Green Party’s Stein Predicts DNC Will Sabotage Sanders, Try to Reabsorb Supporters

[Triana]

I am NOT advocating anyone vote Jill Stein or Green Party -- but you have to know they're likely right about this...DNC has done it before.

Physician Jill Stein, who is seeking the Green Party’s nomination for president in 2016, has called Bernie Sanders’ 2016 Democratic presidential campaign “wonderful” and stated that the Green Party “will not attack that campaign.”

However, she told RT on Saturday, “But unfortunately he is in a party that has a track record for basically sabotaging its rebels. It has done a good job of doing that in the past from Dennis Kucinich to Jesse Jackson to Howard Dean, whether they use a PR campaign like the ‘Dean’s scream’ to bring down the Dean candidacy. Also Jesse Jackson was sabotaged by a PR by the DNC. The Democratic Party has its ways of reigning people in if they try to rebel. The bottom line is that we are in political system in the U.S., which is funded by predatory banks and fossil fueled giants and war profiteers. So, we really need to reject that system, we say to reject the lesser evil so we can stand up and really fight for the greater good.”

. . .

In a Monday interview on New England Public Radio, Stein said, “What’s been happening in the Democratic Party is you’ll have a good candidate who will run, but then the candidate gets reabsorbed and the campaign becomes reabsorbed back into the Democratic Party. So it’s kind of a fake left while the party becomes more corporatist, more militarist, and continues to march to the right.”

She called the grassroots movement that Sanders has tapped into a “rebellion” that “can’t simply be passed on to Hillary Clinton.”

THE REST:

http://truthinmedia.com/jill-stein-predicts-dnc-sabotage-sanders-reabsorb-supporters/

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. The socialists called this months ago.

They were even scornful about Bernie 'sheepdogging' for Hillary back then, as he has promised to do if he does end up losing.

But an awful lot of Sanders supporters are behind his policies, not him personally. Ie, those votes are 'non-transferable' to any candidate that doesn't share those same policies.

[PonyUp]

18. Thank you! It's the policies, not the man. My vote won't follow Bernie if he stumps for Hillary.nt

[Baobab]

221. regardless which party wins, if its not Bernie, I see big problems ahead

Not coming from other people, coming from their own selves.

I have never seen an election where both parties front runners were SO very bad.

NO plan at all besides more of the same old.

same old.

And Bernie's plan they already took off the table decades ago, BUT DIDN'T TELL US!

So, WTF?

But what if they win? (For all intents and purposes lets consider HRC and the GOP candidate to be both the same.)

Then they have to deliver up the goods, the long postponed bounty promised from "progressive liberalisation".

Jobs! Not to us, to others!

-------------

Unrelated.. Back in the 20th century, before GATS, TiSA, WTO, RGFS, etc, they did things differently.

Anybody here ever read "Killing Hope" by William Blum?

Read it! There is no other book quite like it.

[Mbrow]

26. Nailed it

Thanks for that

[LWolf]

31. That's true.

It happens every time that issues voters don't transfer their votes, but perhaps not on the scale it will happen should HRC win this year.

[GreatGazoo]

59. In marketing it is called "bait and switch"

but Bernie is supposed to be more than the bait according to Team Clinton. He was supposed to be registering new voters (young voters since there has been no Dem primary for 8 years) that aren't excited enough about Hillary to register.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

65. Except, of course, that the DNC apparently has stopped doing college campus signup drives

specifically because they were afraid they'd just be creating a bunch of new Sanders voters.

[GreatGazoo]

71. which would mean they don't have much faith in the switchability of younger voters

[creatives4innovation]

99. Great point

[snowy owl]

188. God, that's disgustig. I guess we're all demorethuglicans.

[bettyellen]

203. registration drives are organized locally by campaigns, for fucks sake. always were.

shame a lot of people STILL don't know this.

[Baobab]

141. Democrats need to be in Geneva, to get public health care and education removed from

TiSA - "Carve Outs" as it were, or both will be subject to standstill and any new free public health care or education will forever be VERBOTEN!

The TiSA backroom deal, between 51 countries, is planned to be expanded to cover the entire WTO, soon, also it uses a "Negative List" and as such it forces "progressive liberalisation" of huge chunks of the public sector so discrimination by country can be eliminated by globalizing their procurement using a international e-tendering system. It will likely cause a race to the bottom on wages in services, 70% of all jobs.

That means some huge number of jobs will be used as poker chips in a global trading game, essentially.

Bernie Sanders entire platform would become impossible, especially economic stimulus by spending money (it would be statistically much more likely to be spent hiring people who made less because low bidder wins and contracting firms from other countries have much lower costs like wages) The entire New Deal type responses to an economic crisis would be made impossibe - because spending money would just give the lowest bidders work.. (It would also speed up automation!) Also, it frames public services as only "services supplied in the exercise of governmental authority" which it defines exclusively as those "supplied neither on a commercial basis, nor in competition with one or more service suppliers" so public schools are NOT protected from this massive change. Nor is health care, and additionally its market access requirements mandate that there be no impediments to foreign firms setting up shop or international trade in services, which means that sick people will likely be shipped overseas or cared for by foreign contractors in order to preserve the criminal health insurance which increases the cost of healthcare and staff for doctors and hospitals by some ungodly amount,prevents patients from seeing the doctor early when its cheap, and literally adds no value. So the real battle is in Geneva if we want a future, arguably its much more important because a President cannot change these things once they are signed, they give corporations these rights to stay here selling all their services, including health care and education, requiring that those services never be free and never be cheaper than them, forever.

[Dont call me Shirley]

173. This needs to be an OP, Baobob! I will Rec and Kick it!

[Baobab]

209. There is a really good book "Serving Whose Interests" by Jane Kelsey which is a history

of "Trade in services Agreements" (but its mostly pre-Tisa, it goes up to around 2008.) But there is just tons and tons of info in there. If you want some background on the history of them its the best place I know of to get that.


IMO, Jane Kelsey is one of the top experts on services agreements in the world. She is a professor of international law in New Zealand.

[bjobotts]

238. Nonsense. We have done it on a smaller scale and we can do it now. We'e richest nation

[Baobab]

213. Bernie has been an outspoken opponent of 95% of bad policy

and his silence on some other things is explainable - he's a Senator which is different than a House member. Very different.

I'm just glad he's there.

They must be spending an AWFUL lot on consultants, you can really see the spin activity, its everywhere.

[GreatGazoo]

214. Nothing opens peoples' minds as much as seeing that one example that shows what IS possible.

I hope in the years to come that more Bernie Sanderses emerge. If anything good can come out of the circus that is the 2016 elections, let it be more people of integrity getting on every ballot in this country.

[Baobab]

219. Bernie really grows on you.

He sees the possibilities..

[Baobab]

264. We would have to leave the WTO and dump all the other trade deals to have a government

That could actually do things again.

And that would require paying each corporation for their property, which would be the total worth of everything in the world many times over. How is tat happening.

ALARM BELL: Something makes no sense!

We should cut their pay since they will essentially be paid to come in and do nothing, we could get unemployed actors to do that for free.

[snowy owl]

187. Absolutely and thank you!

I voted Stein four years ago and will again. But it could have been Bernie.

[anigbrowl]

224. So did I, and I'm a Clinton supporter

It goes like this every election cycle (albeit much less so when there's an incumbent). Yeah, some people won't transfer their vote to Clinton but they were probably not going to vote anyway before Sanders came into the race, so it tends to net out to zero effect. This kind of thing isn't news to anyone who has paid attention to more than a few election cycles; if it is news to you, then what you missed was the fact that Bernie (like many other stalking horses in previous cycles) hadn't built a strong coalition within Congress and various state legislatures. When a lone revolutionary candidate comes out of nowhere, the first thing to ask yourself is just how one bold outsider is supposed to change everything. That happens plenty in movies, but in the real world victory goes to the people with an existing network which they've invested time and effort to build.

That's why most of Sanders' base is people under 30; older generations have seen all this before and it was immediately obvious to them that Bernie was too short on political alliances to have a good chance of success over the longer term. 'People power' hardly ever wins because people tend to be disorganized and a bit lazy. If you look at the history of successful revolutions you see that the engineers of same were tightly organized and played the populists like a fiddle; the Russian revolution is especially instructive in this regard, with the Communists leading the various workers' Soviets around by the nose.

Now, if Sanders was a younger man, he could build on his success (and I think his campaign has been very successful, and I admire that) by running another campaign in 4 years, but at age 73 that's almost certainly not going to happen. So whoever wins in November, next time there will be someone else to run as a political outsider and get young people interested and keep some of them in the fold afterwards. Smarter politicians plan much farther ahead; Former San Francisco Mayor and Lieutenant Governor of California Gavin Newsom is beginning his run for governor in 2018 now, even though the election is nearly 2 years away.

[Maedhros]

228. "too short on political alliances to have a chance of success" is self-fulfilling prophecy.

It's one thing to recognize that the establishment string-pullers have their own agenda that's at odds with progressive governance, but it's another to accede to their agenda.

[anigbrowl]

230. Nope. Those are things you put in place before you announce your candidacy.

Progressive purity tests are the left-wing equivalent of abstinence-only sex education. There is nothing impressive or noble about being a party of one and blaming your isolation on 'the establishment' at every opportunity. If you can't build coalitions to get elected, you're not going to get any legislation passed.

I remain perplexed at why Sanders supporters think the GOP in Congress and various state legislatures and governor's mansions would suddenly become accommodating of a President Sanders' agenda, given their demonstrated hostility to President Obama's.

[Maedhros]

235. The establishment is what got us into the mess we're in.

Wealth inequality worse than that of the Gilded Age. Never-ending war. Blanket surveillance. Indefinite detention. Executions with no due process. Wall Street wrecking the economy regularly.

Your "progressive purity test" quip is truly insulting, and not worth rebuttal. You either want to change things for the better, or you are settling for the status quo. I know which side you're on, and it ain't mine. That kind of mindset is what I'm fighting.

How many progressive ideals should be abandoned this election cycle? How many more should we abandon in 2020? What about in 2024? How does that get us closer to our goals?

[bjobotts]

239. We will retake the senate.Things won';t be the same as now.We will take down corporate welfare

Medicare operates on 3% overhead and is already in place, we just need to expand it. The people will come forward like they did for the "public option" and ending the Bush tax cuts. We will have a veto proof majority in the senate and I want to move forward with bold plans not incremental steps. It took over 100 years to get a health care plan past the congress and there were no incremental steps...we just did it...when we had a veto proof majority in the senate. Repubs will obstruct every dem given the chance but bigots and racists just add to their numbers. Best to be bold with a populist agenda and Bernie stands for everything the majority of Americans (according to the polls) say they want. Bernie may not have put his name of it but he got more amendments and legislation passed and was ranked #1 in getting things done in the House. Ask other members and they will tell you many times Bernie said "here are some good amendments or legislation that the GOP will go for but not if it comes from a dem so put your name on it and maybe we can get it passed". So says the author of "Side Swiped".
Saying it won't work or we just can't get it done...makes iot so easy for dems to moan because it requires nothing of you today.

[That Guy 888]

244. How about rw anti-abortion purity tests? That purity test is going nowhere, right?

I see right-wingers not giving up on their ignorant and destructive agendas, and getting them. Meanwhile our republican light New Democrats play false equivalency with policies that would work for everyone, while fighting tooth-and-nail to get what the 1%, industry and Wall Street wants.

[artyteacher]

2. the greens are the saboteurs. ...

After all Nader gave us Bush and the death of a million or so Iraqis is on Green party heads. Hey, Sanders could be said to be the new Nader.

[Art_from_Ark]

10. Nader didn't give us Bush

Bush's brother and the rest of the corrupt Florida political establishment, as well as Cheney's now deceased hunting buddy on the Supreme Court and his 4 collaborators, as well as a gutless Democratic establishment that wouldn't stand up for Gore in the Senate, are the ones who gave us Bush.

[hobbit709]

15. +1 million.

I'm ready to puke every time I hear that bullshit about Nader.
I didn't vote for him and I was disgusted by the events at the time but I never blamed Nader. I blamed the Party leadership for having no guts.

[lame54]

202. +2 million

[Rosa Luxemburg]

212. Didn't Scalia give us Bush?

[Mendocino]

217. They stole the election

and managed to pin the blame on Nader, leading to further division in the left. A classic Karl Rove twofer.

[noiretextatique]

253. Hell yes...and the rest of the Felonius Five

Even with the 200k demoblicans who voted for Bush in Florida, Gore would have won...if the recount was not stopped.

[bigwillq]

25. ....

[Adrahil]

40. Tell yourself that.

If Nader voters had voted for Gore, there would have been no opportunity for such shenanigans.

[Fuddnik]

61. If the current head of the Florida Democratic Party hadn't helped Jeb Bush purge the rolls.

Along with Katherine Harris, there would have been approx. 80,000 more likely democratic voters in that election. I wouldn't have even been close. She was employed by ChoicePoint, who submitted the purge lists.

And if her husband, who was the lead counsel on the Bush side of Bush v Gore, hadn't stopped the recount, with a treasonous Scalia court ruling, Gore would have been President.

Stop smearing one of the greatest Americans of the 20th century, Ralph Nader.

That's the problem. The party is filled with Republicans, who sabotage every progressive who comes along.

And, just for the record, I voted Gore.

[artislife]

122. Learned something new, thanks

This election has been about pulling back the curtain for me. I do not like the machine that has been running the Democratic Party.

[Hydra]

216. There were some really good posts here on DU during the Bush Admin

Where some of the oldies like Octa and others posted all about the Bush Admin crimes including the FL theft. The who, when, where, why and how it all went down.

Back in the day this was a hotbed of rebellion and investigating. If you weren't lurking then, I'm sorry you missed it.

[BeanMusical]

147. Very good post. +1

[Dont call me Shirley]

176. Much applause for your post, Fuddnik!

[HereSince1628]

66. Rationalizations, not answers, are hiding in the elementary arithimetic

You can dance all you want with re-attributing percents within the vote, but if you're really interested in why a group voted the way they did, shuffling the fractions of the election turnout won't reveal -why- the voters weren't drawn to vote for the Gore/Lieberman ticket.

An effort that might yield a more revealing answer is to dig into a real question: Why wouldn't a Green leaning voter vote for a ticket that was composed of one former chair of the DLC and his DLC but soon-to-be-republican running mate?

Blaming the Greens who voted for Nader makes no more sense than blaming republican voters. Neither group voted for Gore/Lieberman, and the dems lost -a lot- more republican votes than Green votes.

Of course blaming 'others' through 'if only' fantasies is facile, and holds little risk of a discomforting result than a serious self-examination.

[Perogie]

81. You might want to rethink that

"Twelve percent of Florida Democrats (over 200,000) voted for Republican George Bush"
-San Francisco Chronicle, Nov. 9, 2000

Nader only got 97,488 votes in Florida. Blame the democrats that voted for Bush.

Those are the facts not an opinion. Gore lost democrats to Bush.

[DhhD]

101. So its gets easier to leave the Presidential Box empty on the ballot and vote all D down ticket.

Sanders better not give my campaign donations to the DNC/Hillary Clinton.

[noiretextatique]

254. The Nader-haters give them a pass

They just prefer to blame the left, not the right. It fits better with their narrative.

[TM99]

116. If 200,000 Democrats had not voted for Bush in FL

is what you mean to say because those are the facts.

Only 90,000 voters went for Nader in total.

It was the conserva-Dems in FL that allowed it to be close enough to steal.

[FighttheFuture]

160. Well, not exactly... let's face it, Jeb! stealing the election for Big Bro that did it. Stolen is

Last edited Tue Mar 1, 2016, 04:47 PM - Edit history (1)

the only correct way to call 2000. You can say this and that, and gnash what-ifs all day long. The bottom line is 2000 was stolen. And when Jeb! could not quite pull it out concisely, they had to go to their buddies on the Supine Court, led by Scalia (may that fucker burn in hell).

Also, add on that they spent 8 years hunting Clinton, so Gore ended up distancing himself from him (stupid) and Gore, a good guy, but kinda a dope too, went with the DLC line. Remember his VP pick? LIEberman (barf).

Still here I am gnashing my teeth. It was stolen is the real reason, and the Establishment Dems have done jack shit to correct this electioneering by the R's. Just as the R's have Trump, the Conserva-Dems have elections where they should be cleaning the floor with these assclowns, but instead are in the minority and nothing is a sure thing!

[TM99]

167. Well, you don't have to yada yada me.

Yes, it was stolen. Period. And yes, it was the establishment that put forth a poor campaign, put forth a shit VP choice, and bailed on fighting very early and easily.

[FighttheFuture]

185. sorry... not intending any disrespect! Modified the post.

[TM99]

186. Tensions are high today

so it is ok.

[Perogie]

174. pretty sure I said it correctly

200,000 democrats voted for Bush so Nader is not to blame for Gore losing

[TM99]

175. I never responded to you but another poster.

It is all good but we agree.

[progressoid]

191. Bullshit. Maybe if thousands of Democrats in Florida hadn't voted for Bush...

According to exit polls (available at ABC), 13% of Florida Democrats voted for Bush -- that's more than 150,000 -- while only 8% of Republicans voted for Gore. Almost equal numbers of Democrats and Republicans voted for Nader.



http://rosenlake.net/er/green/goreloss.html

[lame54]

204. if gore ran a better campaign...

if choice point didn't purge the voting roster

If katherine harris didn't cheat

if the supreme court didn't make a corrupt ruling

etc. etc.

to pin it on nader who ran a legal campaign is bull - let's get past this

[Fuddnik]

63. see post #61 below.

It's only gotten worse since then. The foxes bought the henhouse.

[Art_from_Ark]

88. It's amazing how everyone who seems to blame Nader for 2000

seem to completely overlook the blatant corruption that was involved on the Republican side in Florida, including having the governor of the key state being the brother of one of the candidates, and his campaign co-chair being in charge of counting the votes, for crying out loud. And if that weren't enough, three of the "justices" who were on the US Supreme Court at the time (Scalia, Thomas, O'Connor) had all been appointed to the court when the plaintiff's father was vice president! And the "justice" who agreed to take the case was a hunting buddy of one of the men who would directly benefit from his decision.

If that had been in ANY OTHER COUNTRY, Americans would have cried "foul!" But since it happened in the good ol' USA, it had to be on the up-and-up, since "those things just don't happen in America"

[BreakfastClub]

95. I partially agree. Yes, Bush stole the election, but Nader made it much easier. nt

[Fuddnik]

114. Nader didn't do jack shit.

Hanging chads, confusing butterfly ballots 80,000 probable dems purged, Republican recount riot in Miami.

The butterfly ballot was so confusing, Pat Buchanan, a damn near neo-nazi, won a majority Jewish district. By thousands of votes by people who thought they were voting for Gore. A flood of overseas military ballots, without postmarks, that arrived late, and never should have been counted.

Election lost by 538 votes. Yep, gotta be all Naders fault.

[KoKo]

135. And, remember what Pat Buchanan said about his votes in FLA?

He said he got more votes in Florida than anywhere else. He questioned those votes he got because he felt they were due to the punch card system. With his ego that was a lot of truth to admit.

Yet, low information voters and those to young to have been able to follow "Stolen Election 2000" have been propagandized to believe it was Ralph Nader who put Bush in. And, remember the "Supremes" stopped the FlA recount and the NYT's independent review never was published because "9/11" happened and everyone just moved on.

Thanks for your replies here calling attention to the lies about Nader!

[noiretextatique]

256. No...purging 80k eligible voters made it easier

Or have you forgitten about that?

[Mufaddal]

125. Yeah, it's easier to blame Nader than admit your candidate's campaign was stillborn

The liberal Nader-blaming against the left after 2000 was pathetic. It's wasn't Nader's job to drop out or encourage people to vote Dem, it was the Dems' job to put forward a strong platform to win people's votes. They failed by continuing to pursue the status quo (just as Hillary is doing now).

Incidentally, I will say the same for O'Malley in Iowa: If he had dropped out a day earlier, would Bernie have won (albeit by the same razor-thin margin that Clinton did)? Yeah, probably. Does that mean it was O'Malley's fault Bernie lost? No.

All of this could be solved with instant runoff voting, by the way, but the two parties (and I say two in a very generous way) need to maintain their stranglehold on American political life, so it won't be happening anytime soon.

[noiretextatique]

255. It is disgusting really

They don't give a damn about purged voters or SCOTUS. The goal us to blame the left.

[RoccoR5955]

87. Thank you for that

Apparently, people still are unaware that it was Jeb, Cheney, and the Supremes Court that put Shrub in office, NOT Nader.

[mmonk]

131. +1

[Triana]

155. +1 n/t

[Duppers]

179. Thank you! +100

my friend.

[rhett o rick]

241. Don't forget Sandy O'Conner's sell out. The fix was in. May they all rot in hell. nm

[blackspade]

13. Bull-fucking-shit.

This is not even close to the facts of history.
SCOTUS gave us Bush. They stopped the recount that would have given the election to Gore.
I am so sick of this ahistorical smear of the Green Party.

[FighttheFuture]

161. Exactly! Jeb! could not steal it definitively enough (not for lack of trying) so

it was sent to the Supine Court. 2000 was stolen!!!

[AlbertCat]

205. Jeb! could not steal it definitively enough

Exactly!

Even with Jeb's purge and lots of conserve-dems voting for Bush.... they STILL couldn't get it right so...PLAN B- bring in the Supremes!

[noiretextatique]

258. +1000 the goal of democrats against democracy

Is to blame the left.

[KitSileya]

14. No, I think they are the Igor to the republican's Frankenstein.

It is clearly the Republicans who are to blame primarily, but the Naderites are guilty of not wanting to see the whole picture they were contributing to. They knew that the consequence of their choice - they knew a vote for Nader was a vote for Bush, after all, they had the example of Perot 8 years earlier. But the republicans bear the main fault of the Iraq war.

[BlueMTexpat]

69. +1! eom

[zalinda]

166. And Perot gave us Bill Clinton. eom

[KitSileya]

168. Yes, so they knew how advantageous third party candidates are

For the other party. They had seen the advantage Perot gave the Democrats, so they damn well knew the danger for Gore. But purity, purity, purity. So they were the ones who stood by and held Bush's coat while he wrecked the Middle East, the economy, civil rights, the environment... Too many to note. In a first-past-the-post you cannot vote third party if you don't want the party on the other side to gain from it.


In this election, only people who are so privileged they won't suffer for it (read, they are white, straight, cis, middle class) or are purely malicious will not vote against the Republican candidate. It doesn't matter if it is Trump or Rubio or Cruz, their policies are essentially the same. They will hurt minorities, immigrants, women, LGBT folks, African Americans, people with disabilities. In so doing, they will make the US a shitty place to live for white men and post-menopausal women too. So I side-eye people that say they won't vote for the Democratic nominee if it's not their candidate so hard I hope they get banned.

[zalinda]

234. It's not Democrats that you have to worry about

but the Independents, who will not vote for Hillary and they are 47% of the electorate.

Z

[A Simple Game]

16. Why do people keep repeating a Republican meme on a Democratic board?

Please learn the truth about what happened. Nader stole nothing, Gore won. Bush stole the election (Florida) with the help of the Supreme Court.

[artyteacher]

28. Nader helped Bush...

And he could have campaigned for the Dems and Gore instead of popping up every four years to hurt the side that's closer to his views.

[A Simple Game]

44. Gore's poorly run campaign gave Bush more votes than Nader ever could have.

If you just want to complain fine but if you seek a solution to prevent this happening again then educate yourself as to what actually happened. Then you will have a chance to know what may be able to stop a repeat in the future.

Nader obviously thought he would be a better choice than Bush or Gore. What would you do, stop qualified people from running for President unless you approved of their candidacy? If so then why didn't you want to stop Bush and be done with it. Nader was obviously a better choice than Bush so why blame Nader? Or perhaps you agree with the Republicans and want to limit who can vote?

No I did not vote for Nader, but I would never advocate he not be able to run for the job or that people not be allowed to vote for him if they thought he was the best qualified for the job.

How people qualify to run for President is settled, you don't have to like the qualifications, which admittedly are set very low, but you have to live with them. When you complain about Nader running you are complaining about democracy, yes it is that simple.

[artyteacher]

46. Doesn't excuse Nader or the Greens ... sorry eom

[A Simple Game]

54. Then maybe you could start a petition to ban third parties or something. Maybe make it illegal

to vote for a third party candidate. Or you could write and publish an essay on how your brand of democracy would be better than the one we presently have.

You could stop using Republican memes and tell us your solution to prevent what you feel is a major problem in our electoral system.

But remember, Republicans want you to blame Nader because that ignores the real problem insuring that it won't be fixed.

[LiberalLovinLug]

218. I'll humor your conspiracy theory.

What if Nader tipped the balance? If the Democratic party was too corporate puppet back then, especially the choices in the D candidates in Florida, who were basically DINOs, maybe they should have looked inward? Ask themselves why they had lost the progressive, green voter to Nader? Maybe realize that the Dem voter, and even in general Americans are not as conservative right wing as the MSM and the Washington bubble assures them they are.

And so even if you are correct, what have they done since? Doubled down on supporting corporate-shilling DINOs. How'd that go for them in 2014?

Maybe Debbie and the whole lot should wake the fuck up! The Republicans will never be co-opted (again) Clever Bill managed to out wit, out last, and out Republican them. Now, they have learned, and will simply move the whole circus further to the right into crazy land rather than allow a Democratic President, or those who are running under the same banner, to be "better" Republicans than they are, spawning clowns like Trump to run.

Instead of blaming Nader. (You are actually blaming the disenfranchised D voter), the Democratic party would be best served to listen to its base and absorb those disenfranchised Green party supporters. Which is what would happen based on this article by the Green party leader if Sander were nominated.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

107. If the Democrats want the votes of the left they should pursue leftist policies.

Instead of whining about voters on the left who vote for leftist policies.

[artislife]

124. You mean to add that moves to further away to the right with each passing year. nt

[rhett o rick]

242. 158 million people didn't vote for Gore and you want to blame Nader. Blame the hubris of the DLC

that didn't care that the nation was sick of the crap that the DLC/Clinton/Gore brought us. You want to beat the Republicons, nominate a progressive.

[noiretextatique]

259. 80k voters purged in Florida helped Bush

But your insistence of blaming the left, not the actual rw culprits, is duly noted.

[sellitman]

64. Fuck Nader

Rewriting won't change history. He equivocated that Gore was no better than Bush. He was as wrong as anyone who ever lived.

Fuck him.

Without him Gore wins. Period.

[A Simple Game]

70. Excellent reply and it keeps life simpler and easier to ignore what is a complicated scenario. n/t

[Tanuki]

74. Thank you! And imagine how much less damage there would have been to the environment

if the author of "An Inconvenient Truth" had been in office for 8 years instead of GWBush. Ralph, perhaps inadvertently, set progress back catastrophically by his insistence on ideological purity, and it seems as if Jill Stein and her fans are poised to perpetrate more of the same in the event that Clinton is the nominee. Another Green Party spoiler...the GOP must be salivating over the prospect.

[sellitman]

98. Betcha some of these purity trolls are placed

If not they are nieve and thinking with the wrong organ.

[Perogie]

77. Live and learn

"Twelve percent of Florida Democrats (over 200,000) voted for Republican George Bush"
-San Francisco Chronicle, Nov. 9, 2000

Nader only got 97,488 votes in Florida. Blame the democrats that voted for Bush.

Those are the facts not an opinion. Gore lost democrats to Bush.

[NewJeffCT]

112. How many of those "Democrats"

were holdovers from the days when George Wallace was a fellow southern Democrat and just never bothered to change their party affiliation?

With just about every presidential election since LBJ, the Republican nominee gets a higher percentage of registered Republicans in the South than the Democratic nominee does of Democrats for those reasons.

[Perogie]

177. speculation

Do you have any evidence that is the case or maybe they didn't want to vote for Gore. A lot of Dems voted for Reagan.

[PDittie]

103. Urban legend.

http://brainsandeggs.blogspot.com/2012/09/of-urban-legends-and-2000-election.html

If you don't believe me ... would you believe Jim Hightower?

http://www.salon.com/2000/11/28/hightower/

Maybe those 308,000 registered FL Democrats who voted for W in 2000 -- 191,000 of whom described themselves as 'liberal' -- just didn't get Barbra Streisand's memo about the Supreme Court.

http://barbra-archives.com/live/00s/nomination_concert_2000.html

Does repeating the same mistakes in 2016 (i.e. beating progressives with a SCOTUS cudgel onto the Clinton bandwagon) sounds like the defintion of insanity to you? Because it sure does to me.

[TM99]

119. But it is y'all that are rewriting history.

200,000 Democratic voters went for Bush. The rest was about election fraud, theft, and a SCOTUS acting in a partisan manner. Period.

Nader was right then, and that truth is accurate today.

We have a singular corporate party with two heads. Now the heads spew a few differences but when push comes to shove a warmed over 1990's health insurance mandate plan from the right suddenly transforms into a 'liberal' health insurance mandate plan from the left. Yup, big differences there.

[noiretextatique]

260. +1000

These folks are pissed at the temerity of the left...that is all. They are pissed that Nader ran, and they are pissed that people voted for him. They are so pissed that he called out the DLC/3rd way DINOs.

[TM99]

261. They are pissed at the truth.

When you have a candidate whose entire public life has been one lie and pander and flip flop after another, I am sure they are quite sensitive to the truth.

[noiretextatique]

262. I've noticed that...

It must be tough to defend the indefensible

[TM99]

263. Well, it would take more mental

energy than I would ever want to expend.

[lapfog_1]

76. all true

however, it has been my contention for years now (more than 16) that the Repukes can only steal an election if it was "close" to begin with. If the Democrats win by 5 points or more, no number of election stealing shenanigans can affect the result enough to allow for the theft (exit polls and news coverage being what it is).

This could be changing now... with the rise of fascists and corporate owned media.

But Nader on the ballot and many in the Green party saying that Gore would be the same as Bush... that made it close. And close is all they needed to allow the theft.

[senz]

142. Yes, the final recount showed that Gore won.

Not just the popular vote, but Florida itself, which means he won the election.

I wish he would have fought to the end.

It looks like Bernie will fight to the end because he understands that this isn't about him, it's about us.

[FreedomRain]

20. Green party is generally anti-war you know

the bodies and the rubble etc. creates a lot of hazardous waste.

about half of US voters (with special mention of US Supreme Court Justice Scalia and Florida secretary of state Katherine Harris) gave us Bush.

I'm not a big fan of Nader but that is ridiculous

[artyteacher]

29. hard to claim that when they help the pro war GOP. eom

[Tanuki]

78. And the GOP helps the Green Party! Over and over again, they have financed Greens

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/img-src-images-santorum1-jpg-hspace-5-vspace-5-align-left-gop-donors-funded-entire-pa-green-party-drive

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/ralph-nader-was-indispens_b_4235065.html

[Mbrow]

32. Sorry go look at the facts again.

What Gave us shrub was voter suppression, and a political supreme count amount others things. But even so what really gave us Shrub was the DNC constant move to the right which was facilitated by Clinton. The DNC has betrayed us a long time ago.

[HooptieWagon]

43. 13% of Democrats voted for Bush.

...and it wasn't The Left.

[artislife]

129. Yep. nt

[nyabingi]

47. Wasn't Nader's fault that the Democrats

keep picking right-leaning corporate hacks as their presidential nominee.

The right-leaning Democrats have been making this mistake since the Clintons and have still not grasped the fact that they are alienating a large chunk of the Democratic electorate.

[ejbr]

62. One could also argue

that it was the Gore voters, of which I am one, who gave us Bush by not voting for Nader. Tough pill for the status quo, I know.

[gordyfl]

67. And Did Nader Give Us a Bush Second Term?

2000 & 2004 Dems were losers.

[lapfog_1]

80. 9/11 and fear gave us "4 more years" - n/t

[NWCorona]

75. People need to retire that kind thinking

[liberal_at_heart]

79. Like it or not there are more than two parties in this DEMOCRACY.

The two parties are corrupt and the people need a third party to both hold the two parties accountable and to have a third option when the two parties refuse to be held accountable. This country is a democracy and we have more than two parties. Deal with it.

[Gene Debs]

90. That bullshit again? Ignore list for you.

[CrispyQ]

91. Oh good fucking grief.

Proudly changing my affiliation back to Green after caucus tonight.

[pinebox]

102. Gore was his own worst enemy

A shitty candidate with a cardboard box who couldn't even win his home state. Don't whine about Nader, go yell at the DNC for shoving a guy with no personality down everyone's throats

[DAMANgoldberg]

158. Agree 100%

Gore was less charismatic than Clinton and couldn't carry Tennessee, where the family name is synonymous with state politics. That fact would have made Florida irrelevant to the conversation.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

105. Which Green Party senators voted for the wars?

[artislife]

121. We got Bill because of Perot. nt

[Kall]

151. The death of a million or so Iraqis

is on the heads of the Republicans for proposing it and the Democrats that enabled it. Know of any?

[Turn CO Blue]

159. The butterfly ballot cost Gore at least 2800 votes, possibly 3200

Why does everyone forget the host of factors that election -- the butterfly ballot being a major one?

The voter rolls were purged. That cost Gore tens of thousands of votes.

The Republicans STOLE that election, planned for months to steal that election, and used a large bag of dirty tricks. That is the proper frame.

I criticize Nader too, but I fail to see how getting off the foundational lesson from that whole episode helps with our fight for peoples' franchise - the right to vote and for it to be counted now or in the future.

[Enthusiast]

165. We have heard your talking point a million times. That doesn't make it true.

We watched what unfolded in Florida where they illegally purged thousands of black men from the voter rolls.

[pangaia]

181. If you teach art, you should know better than that.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

193. What about all the Jewish people that voted for anti-semitic Buchanon?

The whole thing was rigged in Florida. And the SCOTUS still had to come to Georgie's rescue.

[mrdmk]

200. That is the short story. The longer story is it was the death of a thousand cuts!

A longer story is Al Gore, Jr. ran a crappy campaign. Gore even admitted to it:


<snip from the middle of the story>

Gore couldn't believe his eyes when he read distortions about him printed in the country's most respected newspapers, say those in his inner circle. "It stung to have the political media, the elite political media, buy into this crap," says Roy Neel, his close friend and adviser of 30 years, about the press coverage. "But I don't recall him ever blaming the media for the problems he was having."

Indeed, Gore accepts responsibility for not being able to communicate more clearly with the public. He admits, however, that the tendency of the press to twist his words encumbered his ability to speak freely. "I tried not to let it [affect my behavior]," Gore says. "But if you know that day after day the filter is going to be so distorted, inevitably that has an impact on the kinds of messages that you try and force through the filter. Anything that involves subtlety or involves trusting the reporters in their good sense and sense of fairness in interpretation, you're just not going to take a risk with something that could be easily distorted and used against you.… You're reduced to saying, 'Today, here's the message: reduce pollution,' and not necessarily by XYZ out of fear that it will be, well, 'Today he talked about belching cows!'"

link: http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2007/10/gore200710



According to Gore, bringing up the Internet again in public was like stepping on a verbal land mine. "If I had tried in the wake of that to put expressions about the Internet in campaign speeches, it would have been difficult," he says. "I did, of course, from time to time. But I remember many occasions where I would say something about the Internet, and as soon as the word 'Internet' came from my lips, the press would be snickering and relishing the mention. Not everybody in the press, but the Zeitgeist was polluted, and it never dissipated, because the stream of pollution coming into it was constant, constant."

The notion that he was prickly or unpleasant to reporters doesn't jibe with what Tipper witnessed. From her viewpoint, he remained gracious with the reporters—even at an event during the campaign, when Maureen Dowd sidled up in the middle of a conversation he was having with two other reporters. "He stood up and got her a chair and said, 'Please, join us.'" After Dowd had written about him "lactating," he agreed to an interview with her, answering questions about his favorite this, his favorite that. According to his staffers, she was a fact of life that would have to be endured.

The Gores, a famously close-knit family, could laugh at the coverage some. They joked around at the nonstop talk about which president you'd want to have a beer with. The Gore's middle daughter, Kristin, pointed out, "Gee, I want the designated driver as my president." But down deep they weren't laughing. "The sighs, the sighs, the sighs," says Gore, of the debate coverage. "Within 18 hours, they had turned perception around to where the entire story was about me sighing. And that's scary. That's scary."

[Raster]

220. NADER DID NOT GIVE US BUSH*!!!

Bullshit!!! What about the tens of thousands of lawful, legal voters removed from the Florida voter roles by Jeb Bush and Katherine Harris that specifically targeted Democratic-leaning minority precincts. You don't think they had anything to do with the Florida electoral debacle?

What about Florida Secretary of State, Katherine Harris, Co-Chairperson for the Committee to Elect Bush*/Cheney* in Florida, running the statewide campaign to elect Bush* from her Secretary of State Tallahassee office, and time and time again ruling every electoral nuance in Cheney*/Bush* favor... You don't think she had anything to do with the Florida electoral debacle?

What about the outright voter intimidation in Democratic Black and Hispanic precincts on election day by Florida State Police, encouraging minorities to "move along"... You don't think they had anything to with the Florida electoral debacle?

What about the notorious butterfly ballot - conceived by a Democrat-for-a-day County Clerk that allowed for over 3000 votes for rabid anti-semite Pat Buchanan in a predominately, elderly JEWISH precinct. Even Buchanan admitted there was most likely a mistake. You don't think that had anything to do with the Florida electoral debacle?

What about the notorious black box voting machines - manufactured by two staunchly republican-owned interests - that were designed to be non-paper trail verifiable, whose "secret operating code" was unavailable for neutral third-party inspection, that were actually witnessed by impartial observers over and over again switching votes from Albert Gore to George fucking Bush*... You don't think that had anything to do with the Florida election debacle?

And what do you think about the usually accurate as hell Exit Polls that showed Albert Gore handily beating George Bush? You don't think there was any problem there?

So seriously, you want to throw Florida 2000 at the feet of Ralph Nader?

Everytime you or anyone else repeat the patently false and uberly dishonest bullshit meme that Florida 2000 was Nader's fault, you basically do the evil scumbag's work for them. You think long and hard about that.

[TransitJohn]

243. Good fucking hell

The SCOTUS gave us Bush*.

[That Guy 888]

245. Nah that would be New Democrats, pining for "Republicans We Can Work With"

DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz joins hands with GOP in assault on Elizabeth Warren’s consumer protection agency

http://www.salon.com/2016/03/01/dnc_chair_debbie_wasserman_schultz_joins_hands_with_gop_in_assault_on_elizabeth_warrens_consumer_protection_agency/

[4dsc]

3. Spot on

No matter how much lipstick you put on the Hillary campaign it's still run the DNC. And we all know they don't represent the average joe that's supporting Bernie.

[firebrand80]

4. I appreciate her unbiased analysis nt

[VulgarPoet]

5. Spot on. nt

[mmonk]

6. Yep. Bad strategy.

[Doctor_J]

7. They won't be absorbing me

[Le Taz Hot]

11. Me neither.

They had a chance to do the right thing and throw their support behind Bernie from the beginning. Screw 'em.

[MissDeeds]

73. Me either n/t

[liberal_at_heart]

83. me either. I am now an Independent. I am no longer a Democrat. If a Democrat wants my

vote they will have to earn it.

[Svafa]

118. Every day I'm finding it harder and harder to

imagine myself holding my nose this time around.

[TheUndecider]

146. I'm with you!

IF she were the nominee and If the GE were today I'd probably vote Hillary, however I'm less sure of that today than yesterday! However today is not that day and I'm going to caucus for Bernie today!

"Rock Out with your caucus out" - some Bernie Bro

[CoffeeCat]

8. Thoughts

I agree with Stein's analysis about what the DNC thinks that it is going to do.

They may be able to bring down a campaign or a person. Any idiot could do that when you have the media in your pocket. They're not that clever.

What amazes me, is that the DNC doesn't realize that a considerable number of Sanders supporters will never be "absorbed", as Stein said. That is not happening this year.

I started an online chat with several Sanders campaign workers from Iowa. They're from all over the country. There's 20 of us in it, and NOT ONE will be voting for Clinton. Not one. That could change, but the resistance is real. This is not Obama v Clinton with a few differences between the candidates. This is establishment corruption v the base of the party.

Sanders made the base realize just how corrupt and sick the establishment wing of the Democratic party is. Most of us knew it and supported Obama in 08, against Clinton. There's just no going back, given how the Clinton camp has acted throughout this race (calling Sanders sexist, calling Sanders racist, David Brock starting an early propaganda campaign insisting that Sanders couldn't connect with minority voters, the data breach that many believe was a Clinton set up, dirty tricks in Iowa, dirty tricks in NV, etc.).

Will some Sanders supporters vote for Clinton if she is the nominee? Of course. However, a significant number won't. The DNC is facing an unprecedented dynamic that they either don't see; or refuse to see. I've been a Democrat my entire life, and I won't vote for HRC. I will remain a Democrat too. HRC doesn't own this party. "We The People" own the Democratic party.

This "reabsorption" just isn't going to happen as it has in the past. The hubris of some in the Democratic party (and also the Republican party) is mind boggling. It's like they don't see what's happening in front of their own eyes. We're done with corruption, lies, corporate control, war for profit and other shenanigans. Completely done.

[AhhMass]

39. I'm new

and just getting into this whole "voting" thing for 2016, but it seems to me that a "my party right or wrong" attitude isn't a political party, it's a cult.

I want to vote for a candidate I can believe in, not for someone whose claim to fame is that they are better than an awful alternative.

I'll vote for a good candidate (even if they are a write-in). I can't see myself voting for the second-worst candidate.

And having just looked over the DU terms of service again, I seem to have violated them with my very first comment.

But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees

By saying I'm willing to not support the nominated Democrat if I do not believe in them, will I be cast out? How does that sort of thing work here?

[BernieforPres2016]

85. I've only been here about a week and almost didn't join because of that loyalty clause you highlight

If Bernie isn't the nominee I will be out for the general election season. I won't back Hillary and I don't do loyalty oaths. Both parties are owned by the 0.1% and they're both despicable.

[Kittycat]

94. Don't say it once the nominee is selected

And DUers will likely need to find a new place to post. I know the HRC group has another site. I don't know where Sanders people post aside from Kos or Reddit (I'm not on Reddit, might have to break down and sign up. Grumble. Too old for this shit).

[JonLeibowitz]

150. Jack pine radicals is where the cool kids are

[Oilwellian]

100. You're allowed to say it until the nominee is selected and the primary is over

You can't encourage others to vote for another party candidate, ever, but you can say you won't vote for a candidate until the general election begins. If you do that once the nominee has been selected, yes, you will be banned.

Personally, if Hillary gets the nod, I'm taking a hiatus from DU and will return once the election is over to console her losing supporters.

[AhhMass]

152. Wow

So DU is like a cult of personality when election time rolls around? Wow.

I guess for the people who object the DU policy is sort of like "don't ask, don't tell". Which I guess is a liberal policy since it was promoted by a Democratic nominee. That is the way it works, right? Or is the liberal policy "if you're not with us, you're against us"? Or is unquestioned support of Dear Leader the "litmus test" of whether I'm a true liberal?

(I'm not big on ancient history but I can look this stuff up)

I don't give a F if anyone replies. I feel like I need a shower after seeing how some of these so-called liberals treat each other here. I'll come back and read the headlines next week maybe. Actually putting words on the same site as some of these people makes me feel scummy by association.

[john978]

41. Well said!

[bunnies]

149. I wish I could rec this post a hundred times.

You completely nailed it.

[Kip Humphrey]

9. The DNC's problem is that Hillary represents a lot that the revolution is against.

[demwing]

17. True - this isn't revolution vs. revolution-lite

This is peaceful revolution vs increasingly militaristic authoritarianism.

Which side are we on?

[Kip Humphrey]

23. I know what side I'm on but then I've been a radical all of my life!

[TCJ70]

68. That's what makes me concerned about a Hillary nomination...

...it's not like choosing between two Democrats. You're choosing your core values vs. the opposite of your core values.

[RoccoR5955]

93. you forgot corporatist rule.

And I have been against the war machine for more than 45 years.

[demwing]

96. How could I forget that?

When everyday at DU I read about why our corporate overlords are better than their corporate overlords?

BAD demwing! BAD!

[tazkcmo]

12. Good luck with that. n/t

[oasis]

19. Green Party knows a little something about sabotage.

[Orsino]

21. Gee, it would be awful if that ever happened.

[Thespian2]

22. From what I read,

the revolution is not very likely to support the DNC and HRM...

Most, i fear will not vote for the party of Losers...

[Baobab]

222. Well, the trade deals will make them all symbolic only

Pretend to argue! Look Busy!

[Cheese Sandwich]

24. Jill Stein is wicked smart. It's good to have choices in life.

[bigwillq]

27. ...

[UglyGreed]

30. So it’s kind of a fake left while the party becomes more corporatist, more militarist, and continues

march to the right - ain't that the truth!!! Go Jill Stein, speak truth to power.

[pengu]

33. I'll vote for the candidate that most closely aligns with my goals and values

I am not a fear based voter.

[Kittycat]

97. Seriously. That's what GWB brought us.

You're either with us, or you're against us.

[The Traveler]

163. I'm against

Fracking and other environmental lunacies, regime change, the soft corruption of the government by money, forever war, accelerating concentration of wealth and power, racist criminal justice systems, the drug war, privatized prison systems, the TPP and similar corporatist coups, etc.

Yep. You're either with me on that stuff or yer not. This is not at all like George Bush's demand for support of invasion and regime change, and I find the rhetorical tactic you have chosen unwise.

Trav

[Kittycat]

171. I think you have me confused

With a Hillary supporter. I'm tired of the get in line rhetoric being launched at sanders supporters, as though we should abandon things so in contrast with everything she stands for, and key issues that I *thought* the Democratic Party stood against. I won't get in line, and compromise my beliefs.

[SidDithers]

34. Jill Stein talking to RT...

now there's a winning combination.

Sid

[randome]

36. Who else are they going to talk to?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[Dr Hobbitstein]

51. No one else will listen to the Green Party.

I remember a few years ago when they were derided here because they were mostly made up of Libertarians disenchanted with the Republican party.

Now it's "yay Green party!". Fuck Green Party.

[mmonk]

144. They aren't Libertarians. Libertarians have a party.

[Not Sure]

35. I already cast my ballot for Bernie

No matter what happens - short of an embrace of the issues and positions championed by Bernie - I won't be reabsorbed. I don't expect that to happen this year unless She Whose Turn It Is gets indicted...

[loyalsister]

37. Not unexpected

I have talked with a lot of people who refuse to vote for Clinton under any circumstances. When Nader argued that there was no difference between Gore and Bush, I could call them on their BS. Now, it's not so easy to counter that argument. And I am finding that some of talking points that infuriate me, as a die hard Democrat, don't sound as off the wall this time.

[Android3.14]

38. Sanders represents the Federation, Clinton is the Borg

Both would be democracies, I suppose.

[FailureToCommunicate]

52. The Borg? Sounds Swedish.

[GreenPartyVoter]

89. Heheh

[Android3.14]

106. Finally! Someone who gets it

Thanks for the laugh. First Contact is my favorite STNG movie.

[PeaceNikki]

45. How completely odd that a third party candidate would be trying to create an issue in the Democratic

Party!!

[Armstead]

117. The Democrats and Clinton created this issue

[still_one]

48. There is no sabotage. The Sanders campaign is losing quite well on their own. In fact the only

sabotaging I can see appear to be some supporters who say they support Bernie when they spam groups, organizations, websites or Facebook pages who don't support or endorse Bernie

This lame prediction has about as much credibility as when ralph nader said there was no difference between the Democrats and republicans

[padfun]

180. Dont count your chickens

We're only in the third inning.

I cant see where you Hillary fans think that she is already the winner. We have a ways to go.

[still_one]

198. no, I don't assume any winner, but the Jill Stein OP predicting sabotage by just throwing out shit

is what I was responding to

and without hesitation I will vote for the Democratic nominee whether it is Bernie or Hillary in the general election

[padfun]

210. As will I. It's too important of an election

to let the Repugs get it.

I am a Bernie supporter, but if he loses, and if we want the revolution to continue, then at least Hillary wont put a dagger in like a Republican will. If a Republican won the GE, and got multiple SCOTUS pics, that would set progressives back much more than Hillarys picks would.

[still_one]

215. The Democratic primary with both Bernie and Hillary is going to go to the end. The California

primary is in June. There is still a lot of primaries to get through, and issues to discuss among Democrats

[freedom fighter jh]

49. She must be a genius or have a crystal ball or something.

Just kidding.

They've done everything imaginable to defeat him. It makes sense that if they succeed, they will want to keep Democratic voters Democratic.

They may have met their limits. Bernie's supporters may not be so easy to manipulate.

[marmar]

50. The DNC is sabotaging itself, but the tonedeaf leadership doesn't realize it.

Last edited Tue Mar 1, 2016, 11:05 AM - Edit history (1)

They're creating an irreparable rift with their future potential voting bloc

[Beowulf]

86. I think the DNC knows what it is doing.

They have long worked under the assumption that they can subvert the left wing's candidates but still earn the left's vote because where else is the left going to go. What the DNC and the GOP for that matter are failing to grasp is how dissatisfied core constituencies are and seem incapable of dealing with the issues that matter to the dissatisfied in any sincere way. Trump is successful because he plays to fear and revenge. Bernie doesn't do that out of principle, but he could demonize the 1% much more than he has. He could use the pitchfork as his symbol. He could stereotype the elite and use caricature. He could use anger much, much more than he has. And like Trump, he would transform the movement into a destructive, reactionary movement. I think the DNC realizes Bernie won't do that and has promised he won't do that. But what the DNC is not considering is that this movement isn't personality driven, but issue driven. Bernie's emergence as a candidate offered a possible home within the Democratic Party. The Democratic establishment's practicing the politics of destruction on its left wing has many questioning just how much of a home the Democratic Party is offering. And no, this isn't sour grapes. These are long held feelings among the left. The Left had little excitement for this election until Bernie declared.

One of the disadvantages of our system of government over a parliamentary system is how difficult it is for there to be more than 2 significant major parties. The founders feared the new nation could dissolve into multiple competing factions, so they constructed a system where it would be difficult for multiple parties to flourish. However, in a parliamentary system the Green Party might be viewed as an ally by the Democratic Party establishment instead of a threat.

[senz]

154. +1000. Thoughtful, knowledgable, interesting analysis.

It's true that Bernie's personality and character will not stoop to a cutting, destructive, anger-based attack which some of us, horrified by Clinton's corruption and bad character, might wish he would, but it would likely backfire at this stage. I could see Alan Grayson doing it. I wonder if he'll come out and stump for Bernie with a good dose of outrage and class warfare? I hope he does.

Your point that for most of us it's not about personalities but issues is relevant. I've been stunned by Hill supporters almost complete focus on personality and their inability to even think about issues. It displays a frightening lack of intelligence and awareness. Even the Republicans are more issue-focused than Hill supporters. The only issue they bring up regularly is women's reproductive rights, but always as a threat. Sometimes they use racism but I get the distinct impression that for them it's a "card," a means of manipulation, because their candidate has done nothing whatsoever for people of color, quite the opposite.

I've long wished we had a parliamentary system. It would be more democratic than ours.

Anyway, thanks for a great comment, Beowulf. I hope you will keep commenting and perhaps write OPs.

[Beowulf]

157. Thank you!

[artislife]

134. They have focused on the battle with no thought to the war. nt

[djean111]

53. I won't be reabsorbed. Just think - I have asked many many times why it is okay for

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz to campaign for her GOP buddies here in Florida, and refuse to support Democrats.

Never an answer. Because the current Democratic Party is actually kind of gone, now, replaced with the Third Way. I won't support that.

The Democratic Party has left me. I will not move to the right with it. Bottom line.

[Fuddnik]

123. Ain't that the truth!

I put a year of my life into running a campaign for Congress, when Debbie Disaster came along and endorsed her friend, the Republican in the race.

I guess they were pissed off that we beat their hand picked, DLC favorite by 10 points in the primary.

[djean111]

128. And the DNC still expects me to give them money! What a farce this all is! n/t

[Raster]

236. Why is it OK for DWS to openly support HRC? Isn't DWS supposed to neutral?

[Fuddnik]

246. Judging by her past actions, I almost expect Disaster Debbie to endorse her "friend" Rubio any day.

[nyabingi]

55. The pro-corporate, right-leaning Democrats

are sabotaging themselves by continuing to get behind people like Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and the rest of the Republican-lite candidates they've foisted upon us over the years.

Things have gotten so bad for the majority of non-rich Americans that they're tired of just going along with a horribly bad candidate just to defeat an even worse Republican, both of whom will do nothing to change the disastrous course the US is on right now.

If the Democratic Party had nominated someone who represented the interests and aspirations of the base of the party, Al Gore wouldn't have lost as many votes to Nader as he did. They are making the same mistake again because many Bernie supporters, myself included, cannot fathom voting for someone as corrupt and amoral as a Hillary Clinton.

[islandmkl]

56. it's like we are just High-Absorbancy Diapers...well...maybe they have loaded us up

one too many times....

they may have one more election like this to load us up...but it would appear that the diapers are starting to leak...

[Fearless]

57. They will try.

[ejbr]

58. I cannot

reward their antagonism toward my values with a no questions vote for Hillary should she be successful. It's not about Bernie; it's about US.

[Tarc]

60. Stein's opinion is about as relevant to the party as Trump's is, i.e. not at all

If you're a member of another political party, you're out for your their interests, not the Democratic Party interests.

[Kittycat]

104. You can dismiss her, but not the base of voters that simply don't support Hillary

Because she is antithetical to our values.

[Historic NY]

127. +1

[LiberalElite]

72. It can't be passed on to Her -

unless it's completely watered down to a pale imitation. That's the only way we'd "fit in". Neutered and gagged. But hey, UNITY!

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

82. The really sad thing is

If Hillary does get the nomination and ends up losing to Drumpf or one of the other clowns, the DNC will interpret this as an indication that they need to slide even further to the right.

[Skwmom]

84. I agree. I can't simply be passed on to Hillary Clinton. n/t

[Gamecock Lefty]

92. Geez, Guys . . .

There is no sabotage. Just because an obscure candidate suggests something does not mean it’s true – even if you want to make it so just so you can start a new anti-Hillary thread.

If this Stein person is so enamored with Bernie why doesn’t she join his campaign and quit running as a Green candidate?

[99th_Monkey]

109. Jill's commenting on exactly that point: i.e. why she doesn’t join Bernie's campaign ..

she sees what the corrupt anything-but neutral DNC is doing, and she wants no part of it.

So your post makes little sense, if any.

[pinebox]

110. You sound as though you don't know who Stein is

You should educate yourself. Go look up Stein debating Mitt Romney. She's wicked smart.
As far as why she doesn't join Bernie's campaign, not a chance she'd join a Dem campaign. She likes Bernie, she hates the Democratic party & all its bullshit

[Fuddnik]

132. If Hillary fans want a woman President so bad,

Why don't they just join Steins campaign, and they'll get a real liberal to boot, instead of a phony?

[ccinamon]

145. Very good question, Fuddnik!

I have asked that of my friends, but the only answer I get is that Jill is not a Democrat. It is *ALL* about the party labeling, not facts, not the stances on issues, not the integrity of the candidate....it is about the 'D' in parenthesis on the ballot.

[George II]

108. How can the DNC sabotage Sanders' campaign?

[SoapBox]

111. Agreed...I also will not be passed on.

There will be a registration change in my future, should the DNC/DWS/Turd Way Elites continue their shenanigans.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

113. I voted for Jill Stein in 2012 and suffered no particular inconvenience in doing so.

In the GE in 2016 I will vote for the most progressive candidate on the ballot.

[TheUndecider]

153. Philosophically I understand voting the candidate with views closest to one own.

In practice Pres Trump scares me, a lot! Then I start making the lesser of two evils rationalization a in my head. But we're not there yet, today I caucus for Bernie!

"Rock Out with your caucus out" - some Bernie Bro

[Armstead]

115. The Green Party and Nader are absolutely correct on many of the issues

What is so sad is that instead of absorbing them and reflecting the basic Liberal/Progressive agenda they represent, the New Democrat Party chose to go the opposite direction.

[Historic NY]

130. Isn't that the purpose of the Green Party

Why should the Democrats bow to them. If you feel strongly join that party.

[Armstead]

136. You totally missed the point

If you disagree with their basic platforms for reform of the system, you are certainly entitled to do so,

But I am also entitled to say that the Democratic Party ought to be reflecting some of the ideas that Nader espoused in 2000 and the Green's emphasis on a sustainable society and citizen participation over corporate power.

[Historic NY]

138. Two words for you on Nader...

EOM have a nice fucking day.

[Armstead]

140. You have a nice day yourself

Always a pleasure

[nadinbrzezinski]

169. You know what is the largest group of voters in the US right now? Independents

if the greens manage to break though the haze, and we are in the kind of conditions they just might,. we might see a real threat for both parties form the greens.

If the Rs go the whig route, the Ds are pretty much the strong business party right now.

Physics and politics abhors a vacuum.

by the way, we are also in an environment that voters, we love 'em, may finally start to punish not one, but the two major parties. This is so basic political theory that I am gobsmacked it is not known by partisans in the US who claim to be political animals, Then again most partisans around the world behave the same way.

[Fuddnik]

247. And I'll be one again, right after the Florida General Primary in August.

I came back just to vote for Bernie (dropped absentee off 2 weeks ago), butI'm sticking around to vote for Alan Grayson over turd-bag, recently recruited Republican convert, Patrick Murphy.

[ccinamon]

148. Well said, Armstead!

I've been complaining for years how the democratic party is now so far to the right, that Nixon and Reagan are more liberal than most of the people running the DNC!

The Democratic Party is now made up of mostly moderate Republicans who have gradually taken over since the R's moved to capture the southern and religious voters. Us (formerly) liberals of the Democratic party have to fight to take it back or start supporting candidates who reflect our views even if they do not have the (D) after their name.....or a combination of the two!

[GoneFishin]

120. My vote for Bernie is non-transferable. I am voting for his policies.

[PonyUp]

126. +1. n/t

[Fuddnik]

133. Lifting the Veil. Time to see this again.

https://vimeo.com/20355767

[Zorra]

137. Mother Earth says: Adapt to change, or become extinct. And the DINOS are not evolved enough to

adapt to change.


Yabba dabba doo

[brooklynite]

156. I get it...Bernie Sanders is about to crash?

[DhhD]

197. Looks like Bernie is about to Part the Waters. The RED Sea where all the DINOS have ended up!

[whatchamacallit]

139. Absorb this!

For many of us there's no going back to the chicken coop.

[ccinamon]

143. She is right --

I started to see this in 2004 and it has only gotten worse with the corporate TPTB who run the DNC with cash donations.

From now on #MyVoteMustBeEarned.

#IfNotBernie_Jill, as SHE has the morals and values that I believe in. My vote can not be transferred to Hillary as she lacks morals, honesty, and integrity.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

162. Cut It Out - Get in line

resistance is futile

[jalan48]

164. TPP, Climate Change, Endless Wars..................

Once the elation over the first woman POTUS subsides how will corrupt system keep us inline? This isn't 08 and Obama's "Hope and Change" happy dance. Millions of Americans are on to the con--should be interesting.

[Ferd Berfel]

182. THE DNC is toast

only the Blue Dogs will fall in line. And they aren't voting for Bernie anyway

[nichomachus]

170. My gosh, was there any doubt?

If the Clintons can't win clean, they will go dirty real fast.

[Wibly]

172. Stein may be right

It certainly appears that is what they have in mind.

[Dont call me Shirley]

178. Many, if not the majority, of Bernie supporters will not vote for Hillary. They will sit out of the

election altogether. Maybe that's the DLC leaderships's gameplan.

[Ikonoklast]

183. The Democratic Party is leaving me, not the other way around.

Since the DNC has decided it is now 100% Republican Lite, why should I bother to give them my vote at all?

[arcane1]

184. The DNC and Clinton think our vote doesn't have to be EARNED.

They're wrong.

[Fuddnik]

248. Fuck no. They act like it's owed.

Bunch of conniving back-stabbers of the working class.

[socialistforpeople]

189. Bernie or Bust pledge a sign that support can move to the green party

glad Jill stein is getting more attention. I worry that if HRC gets the nomination many will turn to Trump. And that the the RNC and DNC will do everything in their power to shut out a third voice.

[PoliticalMalcontent]

190. Jill Stein is a smart lady

[tblue]

192. After Capehart & Civil Rights swiftboating

I am Bernie or Bust

I wasn't before but I'm not about to reward that behavior.

[RBInMaine]

194. The Green Party is a joke.

[Cheese Sandwich]

232. So people can stop blaming Nader for whatever then I guess

[Cheese Sandwich]

195. The Green Party will essentially stand down if Sanders gets the nomination and try to help him

Right?

That's what I hear.

OTOH if Hillary gets the nomination Greens will have their strongest year since Nader, or even stronger maybe.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

229. So you want another Bush

Am I right?

[Cheese Sandwich]

233. Uhhhhhh....

derp

[Fuddnik]

249. You want a Bush in a skirt.

Am I right?

[pa28]

199. If that's true the DNC will be in for a rude surprise.

Running a primary campaign by appealing to divisions of race and sex is only going to create a big pool alienated, newly independent voters.

If she wins the nomination I hope the thrill will be worth it for them. They will find themselves to be without very many "re-abosorbed" voters on election day.

[lame54]

201. not attack the campaign?...

why don't they support him and quit syphoning votes from him

[retrowire]

206. They may absorb my vote just this once to avoid a Trump or Cruz.

But they'll never have it again until the next Trump or Cruz...

[corbettkroehler]

207. This Green Party Member Feels The Bern

Politically, I am in full alignment with the Green Party. I have registered to vote as a Green. Sadly, the nation's electoral system doesn't have room for Greens until, as in Europe, the party wins down-ballot seats over a span of several cycles.

I concur that Stein's prediction could come true but also suspect that Bernie will continue to trend upward and arrive at the convention ready to contend.

[yuiyoshida]

208. K&R

Tweeted.

[Recoverin_Republican]

211. Ah yes, "Monstrum in erroris" ... the ol' 'scheming monster' meme...LOL!

What, you mean expect Democrats to support the party's nominee???... I'm aghast, AGHAST, I SAY!.. the Scheming Monster ...of a Democratic Party.

[tomm2thumbs]

223. Comparing Clinton to a paper towel

I won't go there. Who am I to rag on paper towels?

[shenmue]

225. She lost last time

[bvf]

226. "Reabsorb"?

Like my vote is effluent?

Nice.

[Ken Burch]

227. She is undoubtably right on that.

The DNC is bound and determined to prevent the party from deviating from sectarian centrism.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

231. Oh, you mean Jill "I'd prefer Romney win" Stein?

Dr "President Obama is very articulate" Stein?

Fuck her. Fuck her and the horse she rode in on.

[colsohlibgal]

237. She Is Likely Correct

Love Bernie but in any just and real democratic system Jill would have a real chance.

[NNadir]

240. The "Green" Party also told us Bush = Gore. The tens of thousands of dead Iraqis might not agree.

Who cares what mindless poorly educated dipshits think about our party?

They have always hated us, always will hate us, and have no right to speak on our issues. The only thing they brought to us in their useless scientifically illiterate lives is the destruction of the World Trade Center, the militarization of the American people, a war in Iraq, a war in Afghanistan, tens of thousands of dead strewn across the Middle East, a destroyed economy, and a rush past 400 ppm of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Why don't they just sit in their sandbox, cry and vote for one another?

[delrem]

250. Yah, everyone know that US "progressives" love to be kicked around.

Hard to figure what new terminology HRC's campaign might come up with to replace "BernieBros" with, though.
And "White progressives = White supremacists". You know, the high points of Hillary's career of championing human rights.

[McCamy Taylor]

251. And why exactly do I care what the party of Nader 2000 has to say about anything?

[djean111]

252. You seem to be convinced that the only reason that Hillary has not already been awarded the

nomination is because she is a woman. Conveniently ignoring and minimizing the very real and very large issues. So, obviously, no one is expecting you to care.

[PonyUp]

257. It was blatant yesterday with Billy and his BULLhorn. n/t