bernie!!

[riversedge]

5. Bernie joined the Democratic because of poltics--he needed the Party establishment and

infrastructure. Simple as that.

[mhatrw]

15. Wrong. The party establishment and infrastructure has done nothing for Bernie.

Sanders has brought excitement and energy to an otherwise corrupt and moribund business as usual corpse.

Sanders is running as a Democrat because we have a two party system because a two party system is easier for oligarchs to control.

[Live and Learn]

22. +10,000 nt

[riversedge]

37. Bernie is going nothing to build up down-ticket Dem candidates-while Hillary has helped fund

raise within the Dem Party to help other Democrats get elected. In addition her 50 state strategy is helping individual states--and the individual state Democratic Parties grow.

[mhatrw]

50. Who is getting new voters and independents fired up to vote Democratic?

It sure ain't jaded and hated Hillary.

[Empowerer]

74. He's not firing them up to vote Democratic. He's firing them up to vote for Sanders

And they have made very clear that if Sanders is not the nominee, they will NOT vote for the Democratic nominee in the General.

This has nothing to do with Sanders trying to energize the Democratic Party. This is all about Sanders using the Democratic Party's resources to undergird and advance his campaign. Period.

I'm not mad at him for it. It's a smart political move by a pragmatic, opportunistic politician. And people need to stop pretending that he's anything but.

[mhatrw]

79. What Democratic party "resources" has he "used" without paying for them?

You mean democracy?

[riversedge]

132. The Party name and Democratic debates for starters...

[mhatrw]

156. So none at all.

That's just the product of our two party system as I originally said.

[Empowerer]

68. If Sanders were running as an independent, he'd still be in single digits. He knows that.

Why don't you?

[mhatrw]

83. Yep. And this really goes to show how terrible a candidate Clinton is.

All you have to do to move way up in the polls is to run against her.

[Empowerer]

90. No, it doesn't.

It shows that Sanders needed the Democratic Party apparatus to get his message out and to run a viable campaign and that, without it, he'd be nowhere.

Funny how little regard you have for your candidate. Insisting that his doing well is proof that Clinton is a bad candidate suggests that you believe that Sanders could not do well against a strong candidate. I think the fact that he's running well against an excellent candidate speaks well of him.

But if you want to believe that your candidate is so weak that he can only prevail against a weak candidate, that's your prerogative.

[mhatrw]

94. The Democratic apparatus? You mean democracy?

[Empowerer]

97. No - it was a slip - I meant the Democratic Party apparatus

[mhatrw]

101. which consists of?

[NurseJackie]

24. Thank you! This needed to be said!

[Live and Learn]

30. OFGS, it is a two party system. He joined the party he best fit with like we all are forced to do.

'That's a mighty fine high horse,' you ride. Watch you don't fall off cause there are some pretty hungry people at the party.

Without Bernie, it was beginning to look like we were a single party.

[cali]

38. Fail. He didn't want to play the role of spoiler, and YOU would

be howling away if he ran as an independent. You praised him for it, before he started looking like a threat to Hillary

[Armstead]

48. He had the option of running third party through the GE ....I suppose you would have preferred that

[uponit7771]

75. Nah, prefer the guy not be a hypocrite and join the same poison that he rails against often...

... he wouldn't have to deal with DWS et al if he stayed independent.

[uponit7771]

72. +1

[pandr32]

126. Agreed

Not to mention he thought he could win against a woman, and one that was doomed to have the full onslaught of the rich Republican puppet master money flung at her.

[treestar]

158. and a lot of his supporters demanded

that it roll over and do whatever he needed to win! And that Hillary be extra nice and go extra easy on Bernie and not dare to run a hard campaign against him!

[Live and Learn]

6. Who the hell do you think you are talking to? Many of us are long term Democrats.

We simply recognize that the party has been taken to the right and are fed up with it. You do know history, right? Would you have been a Democrat back in Lincoln's time?

It is not about our party right or wrong. It is about doing the right thing. And Bernie is the one that has been doing that all along.

[ms liberty]

19. This. n/t

[mythology]

43. If you are so hung up on history

please be aware that the parties are objectively more polarized than in decades, by some measures going back to the time of the Civil War.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2014/02/13/polarization-in-congress-has-risen-sharply-where-is-it-going-next/

So please, stop with this nonsense that the parties are the same, or the Democrats are becoming more and more like Republicans. It's false.

[Armstead]

49. They are not so polarized on core issues of Wealth and Power

TPP, ACA, Deregulation, Fiscal Austerity, etc.......not so much difference.

The GOP could have just as easily proposed something similar to Obamacare, albeit less on the reform side. Their strident opposition is just political opportunism.

[SDJay]

121. To Quote Many Repuke People In My Life

Who have seen the light to varying degrees, I'm not leaving the party, it's leaving me.

[EdwardBernays]

7. Hillary is a warmonger.

Her campaign chairman owns a lobbying firm that represents weapons manufacturers and Saudi Arabia.

When she was SOS she approved weapons deals at twice the rate for donors to the Clinton Foundation than for others. And those weapons went to many countries we previously had not sold weapons to, because they oppress their own people.

She also wants to provoke Russia in Syria, and was desperate to over throw Gaddafi.

She benefits from war, as do her allies.

[grntuscarora]

8. I believe he joined it

because he wanted to provide a progressive choice, because he felt the Dems had drifted too far to the right and he could be an impetus for it to shift left again, and because he didn't want to be an I. spoiler like Nader that helps an R win. I'm one of the ones that wants him to be President, and I'm grateful he's giving rank and file D's a choice of candidates.

[peacebird]

60. ^^^this!^^^

[Docreed2003]

69. I think you are spot on...

There's plenty of evidence that had Sen Warren thrown her hat into the ring that Bernie wouldn't be running. He's running preciesly because he felt that there needed to be a more liberal voice in the primary. That point should be made again and again whenever his motivations are questioned

[flor-de-jasmim]

9. Take a look at history.

The Dem Party has shifted far to the right in terms of some of its rhetoric and policies. As has the Repub Party. it is why some moderate Rs have joined our party. Take a look at FDRs goals. Consider Eisenhower's work in building infrastrucure. Look at the democratic protests of the 60s. Compare that history with Bernie's platform. The public universities in Cal. used to be free.

By what measure do you claim that Bernie is not true to democratic principles of the highest order?

[RiverLover]

16. Excellent points. Excellent post. +1

The highest order.

He's proven its attainable, we just have to give him a shot.

Having the Democratic Party dissolve into conservatism has truly, deeply harmed our country.

[longship]

13. Interesting how today's Democratic Party has so distanced themselves from FDR.

And aligned themselves with policies which Democrats of the past would have unequivocally maligned. All in the name of intraparty political opposition.

Pitiful. Frankly pitiful.

[SDJay]

122. FDR

Would be as much an outcast in this party today as Reagan would be with the bad guys, and that's unfortunate.

[beam me up scottie]

14. ZOMGWTFBBQ??? OH the HYPERBOLE!

How DARE they be critical of our party which has never let us down or done anything worth criticizing EVER???

[pengu]

21. He joined it for people like me

We are long time democrats who are incredibly frustrated with the intentionally anemic pace of progress. We are long time democrats who are appalled by the influence of money on many (not all) of our party leadership.

[vercetti2021]

23. Wow...

You Hillary supporters are blind to see what she really stands for. Go ahead and elect a corporate Dem that will represent our party and then watch her get torn a part by the Republicans and lose the GE. Bernie is the last freaking hope for a progressive USA and you're not helping that cause.

[Nanjeanne]

25. I've been criticizing my party long before Sanders

I've been registered Dem for 45 years. i stopped donating to the party quite a long time ago. I donate ONLY to specific candidates that I feel represent my understanding of what the Democratic Party should be. I've supported Warren, Sherrod Brown, Keith Ellison, and others. I am now giving to Russ Feingold and Alan Grayson and just started supporting Tim Canova and Tom Fiegen and worked on Obamas 2008 campaign.

I refuse to give money directly to the Party until they once again start representing me and not corporate interests.

Call me a bad Democrat if you want. Bernie Sanders is the very heart of what I always felt were democratic principles. Would those who object so much to the fact that he joined the party too late for them have preferred he not caucus all these years with the Dems? They sure were happy to have his votes.

[Live and Learn]

35. The party has been trashed all right but not by Bernie. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

36. The dogs caught a rabbit the other day and only ate the head.

My wife freaked out and declared them murderers and criminals. I pointed out that they were just dogs being dogs. She is now trying to convince herself that dogs don't decapitate rabbits so it wasn't them, it was some sort of avian predator.

[randome]

39. Sort of like taking up arms against the federal government and then...

...complaining when you don't get a pardon. Isn't it?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[islandmkl]

56. i am stealing your "I'm always right.." line...

it will replace my occasional use of 'You seem to be saying: I'm not happy until you're not happy, too.'

THANKS

[randome]

61. No problem! And thanks!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[Empowerer]

77. I love this.

[fredamae]

40. I am one of them

You overlook one small detail. Reality.
http://billmoyers.com/story/both-parties-agree-selling-out-is-worth-it/#.Vq0KF9__d0U.facebook

I do not, most others do not "trash" the Party. We disagree with the direction the Dem Party Leadership is moving.
The leadership-over the years- has Trashed "our" party. The people out here are trying to clean up the mess, again.
It isn't hypocrisy at all. It is a signal the party itself is suffering under it's leadership.

The party is on life support, btw-Bernie might just resuscitate it.
I am disgusted. I have supported Dems since 1959. I don't need counsel nor chastising - Dem Leadership does.

[99Forever]

41. Would you prefer he unjoin it and run independent?

He joined it to take it back from the neoliberal DINOs that have infested it and to finally have it return to caring about We the People instead of the parasites of the fucking .01%. Don't like that?

Tough shit.

[Vinca]

42. Bernie ran as a Democrat because he didn't want to hand the election to a Republican.

If he ran as a third party candidate, that's exactly what would have happened. Is that your preference? Bernie, IMO, is what Democrats used to be and what Democrats should be. The party has moved right over the years and it doesn't sit well with many of the rank and file. I probably would have changed my party affiliation to Independent from Democrat if he'd run as a third party candidate. You might have seen a mass exodus from the party.

[nolabels]

44. The equation is that if one is to critique Hillary Clinton they are critiquing the Democratic party

I am not feeling that way. I feel more that we are doing more of what others do not want us to do. To look under the hood of a car someone else thinks you should buy is only common sense.

Repeatedly, even at nausea people have come posting, and asking if you would want me to vote for Hillary Clinton then please continue in a debate about policies, past positions and future goals. It never happens, we are then asked to bow to the anointed one. You might try understand this concept, rather trying to trash us for pointing these kind of things out

[democrank]

45. Remember this?

Remember how critical DUers were of George W. Bush`s Republican supporters who blindly followed him no matter how bad things got?


Taking issue with Hillary`s NO WE CAN`T or her Iraq War vote is not trashing the Democratic Party, it`s disagreeing with specific positions on issues. The Democratic Party isn`t Hillary Clinton or Bill Clinton or Chelsea Clinton. It`s we, the people....including Bernie Sanders.

[livetohike]

47. He joined it for self promotion. No one has been listening to him for

the past 20+ years in Congress. He needs the Democratic Party. Hope voters remember how much he criticized the party and our Democratic President.

[cali]

54. So absurdly false.

Bernie Sanders has represented me for 25 years. I've attended town meetings/potlucks with him in my tiny town. I've met with him a couple of times in his Washington office. I've followed him closely. I have a good idea of who he is. Bernie was not jonesing to run for President. He never has. He ran because no other progressive did.

Furthermore, progressives have been listening to him for years. His filibuster against proposed tax cuts and his long standing willingness to forthrightly engage with the public made him well known and much admired by progressives, long before this.

[islandmkl]

63. Self-promotion?: apparently working...look at his crowds, the number of his supporters/contributors

...criticized the Party and 'our' Democratic President?...god freaking forbid that as a citizen, let alone a lifelong Democrat like myself, one of us cannot admit, and oh mercy! criticize, that Obama basically went corporate on us since 2010....

and the Party is so corporate/right-center in leadership that we are merely a version of RepbulicanLite™...

Bernie has only caucused with the Dems forever...screw the 'Party' apparatus...Bernie speaks to real Dems, you know, the true progressive/liberal wing the Party was built on...

[book_worm]

51. Some of his supporters on DU and elsewhere are not democrats but people

who in the past have voted for Nader & other third party candidates because they don't support either major party. Some of them helped elect George W. Bush by voting for Nader because Gore wasn't pure enough and some of them will vote third party again this year if Sanders isn't the nominee.

[Broward]

52. Aren't you one of the posters here that was trashing Hillary back in 2008?

[leftupnorth]

53. Maybe people are tired of spineless cowardice

Just sayin'

[hack89]

55. Bernie is a carpet bagger.

Can't explain his supporters.

[Boomer]

57. I'm paid my dues as a Dem

You can go scold someone else, because I've been a Democrat for 40 years. I've earned the right to criticize my own party, and the party has definitely earned that criticism.

Compared to the politics of my youth, Hillary Clinton would be a moderate Republican: fairly moderate to liberal on social issues while being a fiscal conservative that favored rights for big business. As for "war monger", her record speaks for itself. She wasn't the only Democrat that voted in favor of the grotesque Iraq war, but I hold them accountable too.

[beam me up scottie]

58. ^^^THIS^^^

[winter is coming]

76. +1. n/t

[LexVegas]

59. They trash minorities and women. Its disgusting. nt

[cali]

78. That is almost entirely false. Disgusting to see Hillary supporters make that false

claim. And so ironic.

[aikoaiko]

62. To help improve it. Is that really a mystery?

[frizzled]

64. Are you really saying Hillary ISN'T a war monger?

You're welcome to make a case for why she's still the best candidate, but denying what everyone knows is not the best way to do that.

[uponit7771]

65. True, why not run as an independent!?

[Rebkeh]

73. He joined it to restore

democracy, which the party is supposed to embody to begin with.

His joining the party says more about the party than it does about him.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

80. Some people have been working to keep the party from becoming republician for many years

I think it is more realistic to move the dems back left that the other team

[bowens43]

81. Nothing hypocritical about it, the Dem party has moved steadily to the right.

It's time that the entrenched, corporate ass kissing establishment politicians get the hell out of the way and let the party once again become the party of FDR and not the party of wall street.

Dont pretend to know what Bernie thinks and don't pretend that even matters to thos of us so disillusioned with the status quo. We , unlike many hillary supporters are not sheep , we do not blindly follow bernie or anyone else.

why did he join??? Because like it or not we have a two party system.

[frizzled]

85. I missed the McGovern nomination the first time, nice to see it repeated in close up

nt

[Jarqui]

87. I was trying to think of when the DNC has been worse or more corrupt

and I could recall a time.

I fought against Nixon who I couldn't stand as a chronic liar. And here I am in a position where I might have to support Hillary who I also regard as a chronic liar. If that comes to pass, I cannot support the GOP but it will not be a fun time for me. I'm supporting a candidate I do not believe in - which drives me around the bend. Particularly when the runner up is probably the most honest candidate I've ever encountered.

[workinclasszero]

91. If the Dem party is so terrible, why did Bernie so recently JOIN it?????????

Because he is an opportunist. Bernie has always been anti democratic party and proud of it.

But he realized his greatest ambition in life, to be president, was impossible as an independent socialist so tragically he was allowed to run as a democrat. A party he has always head in contempt.

Some quotes from Bernie about the democratic party:

“My own feeling is that the Democratic Party is ideologically bankrupt.”

“We have to ask ourselves, ‘Why should we work within the Democratic Party if we don’t agree with anything the Democratic Party says?’”

“I am not now, nor have I ever been, a liberal Democrat,” he said in a profile in New England Monthly.

..."he called the Democratic Party “ideologically bankrupt,” then added: “They have no ideology. Their ideology is opportunism.”

In an op-ed in the New York Times in January 1989, he called the Democratic and Republican parties “tweedle-dee” and “tweedle-dum,” both adhering in his estimation to an “ideology of greed and vulgarity.”

At the Socialist Scholars Conference in New York City in April 1990, he asked, “Why should we work within the Democratic Party … ?” He said at the gathering he was running for Congress that year again as an independent because it would be “hypocritical” of him to run as a Democrat considering the kinds of things he had said about the party.

Still, he stressed: “I am not a Democrat, period.”

Can Bernie Sanders Win the Love of a Party He Scorns?
The long, troubled history of Bernie Sanders and the 'ideologically bankrupt' party whose White House nod he now seeks.
By MICHAEL KRUSE and MANU RAJU 8/10/2015
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/bernie-sanders-2016-democrats-121181

So the reason so many Bernie backers trash the democratic party is their leader hates it as well but needed it to further his own personal ambitions IMO.

[immoderate]

113. Do you think the Republicans would be a better fit?

Explain.

--imm

[treestar]

160. Wow, he has a lot of nerve really

"vulgarity?"

[NurseJackie]

92. His apparent desire to have someone primary President Obama was too much for me.

I was stunned when I first learned about that. That told me all I needed to know about him. I was not impressed at all.

[morningfog]

100. We are lucky to have him try to correct the party's course.

You should be thankful.

[cantbeserious]

102. Interesting That HRC - And The Third Way, DLC Establishment - Has Trashed The People's Party

eom

[INdemo]

103. This is total BS

How about Hillary supporters calling Bernie Sanders a Communist and that he was not going to allow people to allow anyone to own personal property and it was allowed to stand.

Your post is total BS

[mcar]

106. K&R

[Logical]

109. FFS do you sound crazy.

[leveymg]

111. The Party left us, not the other way around. It was colonized by Rockefeller Republicans

which is what the Clinton machine really is. They trashed it, we're just screaming in horror.

[TransitJohn]

114. The Dem party has been selling us out for a long, long time

Why is that 'interesting'?

[Autumn]

116. After over 40 years a Democrat I left the party before Bernie. I rejoined for one reason, Bernie.

Win or lose, after our caucus I will leave the Democratic party again. For the last time.

[Empowerer]

119. So you're not really a Democrat. You are a Bernie cultist

[Autumn]

123. No I am a former Democrat who became disgusted with the party.

[Empowerer]

139. You are a non-Democrat who joined the Democratic Party for the sole purpose of supporting one man

You have no interest in the party, do not support what it stands for and have no desire to help the party in any way. You are in the party ONLY because of your devotion to one man, who also isn't a Democrat but joined the party in order to bolster his own political prospects.

Got it.

[Autumn]

140. I supported and voted and was a member of the Democratic party for over 40 years.

I left the party when they no longer had any interest in my needs and the needs of the people and you are correct, I do not support what the democratic party stands for any longer. I support Democrats who support the people. Got that?

[Empowerer]

143. I'm not talking about the past. I'm talking about now. And now, you are a non-Democrat who joined

the party for the sole purpose of voting for one man and have no interest in staying with the party or doing anything to support it and you do not intend to remain a member after you vote in the primary. Period.

Do you intend to vote in the General Election if Sanders is not running?

[Autumn]

146. As of now I am a registered democrat, after this primary I will be Unaffiliated. I have never

missed an election in my life. I have never voted for a republican and I don't intend to start now. My vote is my voice and I don't do loyalty oaths. Period.

[elana i am]

117. blue dog/third way/dlc DINOs trash the party.

i repeat, blue dog/third way/dlc DINOs trash the party.

[Larkspur]

118. Read Thomas Franks' book "Whats' the Matter with Kansa?"

The reason the Democratic Party has been neutered and in minority status is because the Clintons and the DLC have turned the Democratic party into a Republican-lite party. Under the Clintons, the Democratic Party basically abandoned the working class with the passage of a Republican originated free trade bill and other pro-Big MOney bills. In exchange, the Clintons and their allies feasted on Big Money donations to their campaigns and to their lifestyles.

[Ron Green]

120. SUCK OF THE DAY!

An early and solid winner! It's even got "I love Bernie, but..."

[Autumn]

124. Here's a Better question. Why are so many Democrats disgusted with the Democratic party

that they support this "outsider" Bernie Sanders over your lifelong democrat Hillary? Think about that.

[Kalidurga]

125. If the Dem party is so terrible...

The Democratic Party isn't terrible. It's just a couple of people in it I don't like, people that are like Hillary. Those that pretend to be helping, but really just uphold the status quo.

[asuhornets]

127. My thoughts exactly..n/t

[HassleCat]

128. I criticize the party

My gripe is that the party allowed people like the Clintons to push us away from traditional Democratic ideals, and cozy up to corporate interests that would donate money to help elect Democrats. Yes, this is a good strategy to help Democrats win elections, but Democrats must make serious compromises to keep that cash flowing in. And, for extra onus points, the strategy is not working. We are emulating many of the actions of the other party, and losing to them across the board. We are now the minority party at all levels of government. "We need to be more like them to defeat them," has not worked well for us, but we keep thrashing along, able to capture the presidency, but losing everything else. A Clinton victory will only help perpetuate this slow suicide.

[Ed Suspicious]

129. We were supporting the party before he joined. We were fed

up with it before he joined. Change was not coming from within the party. We seek to hire him from the outside to shake things up a little. If youbhave shitty management at work, and a new staff is brought in, do you cry because the new staff wasn't promoted from within or do you get to work trying to make things better under the leadership of the new management?

[dinkytron]

131. Ah, but do you love BERNIE more than you love CAPITAL letters and question marks?

But seriously, even if he disappeared tomorrow, he Bernie's already wiped the floor with Hillary and has woken this country up.

[riversedge]

133. NOPE

[Bjornsdotter]

134. I wish he never joined the Democratic Party

I wish he had stayed Independent and been on the GE ticket running against Clinton and Trump.

However he didn't and he will get my support.

[Autumn]

141. Tell you the truth I wish he had done that too. But Bernie does the right thing.

[cascadiance]

135. I think you're confused we're angry at the Corporatists who trashed this party with the Koch's DLC!

... and how it has made it far more ALIGNED with economic royalists rather than standing against them the way the REAL Democrat FDR had done and would do today in standing with someone like Bernie in doing so!

Bernie is in the Democratic Primary because the SYSTEM IS RIGGED against any third party competing and winning instead of being a spoiler. Not just Bernie, but NO ONE could run as a third party candidate and win in our currently *RIGGED* system!

And corporate oligarchs like the Kochs are LAUGHING at you when they've bought controlling elements of both parties and would be very happy if Hillary were to beat Bernie so they could continue to do so and keep economic royalists in charge of this country the way they have since they and the Clintons started the DLC so many years back.

Such hypocrisy and so more REALLY pathetic. If you don't like Bernie having run as a Democrat, then why don't you push to have instant runoff voting in place, to take away the chance that a third party in a race would "spoil" it. That way, if a real good third party can enter a race and not be bought by Corporate America since it would be a lot harder for them then to "buy the field", then we might have a decent candidate win on occasion. But those against IRV are more interested in protecting the interests of the powerful, rather than putting together an electoral system where a decent and not "bought" candidate could have a shot at winning.

If you don't like Bernie running in the primary to avoid the problems with our winner take all system rigged to reward those who are owned by the economic royalists, then TOO BAD! It's the way we restore real Democracy, and it is what will happen this year.

I bet Bernie loves the way Bernie told off the economic royalists as the preeminent Democrat of his day far more than Hillary does. Bernie is far more of a TRADITIONAL Democrat than Hillary is.

[nc4bo]

138. Many of us feel the Democratic Party trashed US first and have not been shy in stating that opinion.

So....for every finger pointing at Bernie crying Waaahhhhhhhh Waaaahhhhhh, 3 are pointing right back in the other direction and straight at the root of the corruption and hypocrisy.

[DonCoquixote]

142. several reasons people who ask this question pretend not to know

One, this nation is a two party system. Third Parties are effectively votes for the GOP, as Ralph Nader so deftly proved in 2000.
Two: The Democratic Party was the party that espoused government programs as shown by FDR, but Clinton led a revolution against those democratic ideals, gutting many of FDR's programs like Glass-Steagall. Bernie is helping the FDR Democrats take their party BACK!

[DisgustipatedinCA]

148. It's been my party for a long time, and I'll keep criticizing it as I see fit.

What kind of attempt at discourse is this?

[Gothmog]

150. Great post

[HassleCat]

151. War monger? Republican?

Those appear to be comments trashing Clinton, not the party. There are some comments trashing the party for following her third way plan and not promoting progressive ideas. Although I don't like the nasty tone of some of those comments, I agree with the substance of them.

[djean111]

153. Maybe you should spend some time asking Debbie Wasserman-Schultz why she supports her GOP buddies

over Democrats, and discourages progressives from running.

She is a symptom of how the Democratic Party has greasily slid to the Right, and I won't declare fealty to that. Has nothing to do with Bernie, really. Oh, and Bernie is more of what it means to be a Democrat than an awful lot of politicians who merely have a "D" after their name.

[longship]

154. Hint: Bernie has caucused with the Dems for decades.

So let us all give up the spin that he is not a Democrat.

[cheapdate]

155. Bernie Sanders himself, however, talks ideas and policies.

He draws contrasts without mud-slinging, which is one more reason I've always had great respect for him.

Journalists and interviewers are constantly trying to get Sanders to lower himself into the gutter and slander his opponents. He won't do it. Call it virtue. Call it integrity. He's got it.

His mud-slinging supporters do his campaign harm.

Same for the mud-slingers on Hillary's side.

[treestar]

157. And why did he caucus with them?

I know, being in GDP you sometimes think actual Republicans couldn't hate the Democrats more.

Of course you will get claims that Bernie is the "true" Democrat and the rest of us aren't really Democrats. Insulting, really.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

162. Because he's a (Gasp!!) Socialist paid by Russia or Beijing or Havana or something.

Whereas, the Clinton's are REAL Democrats and the $millions to prove it.