HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Can someone explain to me...

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 12:40 AM

 

Can someone explain to me the intersectionality between...

Current Progressivism and tangible concern for the issues, and the current Bernie Or Bust campaign (apparently a petition going around)? Im very confused how they intertwine and/or overlap.

Is Bernie or Bust just a bunch of rabble rousers or is this current progressive groupthink? If so, what is the intersection between tangible concern for issues and Bernie or Bust?

Personally I think the Dem base will unite.

148 replies, 5016 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 148 replies Author Time Post
Reply Can someone explain to me the intersectionality between... (Original post)
JaneyVee Mar 2016 OP
malokvale77 Mar 2016 #1
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #2
silvershadow Mar 2016 #103
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #110
Hortensis Mar 2016 #111
marions ghost Mar 2016 #124
Hortensis Mar 2016 #127
marions ghost Mar 2016 #129
Hortensis Mar 2016 #133
marions ghost Mar 2016 #141
Hortensis Mar 2016 #115
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #3
litlbilly Mar 2016 #4
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #7
Hortensis Mar 2016 #140
Chichiri Mar 2016 #29
litlbilly Mar 2016 #5
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #10
Lucinda Mar 2016 #145
azurnoir Mar 2016 #6
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #8
azurnoir Mar 2016 #12
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #14
azurnoir Mar 2016 #16
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #18
azurnoir Mar 2016 #61
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #64
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #77
azurnoir Mar 2016 #80
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #82
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #83
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #70
azurnoir Mar 2016 #76
silvershadow Mar 2016 #104
azurnoir Mar 2016 #142
daleanime Mar 2016 #9
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #11
Gwhittey Mar 2016 #13
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #15
ismnotwasm Mar 2016 #17
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #19
kristopher Mar 2016 #43
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #48
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #52
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #55
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #56
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #57
Hortensis Mar 2016 #112
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #118
Hortensis Mar 2016 #119
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #120
Hortensis Mar 2016 #121
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #143
Hortensis Mar 2016 #146
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #58
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #60
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #65
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #66
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #68
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #73
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #75
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #78
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #63
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #67
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #71
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #79
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #81
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #86
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #87
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #88
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #92
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #85
silvershadow Mar 2016 #105
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #20
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #21
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #22
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #23
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #26
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #44
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #50
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #24
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #25
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #28
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #32
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #35
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #40
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #42
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #45
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #49
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #51
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #54
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #59
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #62
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #74
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #39
840high Mar 2016 #30
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #33
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #38
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #41
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #46
hillarysong2016 Mar 2016 #27
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #36
hillarysong2016 Mar 2016 #106
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #107
Armstead Mar 2016 #31
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #34
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #37
PatrickforO Mar 2016 #47
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #53
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #69
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #89
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #90
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #94
Warren DeMontague Mar 2016 #100
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #93
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #96
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #97
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #98
Gwhittey Mar 2016 #72
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #84
Live and Learn Mar 2016 #91
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #95
Live and Learn Mar 2016 #99
Recursion Mar 2016 #101
Hortensis Mar 2016 #117
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #126
Hortensis Mar 2016 #128
JonLeibowitz Mar 2016 #136
Hortensis Mar 2016 #138
retrowire Mar 2016 #102
Post removed Mar 2016 #108
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #109
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #113
RiverLover Mar 2016 #114
DrDan Mar 2016 #116
Bettie Mar 2016 #122
Katashi_itto Mar 2016 #125
Bettie Mar 2016 #132
Katashi_itto Mar 2016 #135
Bettie Mar 2016 #137
Katashi_itto Mar 2016 #139
whatchamacallit Mar 2016 #123
JaneyVee Mar 2016 #131
whatchamacallit Mar 2016 #134
Avalux Mar 2016 #130
ieoeja Mar 2016 #144
Motown_Johnny Mar 2016 #147
H2O Man Mar 2016 #148

Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 12:44 AM

1. Nope...

I can't explain anything to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malokvale77 (Reply #1)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 12:48 AM

2. Ok.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malokvale77 (Reply #1)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:46 AM

103. LOL. Perfect! nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malokvale77 (Reply #1)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 06:35 AM

110. good point malokvale

 

we've tried explaining but nothing gets through. .. . any issue we have with Hillary is never addressed, they just attack the messenger. . .and that's what I think this post is, a passive-aggressive put down of Bernie supporters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #110)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 06:59 AM

111. Here's part of the American Values Project manifesto on

"what it means to be a progressive."

"... the central progressive message is one of fairness and equality:

Our approach is simple to summarize and is built upon the ideas of generations of progressives from Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Barack Obama:

Everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does his or her fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules. As progressives, we believe that everyone deserves a fair shot at a decent, fulfilling, and economically secure life. We believe that everyone should do his or her fair share to build this life through education and hard work and through active participation in public life. And we believe that everyone should play by the same set of rules with no special privileges for the well-connected or wealthy.


Progressivism is inherently liberal and arose with liberalsm from the Enlightenment. Both Hillary and Bernie are progressive. The Democratic Party is progressive. Almost all liberals and far-lefters are progressive.

"Bernie or Bust" is a plan to throw progressivism itself under the bus if a majority of voters don't choose its supporters' favorite candidate. Obviously, this is inconsonant with the principles of fairness and equality for everyone that are intrinsic to progressivism.

These true believers see themselves as a righteous elite, The Only Ones Who See, and thus The Only Ones Who Can Save America, but if they go forward with this they will just be really bad losers who have abandoned their goals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #111)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 09:38 AM

124. "progressivism"

by this loose definition you would include Hillary, at least what she gives lip service to.

But Hillary is certainly not what I think of as progressive. She is Status Quo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #124)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:11 AM

127. This is PROGRESSIVEVALUES.ORG's definition, MG.

Not mine.

Although they have some good moments, it might reassure you to know that this site is maintained by people mostly to my left, some of whom actually remind me of the extreme partisanship here. In fact, one article actually lumps Reagan, both Bushes, Clinton and Obama into one conservative economic reganism-obamaism continuum. The author dresses it up with a lot of history-referencing verbage, but it's largely just the usual far-left partisan rejection of Democrats. They maintain a rather elegantly designed site and know how to sound high minded, but I'm pretty sure behind the scenes chortling over anti-Hillary lies is going on these days.

And yet, as you yourself recognized, the definition they worked over so thoughtfully absolutely includes Hillary, and the rest of the Democratic Party and all liberals, including me. Go figure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #127)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:36 AM

129. OK

not familiar with it--will check it out. I'm just saying that what people think of as "progressive" varies a lot. We may not all be singing Kumbaya in the big tent anymore.

Whether it's an "extreme" view or not, I do think it is fair to say that there is a conservative continuum over the last decades that includes both Dems and R's. This is the result of DLC influence, among other factors. The DLC was the wrong direction for the Democratic party--and Bill and Hill were part of that conservative alliance. Pragmatic, perhaps, maybe the best we could do at the time you could argue--but allowing for a lot of the horrors and abuses we are witnessing today. It's just not working.

I don't think that Hillary can bring about significant changes in this country. She is way too heavily invested in the status quo, with all its corruption and excess, so damaging to real Democracy. It's what she had to do to get where she is--OK, but that's not saying much at this point. I admire the candidate who has, to a far greater extent, stuck to his principles from day one. I am voting for the candidate this time--not so much the party.

thx for your reply

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marions ghost (Reply #129)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:47 AM

133. I agree that in the 1990s the party crossed lines

to the right that should never have been crossed in its attempt to maintain power and get some things done. But it largely came back and did so some time ago.

We can agree that, regardless of their ideology, in practice our representatives are far too interested in protecting their own jobs and power, but that's an effect of the corruption that would infect Bernie's people also -- almost as soon as they got membership in the DC winners' circle and within sight of those go-for-the-gold lobbying careers.

The problem in 2016 isn't that we're too far right. We're not. The problem is that our representatives are much too protective of their DC membership to put themselves out for principle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #133)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:33 AM

141. So

if I read you correctly-- the disease of corruption is part of the system, and Bernie & Co. would succumb to the disease once in office. So that's a given? But there's no evidence for that statement. I think his record shows otherwise.

How do you see the Dem party as "coming back" exactly--without real reform.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malokvale77 (Reply #1)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 07:17 AM

115. Can't or won't? "Bernie or Bust" is obviously,

demonstrated by dozens of refusals to discuss, embarrassing to some. Yet not embarrassing enough to stand up and reject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 12:53 AM

3. Nnnnnnnnnnope.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 12:59 AM

4. Hey Janey, where's this Bernie or Bust campaign you speak of? is the the new meme for tomorrow?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to litlbilly (Reply #4)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:04 AM

7. Right here:

 

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1391762

And you can check the #BernieOrBust on twitter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #7)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:26 AM

140. One article unbelievably claims Bust stems from "organic integrity."

Sure, who doubts that "organic integrity" comes very easily to the kind of righteous zealots who flocked to Elizabeth Warren, then Bernie, and are now considering joining Bust as they see the end down the road.

However, other infamous characteristics also include a tendency to burst into flame and turn on literally anyone at any provocation, as witness the egregious attacks on our most powerful progressive leader, Warren.

But to use "organic integrity" in connection with Bust, which is asking a commitment to literally abandon progressive integrity and principles and give aid and comfort to the implacable enemies of progressivism? Unbelievable hypocrisy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to litlbilly (Reply #4)


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:00 AM

5. dont bother answering, youve been on my ignore list for a long time

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to litlbilly (Reply #5)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:05 AM

10. How did you see this post?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #10)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 05:21 PM

145. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:02 AM

6. petition you say? where can I find this petition of which you speak?

all hail the peti.........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to JaneyVee (Reply #8)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:07 AM

12. but petition not there now I haz sad

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #12)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:08 AM

14. So you're saying you never heard of it?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #14)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:11 AM

16. no but not really paying attention either busy checking change.org petitions

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #16)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:14 AM

18. The link I gave contains a link.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #18)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:49 AM

61. ah links within links like a puzzle it is

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #61)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:52 AM

64. "Like a circle in a spiral // Like a wheel within a wheel" -- Windmills of your mind

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #64)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:00 AM

77. A riddle, wrapped in an enigma, wrapped in a sort of croissanwich type deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #64)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:02 AM

80. circles within spirals are paradoxical

but generally I like sting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #80)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:07 AM

82. every time that wheel turn round

bound to cover just a little more ground!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #80)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:07 AM

83. I first heard it in The Thomas Crowne Affair. Excellent soundtrack for an excellent movie.

G'night.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to azurnoir (Reply #61)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:55 AM

70. Is this all too complicated for you?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #70)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:59 AM

76. yes yes complicated it is

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #14)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:48 AM

104. Oh we have all heard of it. We have a secret conclave with regularity, where we exchange

 

coded messages.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to silvershadow (Reply #104)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 12:04 PM

142. hush you're not supposed to tell

but they still don't know the super duper top secret entry code, and if you don't know that it could 'appear' to be a website started last summer based on working to get Bernie nominated

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:05 AM

9. I've given up trying to explain anything to you....

sorry about that. But have a lovely evening anyways.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to daleanime (Reply #9)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:07 AM

11. Never heard of you before. But thanks for stopping by.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:08 AM

13. I once got a forunte cookie that said

 

"One who bases one knowledge off twitter hashtags and what they read on internet forum are"
That was all that was on the paper as it ran out of room to finish I guess, anyone got a guess what it would say?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gwhittey (Reply #13)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:10 AM

15. Ok so everyone is on board that this isnt an actual thing?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #15)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:11 AM

17. What nobody's stepping up?

I could have sworn...ah well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #17)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:15 AM

19. Yeah its weird.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #19)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:28 AM

43. Not really.

Nope. Not weird at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #15)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:33 AM

48. "an actual thing"



Like "berniebros", it's an expression someone somewhere on the internet is talking about. Whether that makes it "an actual thing" i suppose depends on how one defines "thing".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #48)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:38 AM

52. Or you could Google it and see what turns up!

 

A big part of reality is 3rd party perspective.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #52)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:41 AM

55. Google is now the determinant for the objective reality of stuff?

Thank God, that means that something like 60% of reality is nekkid ladies. Sweet.


ETA: "3rd Party Perspective", well done on the double entendre.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #55)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:42 AM

56. "A big part of reality is 3rd party perspective." -- I'd very much like to think that was

unintentional snark.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #56)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:43 AM

57. IRONY: THE SHACKLES OF YOUTH

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #57)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 07:12 AM

112. Weren't you really thinking "shackles of mind"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #112)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 08:36 AM

118. No.

But then, consistency is the small knob-gobbling hobgoblin from gobbler's knob.

Abraham Lincoln said that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #118)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 09:04 AM

119. Is that why you won't discuss "Bernie or Bust?"

The notion of a thread having a subject just a shackle on small minds?

Here is a scenario: It's this time next year and it turned out to be BUST for you guys. Either BS or HC lost to President Rubio or we have another President Clinton working with a bare Democratic majority Senate to force what she imagines to be progressive changes through as best she can, step by partial step.

What are you doing in this scenario? Are you launched on 8 years of denying any progress can or will be made under Clinton or on 8 years of blaming Hillary and liberals for electing Rubio? Will you be here at DU?

In any possible scenario, do you expect another decade of complaining and arguing that liberals are not "real" progressives to be worthy and satisfying?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #119)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 09:07 AM

120. Wait, what wont I discuss?

Please, tell me what it is I'm saying.

Or shit, just find someone to create an account that will say whatever ... The fuck that was, you just tried to shoehorn into my mouth, and blargle it at them. Okay?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #120)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 09:16 AM

121. It was the "Bernie or Bust" movement.

And now I've asked how you see yourself spending the next decade of your life, politically, if it's "bust." No matter which party wins the White House on November 6, it is highly unlikely we will have a President Sanders, after all. It's not too early to wonder.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #121)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 04:36 PM

143. Well... I've been here for 12 years, already.

So if you want to make some authoritative statements as to what I, personally, do or don't believe, you can start by looking at the shit I've actually said, instead of arguing with one of these.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #143)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 05:39 PM

146. Okay. Have a nice evening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #55)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:46 AM

58. Where do you get your news?

 

See how easily your logic disintegrates? You are being sanctimonious about something you also participate in everyday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #58)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:49 AM

60. If you think your 'reasoning' corners Warrens in any way, you are sorely mistaken

Internet commentary is quite a different kettle of fish than news via the Internet.

Your reasoning for why Warren's logic "disintegrates" is actually quite laughable and false on its fac.e

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #60)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:52 AM

65. Im referring to third party perspectives.

 

The news doesnt channel into your brain, you get it from an actual source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #60)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:52 AM

66. Here, I actually thought maybe we could have an interesting discussion on metaphysics and semantics

ah, but alas, I am in GDP, where all that happens is team B and team C throwing poop at each other.

C'est La Vie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #66)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:55 AM

68. I learned everything I needed to about the poster's intentions with this thread

via Post #28 and the subsequent downthread. Quite disheartening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #68)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:57 AM

73. And to boot, now I'm stuck in one of those annoying jury loops!



Ah, well, fuck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #73)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:58 AM

75. I'm in one of those too! Weird....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #75)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:01 AM

78. Paging Elad.

It happens, occasionally. Obviously there's a system bug. I'll put something in ATA about it right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #58)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:51 AM

63. saying that everything you can find on google is objectively real, isn't logic.

http://www.google.com/search?q=leprechaun

It's funny, but it's not logic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #63)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:54 AM

67. I agree, which is why i never said that.

 

But there is also plenty of truth out there. Start researching!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #67)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:56 AM

71. Are you referring to these truths?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #71)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:01 AM

79. So Im guessing youre Bernie or Bust?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #79)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:06 AM

81. What a strange post, and a stranger assumption still! Never have I said such a thing in this thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #81)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:13 AM

86. It was a question.

 

Since you decided to hijack this thread which has nothing to do with Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #86)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:14 AM

87. This is GDP. It seemed apropos. For followup questions, please refer to post #71. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #81)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:15 AM

88. have you ever been to a caucus-race?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #88)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:19 AM

92. Excellent, sir!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #67)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:10 AM

85. I don't like to toot my own horn (I'm not that flexible) but I am fairly well informed, as humans go

but thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #52)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:54 AM

105. Just because it may "exist" somewhere, in someone's mind or thoughts, or even

 

as an idea hatched on the internet, makes it a "thing". That doesn't mean it is organized. That doesn't mean everyone has heard of it, or approves (or disapproves for that matter) of it. We are not a monolith. PS: Berniebros is probably a term fist coined in Karl Rove's stink tank, and he thanks you for keeping it alive.

You sure do have a lot of posts for someone who has only been here since 2012. I'm going to have a gander at some of them to see what you are about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:26 AM

20. My guess?

The realization that Clinton has no intention of fulfilling any kind of progressive presidency. Why reward the party (the DNC, largely, for setting up a race with massive advantages for Hillary) for backing a candidate who only pretends to care about the issues that we care about? I imagine the Bernie or Bust crowd (not identifying myself as one such person, necessarily, mind you) is pretty fed up with the charade of democracy when the party can put its finger on the scale, when party leaders are publicly supportive of one candidate over another, and when the candidate offered to us is a corrupt politician who will lie and shape shift on a range of topics as needed to obtain votes.

In this view, the question isn't why Bernie or Bust, it is "why the hell would I vote for Hillary?"

*Note to jury: I am not advocating for any of these ideas, I am explaining to JaneyVee how persons caring deeply about the issues can still vow never to back the nominee. My personal feelings on the subject, I choose to keep off DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #20)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:35 AM

21. "Charade of democracy". There is no charade, she's winning.

 

So youre saying the Bernie or Bust mentality is based on a conspiracy theory ginned up in there own imaginations which led them to despise a candidate enough based on their own imaginary scenario to allow Trump to pick SCOTUS?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #21)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:42 AM

22. No, I am not saying that. You are saying that, and I disagree

The charade is debates scheduled ad hoc, at first to discourage too many people from gaining a thorough look at the candidates (why O'Malley never had a chance, for example) and then in a dramatic shift, adding debates as it helped Clinton. DWS, the chair of the supposedly neutral DNC saying that Bernie is not a real Democrat. The tactics are transparent.

Or consider this excerpt from Politico:

While Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook and press secretary Brian Fallon were agitating about their claims of deeply damaging high crimes out of Vermont in a call with reporters, with Sanders’ state staffers nervously listening in, the lawyers from the campaigns and the DNC were on the phone with the judge. The judge left Sanders’ team with the distinct impression that she was going to rule for them, and within hours, the Clinton campaign sent a turnaround statement urging the DNC to back down. The DNC reversed itself and let the Sanders campaign back into the database late that night.


http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/03/bernie-sanders-2016-inside-213692?o=1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #22)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:46 AM

23. Again, based on no evidence. Just emotions and opinions.

 

And it was Bernie's team who breached data.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #23)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:01 AM

26. I never espoused those opinions, I was explaining them to you. You asked a question in your OP...

If you want to have an argument with an avowed Bernie or Buster, you will have to find someone outside of DU to engage in that discussion, for I certainly will not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #26)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:28 AM

44. No I think i said everything i needed to in my previous post.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #21)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:35 AM

50. Ah, I get it. It's a "mentality". is a "mentality" an actual thing? It's a deeper question than one

might think.

Like whether or not the flying spaghetti monster is a "real" Deity.

Is the thought of a unicorn a real thought?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:51 AM

24. Maybe the problem is that you assume other people engage in "groupthink"

Not everyone does.

I suppose if "groupthink" is what one is used to seeing all the time, in their own circles, they might imagine it is everywhere.

FWIW, I will call "bernie or bust" what it is, namely the 2016 version of PUMA. No thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #24)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 01:56 AM

25. So youre saying you will vote for the Dem nominee in Nov?

 

I was actually looking for someone who will not unless its Bernie to explain. They seem to be missing now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #25)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:02 AM

28. Because they know that if they say Bernie or Bust they'll be banned from DU for a TOS violation.

Bernie supporters here aren't quite as clueless as you seem to think we are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #28)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:10 AM

32. This has gone off topic.

 

My point was basically: is there an actual movement that would throw all of their concern about the issues out the window unless their preferred candidate is elevated to power? If so, how real was that concern. Many arent as privileged to go uneffected by spitefully allowing Trump to pick SCOTUS. Do you think the Bernie or Bust crowd would come around in solidarity on the issues or leave concern at the door?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #32)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:15 AM

35. You make the mistake in assuming they see Hillary as representing them on the issues, whatsoever.

They do not see it that way.

So your premise is flawed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #35)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:23 AM

40. Its absolutely not flawed because....

 

Sometimes elections are about defense as much as offense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #40)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:28 AM

42. The question is one of perception, not whether you personally agree with that perception.

It is a matter of understanding the other side vs. agreement with that position.

I think that's it for me, absent an effort to understand what Bernie or Bust is really about rather than snidely dismiss and lecture them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #42)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:29 AM

45. Thats all im trying to do: understand it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #45)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:34 AM

49. Then you would be better off not arguing against the messenger who is simply relaying the ideas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #49)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:36 AM

51. Its an internet discussion board.

 

Thats kinda the point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #51)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:40 AM

54. You asked a question about what Bernie or Busters believed

I relayed that information. Then you tried to pick a fight over whether they were sensible, as if I had to agree with them simply by understanding where they are coming from.

It's bad form to ask a question, allegedly in good faith, about how a group of people think and then attack the messenger for relaying their thinking as actually espousing said beliefs. If you cannot understand how that might be considered rude, then we really have nothing further to discuss.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #54)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:48 AM

59. Pick a fight?

 



I thought we were having a discussion....on a discussion board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #59)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:50 AM

62. This post of yours is not discussion centered on the question at hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #62)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:57 AM

74. Then why did we continue discussing it further after that?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #32)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:22 AM

39. what's "an actual movement"? Someone writes a petition? A couple people say something on facebook?

Are there going to be Sanders supporters who won't pull the D lever if the nominee is Hillary? Sure.

I'd advise waiting to have those conversations until we actually have a nominee, but that's just me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #25)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:06 AM

30. Alert on me again - my

 

answer to you is how we vote is none of your business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 840high (Reply #30)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:12 AM

33. Im sorry, what are you saying?

 

I dont alert on anyone. I dont even have anyone on ignore. Its only the internet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #25)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:20 AM

38. I've said it like fifty fucking times, now, not that I need to, because that's what I always do.

FWIW, far and away the worst examples of "groupthink" I've seen in the past 8 months have all come from Hillary supporters here, but unlike some people I don't let what some yarblocko on the internet says influence my political decisionmaking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #38)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:26 AM

41. Huh? Is there a Hillary Or Bust Im not aware of?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #41)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:31 AM

46. You brought up "groupthink". I'm telling you that it's rampant, but maybe not where you think it is.

and I could run down the myriad examples, but honestly certain strains of mindlessly repeated nonsensical flatuations have already gotten way more airtime than they deserve.

I said before, Bernie or Bust is PUMA version 2016, which, BTW, was the original "Hillary or Bust".

It was stupid then, it's stupid now. Of course people should support the nominee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:02 AM

27. Clinton is a right-winger, a CONSERVATIVE, look at the issues

 

Destroy over half century of aid to single mothers during the 1990s? Check. One of Hillary's many, massive attacks on women and children, so the head explodes at how she can get away with calling herself a champion of these groups; but there's more,

Demean single mothers as "deadbeats" in the 1990s? Check. Just kidding. Hillary demeaned single mothers at least as recently as 2002 as "deadbeats" while defending the 1990s assault on lower income women and children...check.

Was for NAFTA? Check.

Believes the U.S. should continue to be one of the few western countries in the world with death penalty, and where healthcare is a "market commodity"? Check and check for Hillary.

Pushed for Fracking in the U.S. and around the world too? Check:



Claimed pro-NAFTA was a "mistake"? and but now tells us we should like the ultra-NAFTA TPPP, TransPacific corporate trade deal? Check.

Voted for Iraq war leading to thousands of dead Americans and hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis including dead Women and Children (but brown skinned, so Hillary can still call herself a champion of Women and Children, right?) and estimated 3 Trillion dollar long term cost? Check on all three.

Helped massive incarceration increase in 1990s to explode? While talking not about rehabilitating adults, not even rehabilitating kids, but telling us that even minors are "super-predators" who, Hillary told us, "have absolutely no conscience or empathy" so "lock 'em up" while trying to scare the public, led to explosion in prison even though crime had already peaked:



Claimed Iraq vote was a "mistake" that she "learned from" (It wasn't a mistake, it was a political calculation, anyone paying attention knew it was a scam that war...Her defenders must thing she was both stupid and incompetent to be "fooled" she was not, she is not kind or empathetic or progressive but she is very smart, cold calculating smart, but smart) But let's assume it really was a "mistake"

Did Hillary "learn from" that mistake? Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, reminds us Hillary only pushed for the same thing in Libya, leading to another disaster:



Not getting into what "or bust" means, it's different for each person..some of us are in states where it's not even close, so there's always Dr. Jill Stein of the Greens...others have a more difficult tactical choice to make if right-wing Hillary Clinton (who is more right wing than Trump on the whole regime change, bomb, invade, occupy thing...though Trump is obviously worse in other ways) and I do not envy them that difficult choice..

But if "or bust" means, "or else our changes of getting a liberal, never MIND a progressive" will be "bust" (unless someone runs third party who can win) then of course they are right: a right-winger like Hillary, who was able to destroy more than Reagan could in some big areas of social programs, that is indeed "bust" for any hopes of an actual progressive or even liberal...she isn't even liberal on foreign policy, and only in some areas domestically (she's not liberal on civil liberties, Patriot Act, corporate trade, public non-profit healthcare, or scores of other areas, not even liberal)

I'm not even including another set of hundreds of thousands of women and children Hillary's policies have killed off long before the 2003 Iraq war...But like white American women who are low income or moderate income, their massive killing doesn't preventt, mind bogglingly, doesn't stop Hillary from calling herself a champion of women and children, it's almost as crazy as Kissinger being given a Nobel Peace prize...oh, wait..





"Tangible issues"? Yeah, I think we've mentioned a dozen or so extremely tangible ones, but that won't stop the "you just don't like her personally" charges and other victim playing charges from some of her supporters...who, in fact, are the ones refusing to know about and acknowledge the above tangible issues..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hillarysong2016 (Reply #27)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:18 AM

36. LOL at the video choices. No thanks. But....

 

Under Bill Clinton: 25 Million jobs. Longest stretch of peacetime in US history. Lowest black unemployment in US history. And a budget surplus!

And sorry, but youre not going to fake meme your way into the WH: http://www.vox.com/2016/2/11/10961362/clinton-1994-crime-law

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #36)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:59 AM

106. Thank you for bringing up the twin subjects of unemployment and incarceration side by side

 

No replies about mass-murder and Trillions spent on wars on lies and on fracking and corporate trade positions of Hillary...or mass killing of women and children thanks to her Wars in not only Iraq but Libya, not a word about that...silence I guess means, "no big deal, beating the crap out of single mothers and women in the third world doesn't count...doesn't bother me one bit" and instead brining up "but, but, but the economy was great in 1990s!"

Which is kind of funny since we hear so often, from Hillary supporters, "She is not the same as her Husband, don't blame her for bad things under him!" except it WAS her policies in the case of the ones I mentioned, it wasn't just Bill, it was Hillary promoting those disastrous things in the 1990s and beyond...But you support Hillary it's not enough to pretend the bad things were "only Bill's doing" you also have to pretend the "good things" were her doing, like economic boom? Very amusing...but putting all that aside...thank you for brining up "black unemployment" and incarceration side by side, 'cause it brings up this:

An oft-repeated myth about the Clinton administration is that although it was overly tough on crime back in the 1990s, at least its policies were good for the economy and for black unemployment rates. The truth is more troubling. As unemployment rates sank to historically low levels for white Americans in the 1990s, the jobless rate among black men in their 20s who didn’t have a college degree rose to its highest level ever. This increase in joblessness was propelled by the skyrocketing incarceration rate.

Why is this not common knowledge? Because government statistics like poverty and unemployment rates do not include incarcerated people. As Harvard sociologist Bruce Western explains: “Much of the optimism about declines in racial inequality and the power of the US model of economic growth is misplaced once we account for the invisible poor, behind the walls of America’s prisons and jails.”

When Clinton left office in 2001, the true jobless rate for young, non-college-educated black men (including those behind bars) was 42 percent. This figure was never reported. Instead, the media claimed that unemployment rates for African Americans had fallen to record lows, neglecting to mention that this miracle was possible only because incarceration rates were now at record highs. Young black men weren’t looking for work at high rates during the Clinton era because they were now behind bars [so not counted in official unemployement stats]—out of sight, out of mind, and no longer counted in poverty and unemployment statistics.
http://www.thenation.com/article/hillary-clinton-does-not-deserve-black-peoples-votes/


So while I never give any President, Republican or Democrat, full "credit" or "blame" for when the economy is booming or busting since it's complex, let alone use that as a reason to vote for their spouse who was busy throwing poor men in jail and throwing poor single women, single mothers, off of support and calling them deadbeats, it turns out, what do you know? Even the "good" (which Hillary couldn't take credit for even if it had been real) turns out to be have been a fraud, too..

This won't change the minds of those for whom facts don't matter, but there are those with open mind that Bernie supporters can inform with these seldom talked about facts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hillarysong2016 (Reply #106)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 04:22 AM

107. ...

 

Bernie voted for crime bill, guns 5x, deregulate Wall St (2000), against 2007 immigration, against closing Gitmo. Hillary did not. He also voted for more wars and war funding than any candidate running. How many have died per year from his war and gun votes? He even voted for Afghanistan and Libya.

Feel free to fact check it all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:08 AM

31. Because not everyone sees politics as a team sport

 

They don't identify withbthe Democrats becausevthey see no committment to fundamental principles. They are more concerned with supporting candidates whom represent their values over loyalty to some nebulous institutionsl entity,

I do not endorse that, but I certainly understand it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #31)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:14 AM

34. I endorse that sentiment in fact.

(Doesn't mean I won't vote for the nominee, however...)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #31)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:19 AM

37. I said progressive movement, not any political party's.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:33 AM

47. No need. These 50,000 people have political freedom same as you or I do.

They can think how they want, and they can vote how they want. Since neither you nor I can control them, nor should we want to, maybe we should not worry about them any more than we did about the Pumas back in 08.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatrickforO (Reply #47)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:39 AM

53. So we shouldnt make an effort to reach out?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #53)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:55 AM

69. Ah, see, now you're talking.

I've said for a while Hillary needs to do a better job. The playbook she's been running is woefully dated and not suited to a 21st Century Campaign.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #69)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:16 AM

89. The playbook that is nabbing more vote totals than any other candidate while...

 

Having the most diverse electorate of any candidate running. Ok.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #89)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:18 AM

90. Yeah, who would think the inevitable and presumed front-runner might get more votes than the unknown

self-described socialist Senator?

In terms of "vote totals", how's that turnout thing working against the GOP's so far? Seen those numbers? I think they're "out there" speaking of the google.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #90)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:21 AM

94. 5 candidates = 5 GOTV campaigns.

 

Working out great so far. Hows Bernie's playbook working out?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #94)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:34 AM

100. You wanted to focus on November, I thought.

I've figured all along that she would probably be the nominee. Sanders always faced long odds, one of my hopes would be that he would force HRC to run a more substantive, issues-oriented campaign as opposed to the meaningless pablum and gibberish she was pretty clearly set to roll on at the beginning ("everyday Americans", etc)

That has happened a bit, but like I said, she's still running a set of 1990s style campaign strategies woefully out of whack for the 21st century political reality we face today. That's my opinion, since I want her to win if she's the nominee I have a vested interest in expressing it, but obviously not everyone is gonna agree.

Other than that I just hope we're not looking at some FBI indictment shoe dropping between the Convention and the GE. It'll be tough to blame THAT sort of clusterfuckerry on "berniebros", although I have no doubt some will try.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #89)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:19 AM

93. Having a more diverse electorate and higher vote totals doesn't mean your ideas are better.

The two issues are rather clearly orthogonal.

This is more than a horserace where one side "wins" and the other "loses" so that it is better to be on the "winning" team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #93)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:23 AM

96. Please refer to post 89 for further questions. Thanks.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #96)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:24 AM

97. Uh...that is the post I responded to, and refuted.

Quite a failure in logic, to think that merely repeating oneself is a refutation of my assertion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #93)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:27 AM

98. Better ideas are in the eye of the beholder.

 

The people will speak.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 02:56 AM

72. If Bernie is not elected

 

I am voting for Steve Gold Austin Because he is only man on Earth who can stop Trump. I saw him knock trump on his ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gwhittey (Reply #72)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:10 AM

84. I could watch that over and over again.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:18 AM

91. Tell Hillary she is wrong if she thinks we will unite just because she claims to be a Democrat.

We are done being enablers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Live and Learn (Reply #91)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:22 AM

95. I would prefer just to let it be a surprise for them. They do not understand what

people are feeling or why they are voting, so it is impossible to reason with them. Explanations for why calls of party unity fail are similarly poorly-received, as this thread shows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #95)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:28 AM

99. You are right. They really don't. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:44 AM

101. Roughly, some people have persuaded themselves that Clinton is not progressive

It's silly, it's juvenile, and it's demonstrably false, but it's driving a large part of the campaign emotion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #101)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 08:05 AM

117. IMO, for most it's a protective hypocrisy adopted

to "justify" an extreme partisanship that cannot otherwise be justified.

What is unacceptable about admitting that Hillary is progressive but does not go nearly far enough for them? For me nothing, but that would require accepting her as one of them, just not with them, and a rigid refusal to validate any differences from them by acceptance is a defining characteristic. From there the course is inevitable: Disagreement with extremists on both right and left inevitably results in hostility, rejection and aggression, and so

Hillary was the first major progressive leader they tossed under the bus -- this election. Obama met his fate with them long ago.

Question: No, it's not why are so many here not flat denouncing the Bernie or Bust campaign; hyperpartisaniship and the spector of loss provide that answer. It is this: For those very few who actually do join the Bernie or Bust campaign and finish up the election by tossing progressivism itself under the bus, where do they go from there?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #117)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:03 AM

126. Joining Bernie or Bust is not about tossing progressivism

It is about voting ideas over party unification, a party that works actively against progressives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #126)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:13 AM

128. Congratuations. An actual statement.

I couldn't agree with you less.

If some abandon progressivism if Bernie loses, has it occurred to you that maybe this wasn't really all about progressivism? I don't mean there were no progressive dreams, but just that for them Bernie-ism was mostly just a way of acting out against the Democratic establishment?

Like their counterparts on the far right who are supporting Trump to give the finger to the GOP establishment?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hortensis (Reply #128)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:03 AM

136. And you equate abandoning progressivism with not voting straight democratic ticket?

Someone should let Vermont and Maine know, because they keep voting for Independents over Democrats and Republicans.

Obviously I could not disagree more with that position, which I find ludicrous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #136)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:09 AM

138. Yes, your statement IS ludicrous, isn't it?

Bye now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 03:45 AM

102. because

1) some are caught up in passion and may not mean it.

2) some mean it and have had enough with playing the game by the establishments rules.

shrugs* lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 06:32 AM

109. Tangile concern for the issues . . . . .

 

Bernie has put out details about the plans in most areas and how he will fund them. . .Hillary has not. .. . all Hillary says is,"We can't do what Bernie says and I can do a better job."

Let's see something tangible and maybe there will be a conversation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 07:13 AM

113. What America needs is four parties.

A Clinton-Obama Democratic party, a Trump Republican-Nationalist party, a Kasich-Republican party, and a Sanders Independent party. That way every voter would get to vote for a party aligned with their interests The Clinton-Obama Democratic party would get at least 40% of the vote and the three remaining parties can fight over the remaining sixty percent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 07:15 AM

114. Clinton embodies everything that is wrong with our party. No, she can not unite us with her

lying secretive triangulating corporate third ways.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 07:38 AM

116. well - I cannot think of a more effective project to help ANY RWer move their campaigns forward

hence, I wonder about its origins.

I think one might be more successful finding intersectionality between BoB and RNC/anyGOPcampaign.

Lord knows this would be the place to float that petition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 09:29 AM

122. What I see is a lot of Clinton supporters

doing their level best to alienate and malign Sanders supporters so that they will have a very hard time voting for her.

Many of us probably will eventually vote for her should she be the nominee, but it will not be with enthusiasm or hope, simply with resignation over again, choosing the lesser of two evils.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bettie (Reply #122)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 09:56 AM

125. Not this time. I am done voting for the lesser of two evils.

 

The Hillary supporters just solidified up my determination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Katashi_itto (Reply #125)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:46 AM

132. My kids are still young

and I do believe that Trump would be worse.

So, I'll hold my nose and vote for her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bettie (Reply #132)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:53 AM

135. Thats your right and I respect that. Given the Choice between a Madman and a Corporate Operative

 

who has an agenda for TPP,to Privatize SSA (look at her picks for treasury), more war, will do nothing about climate change.

I think the madman can actually do less damage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Katashi_itto (Reply #135)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:07 AM

137. I respect your opinion too

We all have to do what we think is best.

I am tired of seeing our country sold to the highest corporate bidder, but Trump is just such an embarrassment.

I, do, however, love that Sanders is forcing a conversation that would never, ever have happened if we had the victory march/coronation that Clinton supporters expected.

At least the issues that affect non-1% people are out there. They wouldn't have even been discussed in the victory march/coronation model.

Clinton is modifying her speeches to include talk about the common folk. I just wish I had confidence that she actually means any of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bettie (Reply #137)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 11:11 AM

139. Agree, we must try to do what we think is best.

 

I agree with you.

Personally I think she will pivot 180 once she gets office and put the US on a fire sale. I think within 3-4 years we will look like Greece.

I wish you the best of fortune, no matter how it goes!

Kōun no saikō no

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 09:32 AM

123. Not sure about this organization or petition

Seems like a waste of time when all I have to do is not vote for Hillary on Election Day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to whatchamacallit (Reply #123)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:45 AM

131. But how is that progressive?

 

I mean, is modern progressivism solely about electing one person, or does it stand in solidarity with allies against the rightwing all out assault on our rights?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #131)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:50 AM

134. Sorry

Hillary is simply a different flavored extension of the rightwing assault on our rights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 10:40 AM

130. Why bother your pretty little head about it?

Labeling Bernie supporters such things won't get their votes if the time comes. If you think the Dem base will all of a sudden come together and sing Kumbaya with Hillary you're deluding yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 05:19 PM

144. The Democratic Party's reaction to McGovern loss.

 


Lost badly because:

o incumbent
o good economy
o Vietnam War winding down (536k in 1968 vs only 24k in 1972)
o Cold War winding down (Détente; Reagan tried putting the genie back in the bottle, but could not)
o lost the votes of Moderate

Most of those points were lost on Democrats after the 49-1 loss. All they concentrate on, then and still now, is the loss of those Moderate voters. So the Party moved Right.

If we lose Moderate votes then we must be too Liberal.
If we lose Liberal votes then we must be too Conservative.

Same logic.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 05:45 PM

147. Easily, we feel Hillary is not a Progressive.

 


If Hillary sets the standard for the Democratic party, then Progressives no longer have a party.


We can now argue about Hillary being Progressive or not, but that is a different discussion. You asked someone to explain why some people feel it is "Bernie or Bust". The answer is that Bernie is the only Progressive in the race.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Original post)

Thu Mar 3, 2016, 06:45 PM

148. Interesting question.

I'll recommend the OP.

"Progressives" includes a span of people. There are progressives who are registered in the Democratic Party, and progressives among the Democratic Left. The vast majority of them support Bernie Sanders for president. Some on the far-left consider Bernie as too far to the right.

Progressives are joined by the majority of young adults. And there are numerous other groups supporting Bernie. who you've never heard of. No single one of them may have access to socio-political power, but united, they seem to be doing pretty good.

I would agree that most registered Democrats will vote in November. And I don't think there will be many Trump votes from DU, either. I do think it's important to note that Trump's influence has resulted in a real bump in voter participation. I do not think that one of the Democratic candidates has the ability to get that type of potential voter to the polls. More, I think that campaign wrote off the Democratic Left months ago.

I respect that you support Hillary Clinton. I enjoy reading your contributions to the DU:GDP discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread