2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie already breaking promise to endorse the Democratic nominee.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) insisted hell stay in the presidential race, but outlined conditions under which he would endorse Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton if I cant make it.
Sanders, who badly trails Clinton in delegates for the Democratic nomination, said Wednesday that his chief priorities include making sure the party embraces his anti-establishment platform and expands its base.
If I cant make it and were going to try as hard as we can until the last vote is cast we want to completely revitalize the Democratic Party and make it a party of the people rather than one of large campaign contributors, Sanders said in an interview on the progressive Web show The Young Turks.
Sanders also listed policy demands he would make of Clinton, including a single-payer health care system, a $15 an hour minimum wage, tougher regulation of the finance industry, closing corporate tax loopholes and a vigorous effort to address climate change.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-endorsement_us_56f45bf0e4b014d3fe22b4a7
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)this happens every presidential race, It is called DELEGATE COUNT, for PARTY PLANK WRITING.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)Kittycat
(10,493 posts)I watched the interview, as well. He never mentioned not endorsing out right, he stated what he wanted to see supported. I'm not sure how that is different than any candidate ever.
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)Obviously, they have to have something to fight for. "Hillary is not as bad as Trump" is weak tea indeed, and if Hillary thinks that is going to suffice, she has another thing coming.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)Cenk Uygur's question (what would make the pro-Sanders movement become pro-Clinton) starts at 16:47:
merrily
(45,251 posts)joshcryer
(62,265 posts)Single payer is too much and I don't see Sanders forcing it. Otherwise he'll get everything, breaking up the banks is already a guarantee, tougher regulation is also a no brainer, easily put in there (frankly Clinton was talking about these things long before the race even became competitive and people should credit her for that, see her appearance on The Late Show with Colbert last October). $15 wage is an easy gimmie, it's still lower than inflation (should be $21). Closing corporate tax loopholes is already a party plank and has been for well over a decade (Al Gore first proposed it, Kerry ran on it, Obama and all the top candidates championed it in two presidential runs).
Climate change is also on a policy roadmap for energy independence, though I agree vigorously with Sanders on a carbon tax (one area where I disagree with Al Gore with carbon credits which are slow), but you won't see Clinton calling for a carbon tax (better called "fee and dividend" since people who don't pollute actually get paid for it; it's actually revenue neutral).
But whatever, I am replying possibly to the wrong person given the disagreements in the past, I am simply putting it out there. The OP is totally disingenuous about Sanders' position. He's not going to fail to endorse or fail to release his delegates for Clinton. He will campaign for her. The animosity is coming from his campaign managers not Sanders himself.
PyaarRevolution
(814 posts)If free college education isn't in there. We need both a public option AND free college. Debt free isn't good enough, it will still end up making people wage slaves to scumbag big corporations.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)At least to the OP
... (sigh)
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)They can, but he can't. Of course even after the open admission of raging antisemitism on the part of more than one Bernie basher we are supposed to say 'of course the double standards for Bernie are not about bias' and say that antisemitism is just a cute trait some folk have, folks we must welcome on DU and treat as if they were not malicious, bigoted agenda mongers.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)So it is okay.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)They've been given amnesty, nothing anyone says or does has any consequences now.
At least they're outing themselves more frequently now.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Where did you get yours from?
RandySF
(58,440 posts)Now he's adding conditions.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)That's what I thought.
Breaking his promise = refusing to endorse the nominee
You're welcome.
Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)I've been watching you eviscerate people with your arguments for months now and I just love it. Thank you for your great work.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)My dad taught me well, we learned how to debate at the dinner table. He played devil's advocate and if you lost your temper you lost the debate.
Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)wilt the stilt
(4,528 posts)I actually prefer someone with a law license who passed the bar.
Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)And I don't get into the kind of trouble that requires a counsel. But thanks for sucking the air out of this polite exchange
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Check his journal and you'll see why. And if you don't want to put anyone on ignore this is the best way to handle certain posters:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027534436
That ended up being a fun thread!
Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)wilt the stilt
(4,528 posts)on how to whine. I first noticed this Bernie whining phenomena when he started to whine about his dad being underemployed and going to see "death of a salesman". Like his father was the only immigrant who had it hard. You done well Bernie. Whining is in.
Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)One time I stopped traffic so that I could help one cross the street.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)You never see a turtle using anti-Semitic slurs.
Plus they're cute:
Ned_Devine
(3,146 posts)...and actually a pretty underrated album.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Well, your post proves you're an expert.
wilt the stilt
(4,528 posts)on how to whine. I first noticed this Bernie whining phenomena when he started to whine about his dad being underemployed and going to see "death of a salesman". Like his father was the only immigrant who had it hard. You done well Bernie. Whining is in.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1059701
After that disgusting post you're now claiming Bernie is "whining" about his father, an immigrant who lost his family in the Holocaust and worked himself to an early death?
In his New Hampshire victory speech, Bernie Sanders talked about his father, whom he rarely references. Sanders' father, a Polish immigrant, came to the U.S. with little money and speaking little English, and though he wasn't able to give his son a position of privilege, Sanders acknowledged that his parents' sacrifices got him to where he is today. "Neither one of my parents ever could have dreamed that I would be here tonight, standing before you as a candidate for president of the United States."
Eli Sanders didn't have the neat and pretty coming-to-America story that we generally look for as political capital. As Sanders noted, he lived with his father, mother, and brother in a small rent-controlled apartment in Brooklyn. Sanders said that his mother, who died young, dreamed of getting out of the apartment and owning a home, but never lived to see that happen.
Eli, a struggling paint salesman, was never able to carve out the family's slice of the American dream. As Sanders noted, his father came to this country with little money, and never was able to make very much of it. It's easy to see how Sanders adopted his sensitivity to class and the increasing farce of upward mobility.
Eli left Poland in 1921, and most of his family was sent to concentration camps during the Nazi occupation of the country. Despite working hard, Eli was never able to provide anything more than a "solidly lower-middle-class" life. Although he didn't go into great detail, Sanders' reference to his parents tells you a lot about the motivation behind his campaign for president. It takes someone who was truly affected by class issues to lobby for them so ardently. In a way, Sanders' vision for America is largely reflective of what his parents were denied. They were never delivered what the myth of the United States promises us that if you work hard and honestly, then you'll achieve a comfortable life. Instead, Sanders' father faced adversity, and was never able to rise above the fray.
That tells you a lot about Sanders' campaign. He wants to give the people like his parents like his father the chance to be able to thrive in the U.S., regardless of where they come from or how much they had in their bank accounts when they got started.
http://www.bustle.com/articles/140883-bernie-sanders-dad-played-a-huge-role-in-his-decision-to-run-for-president
I think you took a wrong turn, liberals here care about immigrants whose families were wiped out by the Nazis.
Free Republic is that way ----------->
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)Just ask him.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)They just don't understand why people think they're raging bigots.
Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #123)
Post removed
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)Self delete that, please.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Just to prove a point?
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)truebrit71
(20,805 posts)If Clinton gets the nomination...
Good. Fucking. Luck.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)There is an ugly undercurrent that has become very apparent from some posters, and it has nothing to do with Bernie's politics.
Loki
(3,825 posts)I see it as a distinct phenomenon of people who aren't getting their way. We all had immigrants in our families who had seriously hard times and a lot of hatred directed toward their being here and not being back in their country of origin. Irish, Italians, Chinese, people of Japanese origin and German origin during WWII, Jews, Native Americans, African Americans. Who hasn't felt the hatred. I only have to look at my mother's experience in the 1920-30's growing up a child of a divorced woman and in the depression. I only have respect for her and it's her 98th birthday today. I don't think I ever heard her whine, it just made her stand straighter and taller with her shoulders back. What doesn't kill us, makes us stronger.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Even though she was the target of hatred both in Germany and here I never met a stronger or more compassionate woman, she never looked down on disadvantaged people or accused them of "whining". Like Bernie's parents she died too young although her death was related to malnutrition and diseases she suffered as a child.
Oops, there I go, whining about my immigrant mom, just like Bernie.
I see posts like Wilt's as a distinct phenomena too, one usually seen on the right: intolerance of a minority group manifested as hatred of a candidate from that minority. People who say bigoted things about Obama also exhibit this distinct phenomena.
This is of course just my opinion but it's based on his posts about Bernie.
wilt the stilt
(4,528 posts)and you are extremely good at it.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)You're extremely good at something and we both know what it is.
Loki
(3,825 posts)I don't think so. How we deal with our experiences is unique to us. You want to call it whining about your immigrant mother, well I can't stop you, but some people would see it as such. BMUS I'm happy you found me. But I'm ending our conversation right now, because that's not what you want to have.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I just wanted to know if you agreed with everything he posted and if you were willing to draw the line at attacking a candidate's family.
Good for your mom, btw. Enjoy every moment with her. And I mean that sincerely.
LisaM
(27,792 posts)98!
Loki
(3,825 posts)Response to Loki (Reply #126)
Post removed
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)I'm in.
Actually, I just wanted to tell you that you don't have to copy and paste the same lame comment all over this thread. Once was enough to show your ass.
wilt the stilt
(4,528 posts)I appreciate the advice.
merrily
(45,251 posts)joshcryer
(62,265 posts)That's more than enough to get his stuff put in the party platform. I don't see single payer being put in there, but in the drafting process you can expect the public option to be revived, which is what the Democrats wanted anyway. He probably also won't get a carbon tax put in there, but cap and trade, maybe.
Big deal. Clinton would be remiss to ignore the delegates in that event and really what he wants is not controversial at all.
Let me lay it out for you, the delegates to the convention talk about, discuss, and write the party platform. Back in 2012, in fact, there was a delegate effort to put "God" in the platform (the original draft made no mention of God). The right wing ate it up as if it was some kind of moral victory but that's how the drafting process works.
stonecutter357
(12,693 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Say it ain't so!
Oh wait he did promise to not go negative and then broke his word on that so....
The true Bernie will be on full display soon, no doubt about it.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)Cenk Uygur's question starts at 16:47. The question isn't whether Sanders will endorse Clinton if he's not the nominee. That question is what would make his supporters support Clinton if he's not the nominee.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)I wish he'd at least make it interesting, something like:
BREAKING: PRINCESS DI WAS LOVE CHILD OF BERNIE AND MAGGIE THATCHER
Kittycat
(10,493 posts)revbones
(3,660 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)In another thread they're claiming he's behind a lawsuit against Bill Clinton.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)Cenk Uygur didn't ask Sanders if he'll endorse Clinton.
Uygur asked if he's not the nominee, what would make his supporters support Clinton.
Uygur's question starts at 16:47:
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)They've been smearing Bernie since he announced.
dogman
(6,073 posts)How can you break a promise about an event that has not occurred? There is no nominee.
KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)Why would he endorse someone that he hates? There is a lot of animosity there that makes an endorsement impossible.
Viva_La_Revolution
(28,791 posts)Link please
Jitter65
(3,089 posts)Autumn
(44,971 posts)pnwmom
(108,952 posts)Autumn
(44,971 posts)And by that I mean, have a good day.
elleng
(130,704 posts)SHOCKING!!!
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)dogman
(6,073 posts)He will endorse her over the GOP. That endorsement will not influence people who think for themselves. As he noted they are leaders and activists on there own. They are not sheeple people.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)revbones
(3,660 posts)But it's ok with her followers when Hillary breaks hers.
gordianot
(15,232 posts)Response to RandySF (Original post)
Post removed
Kittycat
(10,493 posts)You can open for Hillary at her $225k speaking gigs for her Wall Street, pharma and fracking buddies.
SwampG8r
(10,287 posts)A made up quote that barnum never said to back an op about what bernie never said
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)When there is NO FUCKING NOMINEE.
jillan
(39,451 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)DesertFlower
(11,649 posts)change the way i think about him as a person. he seems to be a really nice guy.
Viva_La_Revolution
(28,791 posts)It would mean he'd been replaced by aliens. Stupid aliens with no spine.
AgerolanAmerican
(1,000 posts)He'd blow his own credibility out of the water by doing so.
His cred is anti-establishment.
She is as establishment as it gets.
There's no common ground to be had here.
RandySF
(58,440 posts)revbones
(3,660 posts)there's no reason to endorse her. It would be soul crushing to his movement, and the only way he could legitimately sell it to his base. If he just unconditionally endorsed, well aside from looking incredibly shady, it would just demoralize all his supporters and would do nothing to motivate them later.
This is all IF he isn't the nominee.
TexasTowelie
(111,894 posts)then he will lose his chairmanship on Senate committees, his clout as a spokesman will diminish if he doesn't chair any committees, and he will most likely have a primary challenger when he runs for Senate in 2018. All three are excellent reasons for him to make an endorsement.
Bernie doesn't get the option of switching from independent--to Democrat--and back to independent without damaging his credibility in the process. He decided to become a Democrat for the presidential run and if he becomes an independent again then the people that said he was an opportunist will be correct.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)And still be on those committees. No one would care about his stated affiliation. But if he doesn't endorse and takes his delegates home, he'd be done in politics forever.
TexasTowelie
(111,894 posts)If he backs out of the Democratic party and becomes an independent then the only reason why the Democrats would let him hold any chairmanships would be if they needed his vote to reach either a 50 vote or a 60 vote threshold (for a majority or override a filibuster). If the Democrats are somewhere in the middle of those numbers or below 50 senators then they have nothing to gain by putting an independent in a chairmanship or as a ranking committee member.
There was a reason for the Democrats to caucus with Bernie in 2007 when he became senator because it swung the split in the Senate in favor of the Democrats 51-49. If he sided with the GOP it would have meant that with Cheney as VP that the GOP would have been in control. He was also valuable in the 2009 because the Democrats only needed one GOP vote to break a filibuster. However, many Democrats would view it as a betrayal for him to renounce the party after he used the party apparatus for his presidential ambitions and after he has attacked the establishment within the party.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)As an independent. Democrats really don't care about affiliation if loyalties are shown, and Sanders has caucused with the Democrats and shown his loyalty on the big votes (ACA comes to mind). He's never been a spoiler vote, unlike Lieberman.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)Not Endorsing Clinton = becoming a pariah and likely primaried with the full force of the DNC behind it. Never getting relevant committee assignments in the senate, being busted down effectively to a "junior senator" with no real sway.
AgerolanAmerican
(1,000 posts)If he does he is going to make fools of millions of us.
I VERY strongly doubt he is going to do that. It's nigh-impossible to imagine.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)But we'll get back the Senate and he'll be the Chair.
It seems you don't know anything about where Sanders stands in the Senate. What his duties are, and how he attempts to affect change.
RichVRichV
(885 posts)I swore I'd not use this emote, but I have to here.
You do realize that Bernie won the Vermont presidential primary by so much that Hillary didn't even reach viability? In fact he got more votes in that state than every other presidential candidate combined by a substantial margin. He won his last senate race with 75%+ of the vote, including a large block of the Republican vote. Plus he has an army of people willing to donate to him just to screw with the DNC if they were to try. Good luck on taking him out in a senate primary. His seat is as safe as anyone's in the country for as long as he wants it.
As for him becoming a pariah in the senate, the Democratic party may want to wait before getting too vindictive. Let me throw a little hypothetical scenario at you. Say Hillary were to win the presidency (which means a Democrat as vice president presumably). And let's say we pick up some seats in the senate, but not enough to win it outright. The split going in becomes 50 Republicans, 49 Democrats, and Bernie. They're sure going to look foolish if they throw him out too early in that scenario. It may not be obvious to you, but with the senate up for grabs, the Democrats need Bernie in the senate a lot more than the other way around.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)And takes his delegates and goes home here.
Vermonters would not want to even be associated with that. It would be scandalous all on its own. Vermonters would call him up on the regular asking why he was doing that.
Of course it's not going to happen. I'm saying if it did, then there would be push back.
In such a scenario, Sanders takes his ball and goes home, Peter Welch would be ripe for the picking. Miro Weinberger, even Howard Dean could make an impressive showing.
RichVRichV
(885 posts)To be blunt it would go over with a yawn. It simply wouldn't even register against him. Don't take my word for it. Go find some Bernie supporters and ask them how outraged they would be if he loses and doesn't endorse Hillary. Most of us would laugh at you for even expecting us to be.
Better yet, go ask the Vermont Republicans and independents that vote for him how outraged they'd be if he doesn't endorse Hillary. A lot of them probably would be outraged if he did.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)RichVRichV
(885 posts)First she has to win the nomination. May have gone largely unnoticed, but Bernie has gained back 23 delegates on Hillary between Arizona, Utah, Idaho, and Democrats abroad. That's with over 2100 delegates left to go. Contrary to what the media has been saying this race isn't over yet.
And even if she does win, Bernie has laid down what platform he expects out of Hillary for an endorsement. He's not going to let her just swing hard right for the general if she wants it. The ball will be in her court if she wins the nomination to earn his endorsement.
joshcryer
(62,265 posts)Not in some OP that has a low opinion of him.
Mona
(135 posts)From the start of the campaign, where he says he will endorse the nominee?
RandySF
(58,440 posts)I would like to hear the exact words he used.
delrem
(9,688 posts)I'm impressed.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)Go, Bernie!
alittlelark
(18,888 posts)....seriously.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)because yeah, seriously.
malokvale77
(4,879 posts)It makes me happy to know that he won't be a sellout.
pat_k
(9,313 posts)The bastard!
Meteor Man
(385 posts)Applauds Loudly! But we can't remember why.
SunSeeker
(51,502 posts)renate
(13,776 posts)Odds are, he won't be the nominee. It's incredibly maddening, but true. And if he endorsed Hillary without a scrap of concession from her, that would be a tremendous squandering of what he has built, so of course he wouldn't do it.
Similarly, if the Democratic leadership don't take advantage of the incredible energy and excitement that Bernie's ideas have brought, they would be guilty of political malpractice (if only there were such a thing).
This is the Democratic Party's chance to win hearts and minds and gain a decades-long majority (especially since so many of Bernie's supporters are so young). God, I hope they don't blow it.
blueintelligentsia
(507 posts)snowy owl
(2,145 posts)Unfortunately, I don't think she can get it done. I supposed all those wonderful establishment dems who support her could if she shows that it is her mission . . . but somehow, I think money trumps all with her. I just don't think she's got the leverage. Bernie is different. Maybe he couldn't get it done either but I'd put my money on him before I would on Hillary.
Surya Gayatri
(15,445 posts)What a disappointment he is.
Behind that populist façade lurks a massive ego and vaunting ambition.
He pledged to endorse the DEM candidate in order to be able to run as a DEM, but as the cheers of his crowds turn his head, he begins to renege on his promise.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)Cenk Uygur's question starts at 16:47.
His question isn't if Sanders will endorse Clinton if he's not the nominee.
His question is what would get his supporters to support Clinton if he's not the nominee.
stonecutter357
(12,693 posts)Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)Go Bernie Go!
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)Soon,he'll be referring to himself in the third person.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Vinca
(50,236 posts)hellofromreddit
(1,182 posts)That's one of the many reasons he has been such a good politician.
There are two kinds of people who complain about hagglers: (1) people who don't know how to haggle, and (2) people trying to get a lop-sided deal.
artyteacher
(598 posts)Destroying his legacy?
Mike Nelson
(9,942 posts)...I do believe Bernie has hinted his eventual non-support. He appears to be suggesting Hillary is "on the take" from Wall Street corporations. To be explicit, this means bribes. While I do not agree with this view, I can fully understand Bernie and his supporters would want to actively campaign against Hillary. Again, I don't agree at all - but those who do should actively support a third party candidate and boycott the Democratic Convention if they nominate Hillary Clinton.
ucrdem
(15,512 posts)Office Sought: S - SENATE
Election Year: 2018
State: VT - VERMONT, District: 00
Party: INDEPENDENT
http://www.fec.gov/fecviewer/CandidateCommitteeDetail.do?&tabIndex=1&candidateCommitteeId=S4VT00033
That's our super-special Bernie!
BlueStateLib
(937 posts)After a second to the motion, sought by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the convention chair, the crowd shouted a collective aye, and Pelosi declared Obama the Democratic presidential nominee.
djean111
(14,255 posts)That being said - supporter of candidate known for lying accuses Bernie Sanders of lying.
Bwahahahahaha!
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Even as his most vitriolic supporters scream.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Double standard for Bernie, suggestions that his campaign is all about money and this shit is streaming out of a DU cohort that proudly harbors antisemitic posters. Transparent is transparent.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)See Bernie going back on his word.
We will see how it plays out in the remaining primaries.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Get back to us when the promise is actually broken, won't ya?
beastie boy
(9,228 posts)Now he is setting conditions for his endorsement.
Not sure it counts as a broken promise, but it is certainly bait and switch as far as his promises go. Of course, there is always a question of whether he will insist on his conditions. Frankly, I don't think he has a standing to do that.
So in the end, I think Bernie will stick to his word and endorse Hillary unconditionally. This is his only way to be able to influence the Dem party platform.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)Cenk Uygur's question starts at 16:47.
It's not: Will you endorse Clinton if you're not the nominee?
It is: What would get your supporters to support Clinton if you're not the nominee?
Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)beastie boy
(9,228 posts)That was the link I was referring to:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-endorsement_us_56f45bf0e4b014d3fe22b4a7
If I cant make it and were going to try as hard as we can until the last vote is cast we want to completely revitalize the Democratic Party and make it a party of the people rather than one of large campaign contributors, Sanders said in an interview on the progressive Web show The Young Turks.
Sanders also listed policy demands he would make of Clinton, including a single-payer health care system, a $15 an hour minimum wage, tougher regulation of the finance industry, closing corporate tax loopholes and a vigorous effort to address climate change.
Sure sounds like he is setting conditions... Then again, it may just be shoddy reporting from the neo-liberal third way establishment media...
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)Cenk Uygur asked Sanders what would get his supporters to support Clinton if he's not the nominee. He said that Democratic Party needs to be a "party of the people." Then Uygur asked Sanders what policy positions he'd ask of Clinton.
You can watch for yourself. These questions start at 16:47.
aikoaiko
(34,159 posts)Although sometimes people will only do things if their demands are met.
revbones
(3,660 posts)in exchange for his endorsement - and demonstrated principles?
My god! What's next?
Happenstance24
(193 posts)Bernie's probably done in the Senate. Dem's will kick him off and blackball him from all their committees leaving Bernie out in the cold as a lame duck Senator. He'll be cornered after this. Dumb move in a line of dumb moves like giving up the South from his campaign.
Powdered Toast Man
(381 posts)Happenstance24
(193 posts)If Bernie caucuses with Pugs his whole revolution is done. He'd be caught between Dems who don't want him since they think he screwed them and Pugs who he doesn't agreed with politically at all. Between a rock and a hard place. At that point i imagine he'd retire or run for office elsewhere.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Matariki
(18,775 posts)Her followers sure as hell won't.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)hellofromreddit
(1,182 posts)The primary is still unresolved.
Gothmog
(144,884 posts)truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...and then expect them to kiss your arse...
Rob H.
(5,349 posts)Metric System
(6,048 posts)wanted to go to the end, then he should drop out sooner rather than later. An extended primary season can be a good thing if both sides come together in the end.
Bettie
(16,058 posts)to want the party to be of the people rather than large campaign contributors?
The point of negotiation is to ask for more than you expect to settle for. But, I get that Clinton people think that any sort of recognition of the "little people" is just too far.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Poutrage Fail.
blueintelligentsia
(507 posts)blueintelligentsia
(507 posts)I suggest you correct your mistake.
The reporter used the word demands...
Loki
(3,825 posts)Sanders also listed policy demands he would make of Clinton, including a single-payer health care system, a $15 an hour minimum wage, tougher regulation of the finance industry, closing corporate tax loopholes and a vigorous effort to address climate change.
One has to wonder why he hasn't been able to accomplish these himself. He's been in government for how many years???? As how to address climate change, with a good friend like climate change denier, Sen. James Inhofe, who needs enemies.
blueintelligentsia
(507 posts)From 1994 - 2007, congress was controlled by the Republicans, in that time he was known as the "Amendment King". Look it up.
Loki
(3,825 posts)I'm just curious how he proposes to accomplish them now if the make up of the Senate and the House doesn't change. Magic? To date, no one has explained to me how this will happen. Just convincing Republicans that they should just vote for these things that they have always been vehemently opposed to is evidence of a plan that we have not been told about or it is something that he "thinks" will happen. Certainty is not sometimes based in reality. So again I ask, how will this be done? We have a platform for raising the minimum wage, we have accomplished ACA with no Republican help and a constant threat to dismantle it at every turn., and he wants free college and single payer. Yes, regulate corporations and close loopholes by all means, but when we have children murdered in their classroom and this country acts as if they have to wait on the approval of the NRA to agree on background checks, we have an a failure to communicate. Do you propose that he become a dictator and do these things without the consent of the congress. I find this all very unrealistic and I personally prefer to live in a reality based world where we work together to accomplish change, not against each other.
blueintelligentsia
(507 posts)Loki
(3,825 posts)I'm looking for answers to what he is proposing, i.e.: plans, goals. If this President has had this much trouble with the Republican H&C, what could Mr. Sander's hope to do differently. I even think that Hillary will have a very hard time just like Obama if we don't succeed in changing the makeup of the Senate and the House. We can't continue with the obstructionism unless we decide we are comfortable with a dictatorship. They will not move, they have shown that time and time again. If you don't have a 60 vote firewall, you don't get shit done. They make sure of that. Magical thinking and just saying this will change, is not a plan.
Response to RandySF (Original post)
John Poet This message was self-deleted by its author.