Sanders and Trump as allies?

Submitted by gjohnsit on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 9:41pm

This will make heads explode on TOP.

"Mr. Trump campaigned as a populist, campaigned as somebody who is anti-establishment, and I have zero doubt that he received the support of many working class people all across the country because of some of the positions that he took," Sanders told reporters at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast.
Despite being on opposite ends of the political spectrum in many ways, some of those populist ideas from Trump were similar to the ones Sanders made the cornerstone of his insurgent primary campaign, particularly an outspoken opposition to trade deals such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Sanders said the two might also be able to find common ground on an increase in infrastructure projects that could create more jobs.

But Sanders added that now it was time to see whether Trump's slogans and campaign promises were for real, and that he and other members of Congress would now hold his feet to the fire, particularly on his pledges not to slash Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid.

"During the campaign he said a lot, and we will find out soon enough about whether what he said was sincere ... our job is to hold him accountable and we intend to do that," Sanders said.

Sanders added that if Trump keeps his campaign promises and "has the guts" to stand up to corporate America and fight to stop companies from moving overseas, "he will have an ally with me."

Boom! A thousand liberal minds just exploded.
And then Bernie pointed out the obvious.

"The evidence is pretty clear," Sanders continued, "that when you lose the White House in a campaign against a gentleman, who, I believe, will enter the White House as the least popular candidate in the history of this country, when you lose the Senate, when you lose the House, when you lose two-thirds of state governor's chairs, when you've lost some 900 seats of legislatures around the country in the last eight year, I think it is time for the Democratic Party to reassess what it stands for and where it wants to go."
Sanders said that amounted to a choice for Democrats to decide whether they're standing with "corporate America" and Wall Street or with a declining middle class
.

Exactly what we've been saying here on C99P.

This comes a day after Bernie refused to join the Dems.

Tags:

bernie sanders

donald trump

Vote

Comments

Submitted by Le Frog on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 10:19pm

Sounds just like popcorn microwaving

I won't be going over to TOP but I bet the hysterics amount to either "Bernie betrayed us again!!!1!1!" or pearl-clutching on fainting couches because an adult wants to get something done for people, even if that means working with a madman, which therefore allegedly props up Trump's popularity and guarantees Republicans in power forever.

Submitted by Dallasdoc on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 11:10pm

I see Bernie stepping up to seize the populist mantle

Sure he's willing to work with Trump on a lot of stuff Trump has no intention of doing. The stuff Trump might go through with (exiting trade deals?) Bernie could share the credit for. The stuff Trump reneges on, Bernie can castigate Trump as a faithless liar, and he can steal those issues.

Bernie is more interested in populist politics than Democratic Party politics. He knows this is where the action is. And he also knows that his left-wing economic populism is more inclusive and far preferable to Trump's right-wing nativist populism. It makes a lot of sense fo Bernie to stay in the populist arena, to either hold Trump accountable or steal his populist base. Bernie's still a lot smarter than establishment Democrats.

—

Please help support caucus99percent!

Submitted by non-prophet jim on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 11:37pm

"He knows where the action is."

More importantly, he knows what's right. And what the country needs.

—

"The real power is in the hands of small groups of people and I don't think they have titles. -- Bob Dylan"

Submitted by WoodsDweller on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 11:48pm

"Bernie's still a lot smarter than establishment Democrats"

In all honesty, that's a pretty low bar.

—

"The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function." -- Albert Bartlett
"A species that is hurtling toward extinction has no business promoting slow incremental change." -- Caitlin Johnstone

Submitted by Pluto's Republic on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:30am

That's it. At no time has Bernie Sanders ever been a Democrat.

Thanks for the paradigm adjustment, Doc.

Here's reality: No member of the Democratic Establishment will ever mistake Bernie Sanders for a Democrat. Bernie Sanders, even in his run for the President, did not espouse Democratic initiatives or policies. The Democratic Party will not carry national health care over the finish line. The Democratic Party has no policy to invest in the human capital of American citizens by educating them fully and maintaining their health. Those are not Democratic values.

The people who supported Bernie Sanders for President were supporting a candidate who signed some flimsy piece of paper saying he was suddenly and technically a Democratic — but he never was and he never will be a Democrat. It meant nothing.

A Democratic value is forced globalization paid for by crushing the American middle class through free-trade agreements that gave corporations sovereignty over nations. Bernie Sanders was a traitor to that Democratic value and attempted to subvert it.

Sanders was showered with millions of small donations from people who knew in their hearts that Bernie was running against Democratic values like those that Hillary Clinton had long supported. The Democratic Party was finally forced to demonstrate that Bernie Sander's candidacy would not show up on any Democratic Party ticket. And it never will.

Bernies policies belong to anyone who will entertain them. And Bernie will do whatever he must to bring those policies to the People, who are the only ones who can benefit from them. Ultimately and morally, policies that benefit the lives of the People transcend the machinations of political parties.

If the people want such policies, they should take them.

Submitted by ThoughtfulVoter on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:35am

Bernie's appeal broader than a specific party...

The people who supported Bernie Sanders for President were supporting a candidate who signed some flimsy piece of paper saying he was suddenly and technically a Democratic — but he never was and he never will be. It meant nothing.

We supported Bernie for his values, for his ethics, and for his track record of watching out for the little guy. We got on board with him because of his vision for the future, not because he was or was not affiliated with any group and or had any particular endorsement.

I believe that now that Bernie is not weighed down by the heavy cloak of supporting Hillary, he can do great things for America.

And I agree, PR, those values are ours to embrace as they are not specific to a party.

For those of us who have believed that way all along (prior to even hearing of Bernie), it was totally refreshing to find a candidate who finally did too! And because they were our values prior to the campaign, they will still be our values into the future (for me at least).

Submitted by HenryAWallace on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 5:55am

Yes & no. Sanders is a New Deal Democrat, not a New Democrat.

During one of his primary campaign appearances at a university, he even lined up his positions with those of FDR. Of course, one can argue--and I have--that New Deal Democrats were actually anti-revolution Democrats. But, that's another story.

Why did Democratic politicians hate Sanders' run so, almost to a person? (Or seem to?) For one thing, Sanders publicly criticized Democrats of today and did not share money, as all Democrats in Congress are required to do. Literally, he did not pay his dues to the DCCC or to (as far as we know) the DSCC. At the opposite end is Hillary, who (since she met Bill) disses only Republicans and has fundraised for the Party and individual Democrats (including then Senate hopeful Obama) 'til the (Vermont) cows come home.

Since 1995, members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus have collectively given $6.3 million directly to members of the Blue Dog and New Democrat coalitions, according to an analysis by the Huffington Post of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics. That’s not an overwhelming sum when the average winning campaign nowadays costs more than $1 million, but it represents one-sixth of all giving from one faction within the party to another. It doesn’t include the millions that progressives have given to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee — rank-and-file members are supposed to cough up $150,000 every two years (though many miss that mark), committee chairmen $250,000 and up. The DCCC turns around and funnels that money to conservative Democrats in close races. Add to that the millions spent by organized labor and outside groups such as MoveOn.org, and it’s clear that progressive donors have become major financial benefactors of the conservative Democrats who battled to undermine their agenda. “That tension exists a lot,” George Miller says about the party’s demand that progressives fund their intramural rivals. “That tension exists a lot. And it’s real.”

Democrats play it too safe, says Grijalva. “When I give my dues to the DCCC, or when you contribute to it, you have no distinction as to where your money is going to go. And it goes to front-liners and usually Blue Dogs and [they] usually vote against our issues. And that’s a real frustration. And usually, if there’s a progressive running, it’s the last consideration in terms of support,” he says.

The Blue Dog and New Democrat coalitions emerged in the 1990s in the wake of the successful Republican campaign to take control of Congress, and have continuously expanded their membership ever since. The prototypical Blue Dog comes from a socially conservative, rural district; New Democrats are more likely to represent pro-choice bankers from the suburbs. Both groups offer automatic protection against accusations that their members are too liberal.

The money flows almost entirely in one direction: The conservative coalitions have given progressives less than $600,000. While Blue Dogs and New Democrats have each given their fellow travelers $2.4 million in the past 15 years, members of the much larger progressive caucus have helped each other to the tune of just $1.3 million.

Progressives have received very little return on their investment when it comes to important votes. The 34 Democrats who voted against the health care reform bill in March have collectively received $2.1 million from progressive members. More than half of that sum came in the past five years.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/08/power-struggle-inside-the_n_529... (May 25, 2011 article--very good read, IMO)

Submitted by Steven D on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:47am

HRC fundraied for them

only to get like-minded people in Congress. She never campaigned or did anything for "progressive" candidates. It was all very calculated to build up the Dem party to be beholden to her, and allow her to take it over in 2008. Obama really screwed with her plans. I bet she will hate him for the rest of her life. Just like she hates Bernie now and all the rest of us deplorables.

—

"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott

Submitted by orlbucfan on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 8:12am

AMEN, Dallasdoc. Always a pleasure to read you! :-)

—

Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.

Submitted by Steven D on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 10:20pm

Yeah they will explode

Too bad for them.

—

"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott

Submitted by dkmich on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 9:53am

They still hate Bernie, and his supporters.

They're still claiming Bernie isn't a Democrat and advocating for him is advocating for a third party. It hasn't changed a bit. Squabble, squabble, squabble.

—

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

Submitted by snoopydawg on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 10:27pm

We have been trying to reform the DP for decades

And how has that worked for us?

For as long as I have been involved with progressive political movements, activists and organizers have been trying to reform the Democratic Party with little to no success.

Unfortunately, none of this is new as activists have tried to reform the Democratic Party since the 1960’s, only to see the Dems lurch further and further to the right over the past several decades.

At this point, I beg the people who will read this article: do not waste your time trying to reform the Democratic Party. History matters. And history tells us that “reforming” the Democratic Party (whatever that means, as the left has no unified vision) is not only a lost cause, but symptomatic of an American population that lacks anything resembling creativity or independence.

I hope that you read this article. The author goes into detail about the things that only the DP can or won't do while they let the republicans do everything they want when it comes to passing their legislation.
From the Korean, Vietnam to the Afghanistan and Iraq wars to the expansion of Bush's illegal spying program, the MCA when congress decided to take away Habeous Corpus to everything that Bush did and that Obama expanded, this author says he hasn't read anything new that he didn't read when Bush was president because Obama expanded every one of his policies.
I remember this time and how pissed we were when it happened.
Pelosi told us that they had to keep the powder dry. It's still very dry, isn't it?

After 9/11, the modern Democratic Party continued its imperial legacy when it fully bought into and promoted George W. Bush’s “War on Terror.” Without question, Democrats share equal responsibility for the death and destruction that followed the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Not only did they overwhelmingly vote in favor of both wars, they also failed to cut funding when they had the power to do so (2006-2008).

Thanks joe for this link from the EBs.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/18/death-of-the-liberal-class-death-...

—

The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt

Submitted by ghotiphaze on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 10:57pm

TOP never considered Bernie a Democrat

They just wanted to strip mine his voters.

—

There is no such thing as TMI. It can always be held in reserve for extortion.

Submitted by Slightkc on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:03am

Yeah, right...

They just wanted to strip mine his voters.

yeah, right... in the small space of moments when they could stop denigrating and bashing us!

Submitted by TJ on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 10:02am

They has a weird way of going about it.

Even used car salesmen know insults don't sell anything.

Though Kos did show occasional flashes of awareness, eg, when he argued against right wing Dem Kaine.

Submitted by lunachickie on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 10:51am

And they failed, spectacularly, didn't they?

They just wanted to strip mine his voters.

But that's not THEIR fault, is it? How dare I stop eating their shit sandwiches? Oh well, they were just not ugly enough, I guess. Not enough noise to fool the rubes. Not enough scolding. Not enough lecturing.

Yeah, how's that working out for them? Look at all they've lost since 2008. Why the fuck should anyone listen to them?

Submitted by Not Henry Kissinger on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 11:08pm

Shorter Bernie:

when you lose the Senate, when you lose the House, when you lose two-thirds of state governor's chairs, when you've lost some 900 seats of legislatures around the country in the last eight year, I think it is time for the Democratic Party to reassess what it stands for and where it wants to go."

Heckuva Job, Barry!

Be interesting to see how much of the caucus is willing to follow Sander's lead and how many will remain obstructionist.

All Bernie needs are 7 more Dems willing to vote no on a filibuster and suddenly that group becomes a very powerful swing bloc.

—

The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?

Submitted by dkmich on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 9:57am

That really says it all....

They are a party heading the way of the Whigs. I think progressives should walk and talk at the same time. Try to reform the party, and build a new progressive party that can step in the Dems don't comply and die. It shouldn't be only one approach.

—

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

Submitted by PriceRip on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 11:09pm

I think anything grounded in reality . . .

. . . will make heads explode at TOP.

Because they do not understand:

Politics is the art of the possible.

- - - Prince Otto Eduard Leopold von Bismarck, Duke of Lauenburg

Submitted by detroitmechworks on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 11:17pm

Respectfully if I hear a single word about an alliance...

with the "Alt-right", Bernie can go right to hell.

Edit: Allow me to make my statement COMPLETELY clear:

I don't work with Nazis.

Ever.

—

I do not pretend I know what I do not know.

Submitted by eyo on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 6:52am

A socialist even a consertive could love

One story from his campaign I liked, Mayor Bernie managed to "out-Republican the Republicans".
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/10/31/socialist-even-conservative-could-love-burlington-mayor-sanders-was-able-out-republican-republicans/SCmh2TLifXxXRPFKC8NMjO/story.html

[...] Sanders, the unyielding ideologue, who once read Fidel Castro’s biography during a crucial meeting in City Hall, turned out to be a pragmatic and efficient administrator, one so fiscally conservative that some Republicans say he managed to “out-Republican the Republicans.” He just did it his way.

Determined to find alternatives to the property tax, which he considered regressive, he had municipal attorneys pore over the city charter in search of novel revenue sources. When he found the city’s insurance contracts had been repeatedly awarded to the same local companies, he applied a “radical socialist concept, competitive bidding,” as he later jokingly described it, and saved the city thousands of dollars.

Conservatives grumbled when Sanders put his sneaker-clad feet up on the table, but when his new treasurer discovered a $1.9 million surplus hidden in the budget, they grew quiet. [...]

Thanks

Submitted by lunachickie on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 10:56am

You're going to be awfully lonely at some point

because like it or not, the actual Left needs to swing some ugly shitty people in this direction after they wake the fuck up. And some of them will. Some of them already are.

Ruling them out before the fact will get you exactly nowhere.

Submitted by detroitmechworks on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:39am

And some of them know what words to say

in order to get reasonable, good people to support incredibly vile ideologies.

Usually it's in the vein of "Just give them a chance."

—

I do not pretend I know what I do not know.

Submitted by Steven D on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:52am

Not every Trump voter

is a Neo Nazi.

The Neo-nazis and white nationalists just want us to think that.

And I bet that is how the media (other than Fox) will go after them, because polarization and division has worked so well for the .001% who pay the bills for both parties and our Infotainment industry.

—

"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott

Submitted by detroitmechworks on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:16pm

Let me try to be clear, there seems to be a miscommunication

When I say alt-right, I specifically mean the Neo-Nazi crowd.

I know very well how they can get folks who aren't Nazis to be called Nazis by simply claiming that so and so person said something they agreed with. Media does feed off that, and I've seen good people tarred with that bullshit brush before.

Unfortunately, it gets into calling everybody Nazis loses the power of the word, and makes people assume that you're only talking about Trump voters. Again, I blame media there.

—

I do not pretend I know what I do not know.

Submitted by lunachickie on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:28pm

So you're just not going to trust anyone

that you deem "alt-right"? Or has the media done that to you?

How do you have it both ways? I'm sorry, I don't mean to be picky, but I can't figure out how we'll manage to build any coalitions with such pre-judgement afoot. I do not see how that succeeds, ever.

Submitted by detroitmechworks on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:36pm

I hear what you're saying.

And respectfully, I still disagree.
Of course, keep in mind I had a long running feud with RKBA at TOP, so I tend to be very suspicious of anybody trying to get me to change my mind with regards to an ideology I find repugnant. Especially people offering the whole "See we're NOT that different if you just give up one little thing..."

Bridge building that demands you rip up your side of the road to supply the timber isn't something I'm interested in.

And I mostly determine the alt-right by those that personally call themselves it.

—

I do not pretend I know what I do not know.

Submitted by lunachickie on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:54pm

Those are folks who will never agree with you anyway

I mostly determine the alt-right by those that personally call themselves it.

If you think this is what is being asked of you,

Bridge building that demands you rip up your side of the road to supply the timber isn't something I'm interested in.

Building coalitions does not demand that you do such a thing. I know that the "conventional wisdom" of that disgusting Kos blog says otherwise, though. Perhaps it's simply that you need to rid your brain and psyche of all their fucking disgusting propaganda and bullshit before you can fight anything at all.

Submitted by Steven D on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 2:04pm

Okay thanks for the clarification

Understood.

—

"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott

Submitted by readliberally on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 2:14pm

I don't support incredibly vile

ideologies but I'll support policies that are good for the people even if they are also supported by vile ideologues.
We have to support (or condemn) policies, not people.

Submitted by Cassiodorus on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 5:01pm

Nazis?

I await the revelation of Donald Trump's version of "Mein Kampf," the American equivalent of the burning of the Reichstag building, the open attacks on trade unions, the renewed plot to kill all the Jews...

—

“The loyal Left cannot act decisively. Their devotion to the system is a built-in kill switch limiting dissent.” - Richard Moser

Submitted by Ellen North on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:19pm

Sat, 11/19/2016 - 5:01pm —

Sat, 11/19/2016 - 5:01pm — Cassiodorus

Nazis?

I await the revelation of Donald Trump's version of "Mein Kampf," the American equivalent of the burning of the Reichstag building, the open attacks on trade unions, the renewed plot to kill all the Jews...

Ummm, if we switch that last to 'plot to kill all the People of Colour', that's pretty much been underway under both Dems and Repubs already, hasn't it?

If Trump's smart enough to dump the crazy wing-nut stuff/prospective appointments, play this straight and study up on the principles and aim of democracy while making an effort to actually serve the public interest, he might actually do some good for what remains of the battered country and its citizens... in any event, I'm very relieved that the Dems were not rewarded for their criminality by Clinton being branded The US Woman President Who Sold The Earth Because She Wanted The Moon For It. That would have cemented our doom - as Trump/Pence still might. He'd better not try grabbing women's uteri via their pussies, though...

—

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Submitted by ThoughtfulVoter on Sun, 11/20/2016 - 12:21am

Agree, Trump might do some good.

I like his idea of bringing jobs back by fining corporations for imported labor-that should level the playing field for the made in the USA products.

Am a little concerned about Pence's record with women's health though.

My personal view is that planned parenthood and all the contraceptive stuff should be administered by the DHHS (Dept of Health & Human Services) people, and politician's shouldn't be involved in it.

Let the health professionals, not the politicians, decide about our medical care. Our sex lives or reproductive health should not be campaign fodder every four years. You don't have politicians getting elected on whether or not Medicare should cover prostate cancer treatment or what type...and we should not have politicians campaigning about whether or not we will provide birth control or what type.

I think we all would agree that the only woman that should help decide a man's prostate treatment is the spouse. And the only woman's birth control a politician should have an opinion on is his wife's.

Submitted by Cassiodorus on Sun, 11/20/2016 - 7:52am

Feh.

I hate to repeat myself here, but --

Donald Trump's MO, apparently, is to hire idiots, have them do significant damage, and then fire them and hire more idiots. When I am told that Trump wants to hire Romney, Giuliani, and Palin, for instance, it confirms my suspicions that he's an awfully bad judge of character and that he never really learns from this.

—

“The loyal Left cannot act decisively. Their devotion to the system is a built-in kill switch limiting dissent.” - Richard Moser

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 9:41pm

Not trying to be difficult...

but if Donald Trump, as President, fought against the TPP, I wouldn't oppose him just because of his ideology. I'd work with him...on that. Equally, if he decided to pull out of these regime-changing wars, I'd work with him...on that.

I've stood with lots of right-wing people at rallies when we were opposing mass warrantless surveillance.

If we agree on those issues, then we agree on them. I can agree with Hitler that a government having the power to issue its own currency, rather than borrowing it from banks, is a good idea, without agreeing with his multiple genocides or his police state.

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by detroitmechworks on Sun, 11/20/2016 - 12:39am

I get it, a lot of people can separate the ideology...

from the policy.

I can't.

When people I'm supposed to be allies with are talking about "the Jewish Problem", damn straight I'm not going to coordinate or speak with them. When they gleefully talk about how Trump's appointees are going to clear out the "AIDS riddled faggots" I don't give a shit about their economic policy. When they scream about how the white race is being systematically genocided, I know exactly what their solutions in the long term will be. (Yes, I can provide links if necessary, but I really would rather NOT delve into the vile side of the internet that promotes this kind of behavior.)

I've heard the arguments that it's all just "Trolling" and "Media Perception", and that none of the people saying these things can actually DO anything or put their policies into action, therefore it's ok to go along with them on the stuff that might possibly be good.

This election was awful, and I think the worst part of all was it gave the worst among us Legitimacy. I apologize for saying this, but it feels like we've come to the point, where American political discourse is actually seriously saying, "You know, the Nazis are right on a few things..."

If that is what we're saying, I'm out, and know that I don't think less of anybody here. It's just my personal Rubicon, and my own hang up. I'm sure as hell not perfect, and there's some things I cannot do.

—

I do not pretend I know what I do not know.

Submitted by Cant Stop the M... on Sun, 11/20/2016 - 10:02pm

I'm not sure whether the racists are worst

or whether the plutocrats are. Both look pretty fascist to me, albeit different flavors, but it also looks to me like the plutocrats are trying to claim they're not responsible for killing POC, which, um, well, that claim has no legs.

But what it really comes down to is that both are engaged in an ugly dance, both using various forms of bigotry to advance themselves and gain credibility with different audiences, while making sure that the fight we're all thinking about is a race war, not a class one. Some do this with more awareness than others.

As far as the Nazis being right on a few things--well, I guess I just said that I think a government issuing its own currency rather than being dependent on banks is a good idea. That doesn't mean I'm gonna cheer on Nazism. You can issue your own currency without being a genocidal bigoted piece of shit.

—

"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha

"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver

Submitted by karl pearson on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 11:45pm

Only Hope for the Democratic party

I think Bernie Sanders is going to help fill the void in the Democratic party now that the Clinton's are gone. Nothing could change until they were dethroned. Progressives like Sanders are the only hope for the Democratic party; otherwise, it will be a permanent minority party. Who wants to support a bunch of losers who take their marching orders from Wall Street and big corporations? It's ironic that Bernie is an Independent, but still has a Democratic leadership role tailored for him. Sanders is going to have a lot of fun as a $hit stirrer.

Submitted by The Voice In th... on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:35am

Who? You've seen who -

over at the zoo that used to be Booman Tribune. Not to even mention the GOS. They want to double down on neoliberalism and Chuck Shumer, for God's sake, is the firewall in the Senate!

—

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

Submitted by karl pearson on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 1:38pm

Firewalls Up In Smoke

Dems better rethink their firewalls or they will all go up in smoke. Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan were firewalls too. That didn't work so well. Firewalls create a sense of false confidence--big mistake!!

Submitted by Steven D on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:58am

I remember all those articles on how the Republicans were going

to die out and were in disarray. Supposed to be a wave election. So many were blinded by their own egos and wish fulfillment and rose colored glasses. They never saw this coming. Idiots all.

The truth is the GOP have always been more organized and willing to support their President in office no matter who he is, than Dems have ever been. And more organized when they are out of the oval office as well.

Dems fail at everything other than screwing over their base.

—

"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott

Submitted by lunachickie on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:29pm

FDR Dems didn't do that

Clinton Dems did, though.

This is probably an important distinction. However, do I think we can get the Democratic Party back to that standard? Hell no, I don't. It's too far corrupted.

Submitted by BitterHarvest on Fri, 11/18/2016 - 11:49pm

A Possible Counter is Labor Unions and Churches Coming Together

to oppose the coming, actually ongoing, obsolescence of most humans. I don't recall them being traditional allies; however, they have political infrastructure and a core of common beliefs. Sure, there are some difficulties; more so with one than the other ... ok, pretty much all on one side.

If the Democratic Party doesn't transform itself from a (alleged) Labor party to a Humanist party, then most of us are done along with anything we hope for unless another party is formed or expanded. We need a party ready to fight the coming war. The war will not be between people and corporations (those who run them). It will be between people and the few who have amassed vast amounts of wealth and power.

Submitted by Alyosha on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 8:06am

Read Rerum Novarum

For an excellent take on social justice, the rights of workers, and the church. Google and you'll find it.

Submitted by BitterHarvest on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 10:19am

I Read Some, It Doesn't Fully Appreciate the Crap Headed Our Way

Not its fault. This is late 1800's mindset. Some good stuff about core values. We're on the verge of a disruptive technology and it's not being given the consideration it should be.

IMHO, the next battle we face will be the relevance of humans as opposed to AI and robotics. Nations, the NWO, run on economies. Historically, people provided labor, they had a place, things are changing.

I want people to win. That's just my personal opinion. That's why I think the next political party or reformed Democratic party needs to switch gears. Stop fighting the past and shape the future where people matter.

Submitted by karl pearson on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 8:56am

Alliance between AFL-CIO Leader Trumpka and Pope Francis?

"The alliance between labor and religion, particularly the Catholic church, is nothing new. From the promulgation of Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Rerum Novarum in 1891 to Francis’ Evangelii Gaudium, popes have written and spoken in uncompromising terms when making the case for the rights of workers to organize, to advance and protect their own interests, to be justly compensated, and to have humane and safe working conditions."

https://www.ncronline.org/news/people/labor-leader-francis-us-visit-may-...

Submitted by BitterHarvest on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 10:21am

I Was Thinking More Evangelical

I didn't say it would be easy.

Submitted by Alyosha on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:37am

Not not easy

It would be extremely difficult because the theologies are different. Catholicism is communal, but American evangelicals place great emphasis on individualism, ones personal relationship with Jesus, and ones own interpretation of scripture. This is not likely to change without a theological upheaval, which won't happen at the level of politics. But since 25% of the US population is Catholic, it could be emphasized there. Unfortunately, Paul Ryan and Newt Gingrich and other Republican Catholics are distorting church teachings on solidarity.

Submitted by Ellen North on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:31pm

Catholicism is also insane in

Catholicism is also insane in many areas, particularly with the bizarre imposed compulsion to effectively force-breed women and humanity - and life on the planet in general - to death (with the aim of increasing temporal Church power and wealth) and to spread even the most life-threatening disease throughout whole populations rather than encourage condom use, just to mention. Among other things.

—

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Submitted by The Voice In th... on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:38am

Those shitheads are irrevocably Alt-Right.

They define ALT-Right!

—

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

Submitted by Will Rogers Guthrie on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 4:49pm

i was thinking too

at least as much Catholic ,especially religious orders;,Episcopalian,; United Church of Christ;A.M.E., and Unitarian Universalist as much as..evangelical,Mormon,Jewish,Native American,Baptist.....let us say broad interfaith and humanists.
Where I live in eastern Oklahoma, the idea of a broad interfaith movement will be the easier part of the combination with organized labor. I really really like your idea,Bitter Harvest

Submitted by BitterHarvest on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 9:51pm

Thank you

n/t

Submitted by seabos84 on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 5:49pm

"Labor Unions" are like 'progressives' or 'liberals'

we're not talking about unique elements from the periodic table, where lead, gold, silver, hydrogen ... are specific and exact things.

I'm part of the Seattle Education Association - Washington Education Association - National Education Association. In 2010, at age 50, year 5 of teaching, career #3, right after the final despicable sell out on health care, I thought ... 'why don't I do labor union stuff ... what the hell, I'm a teacher!'

I've been living in the 1988 Dukakis campaign, and its spawn, ever since. 'Don't be bitter or negative or angry or we'll scare the middle and lose! We need our seat at the table! We can't be obstructionist! We have to be bipartisan!.' By the spring of 2016, I honestly didn't give a rat's ass about that stupid Friedrich's lawsuit at the SCOTUS ...

and then Scalia dropped dead.

I remember when people were coming up with this "progressive" label cuz the liberals had done such a shitty job of advancing 'liberal' against the liars.

The NEA & AFT grovelled to Clinton in the summer of 2015 ... and the membership ... yawn ...

huh?

There is the beautifully Orwellian optimal solution going on in the teacher's unions. The insular, entrenched, infighting senior "leaders" attribute their incessant seat at the table crap to the barely participating membership. The membership, subjected to last minute agendas and agendas created by the insiders & entrenched, subjected to meetings with last minute insider agendas - the membership is oblivious, apathetic, living in ennui, beat down, out witted and out lasted. The leadershit blames the members ...

We NEED a mechanism for workers to stand together at their job sites and with other workers. The current paradigm is a fucking joke.

rmm.

—

But then I sigh; and, with a piece of scripture,
Tell them that God bids us do good for evil:
And thus I clothe my naked villany
With old odd ends stolen out of holy writ;

Submitted by BitterHarvest on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 9:50pm

I Think the Millennials Have the Solution

Get people connected and comfortable with technology. Provide people with both the knowledge and the tools to get connected. And identify and cultivate charismatic leaders who place people over profit, such as how the Millennials overwhelmingly identified with Bernie. Either way, I think identifying Bernie's rise from relative obscurity to national phenom shows the we can get people involved and active.

I think there are many potential leaders who want the knowledge, training, encouragement, and protection before they will step forward. I've never ever thought Bernie betrayed the movement he spawned. Any action perceived as a betrayal is actually indicative of the power we face. We are dealing with people who will murder others and get a good night's rest. They can still be fought. They can still be beat as this last election showed.

Recently, my niece did ... I'm not really sure ... something to my iPhone. I bought the thing and had not gotten around to doing much with it beyond using it as a phone. She didn't chastise me. She said this is what you need! Suddenly, I'm more connected, aware that I'm holding a computer, and my wallpaper is a picture of her and me. Maybe throwing local "Tech Parties" is one way to leverage technology like Millennials.

The people need a party that is prepared to fight, rather than be reactionary, to the current attempt to make people obsolete. People have no future if they are not part of the future. People have to be integral to the economy. People need inspiration. I don't think fighting against something inspires, but it can be an effective context to deliver a fight for something message. The next fight is for people. We've seen the fight during the industrial revolution. We've seen the fight during globalization. Our next fight is for us. If we're not prepared, most of us are done.

Submitted by Ellen North on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:23pm

Recced with the caveat that

Recced with the caveat that the degree to which any goals are shared will vary greatly with the church involved in each case - and also with whoever heads each labour union...

—

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Submitted by LaFeminista on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 4:35am

All that the establishment in both parties know is

Where the money comes from

Submitted by Cassandrus on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 8:24am

For about $5 per month per household

Americans could outspend all current donors to federal political campaigns and also outspend all federal lobbyists.

A once-a-year $27 contribution could outspend all the lobbyist, elections aside .

We know that government doesn't listen to the people. Because it listens to donors. And donors represent a tiny fraction of Americans. If everybody joined the donor class, then everybody would be represented.

Imagine a Populist party or a Majoritarian party. It doesn't need to be a real party in the legal sense; just an affiliate group like the Tea Party. It's mandate is simply to lobby for policies that the majority of Americans agree with, based on surveys. Every individual can contribute up to a low amount. PACs and corporations can be restricted. You can do any campaign contribution restrictions you want, since this is a private organization. The biggest restriction is, it can only support causes with majority support.

Believe in causes the majority doesn't care about? Go ahead. Support them, too, with other efforts and contributions. This is only for Common Ground issues. (Maybe that's the right name!)

Obviously the practicalities need to be worked out, e.g., since you obviously won't get 115 million households participating, what's the minimum realistic number that could make a major impact?

This is essentially a Kickstarter model for funding politics. Whether we start Common Ground, start a third party or reform Democrats, you either need a new donor model or nothing people talk about on this site will ever happen.

Submitted by UntimelyRippd on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 8:57am

the question is, what is the saturation point?

because, as regards the contributions of the plutocrats, there's more where that came from. Those folks could spend 10 times what they currently spend and literally not feel it -- not ever have to alter any other financial decision they ever make about anything, grand or trivial. but would it do them any good?

—

The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.

Submitted by Cassandrus on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 9:49am

Yes best to do nothing

Submitted by k9disc on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 5:20pm

First Do No Harm...

Where does political money go?

A significant portion of Bernie's hundreds of millions, from regular folk, went into corporate media coffers. Is that really a wise investment? Is it good progressive politics?

I would say no on all counts. We can't win a war of money, we don't have enough, and all the money we do raise goes directly to our opponent's megaphone. Not good politics.

The answer is to make money moot. Bernie, and Drumpf, did it to some degree.

I believe if the true nature of our political system ever gets properly articulated: corporate sponsored public policy that serves Big Corporate & the Oligarchs by putting profit before people; if that is in play, a massive war chest will be an anvil. It was for Hillary.

That should be a YUGE focus. Doubling, tripling down on the corporate sponsorship of the Hillary campaign and the highly damaging economic policies of the Corporate Left. Clearly articulating how the Billion dollar marketing campaign and windfall profits for the corporate media's perpetuated a complete civic fail in 2016.

Nope. We've got fake news. Racism and sexism. Russia. And the Electoral College scam.

The answer to our political problems won't be solved by raising money and competing in a pay to play PR Battle Royale.

Instead of "doing nothing", or feeding the corporate media, we could do something to make money in politics a political anvil.

—

“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu

Submitted by LaFeminista on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 4:37am

PS Americans are not branded D or R at birth.

Submitted by neoconned on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 8:26am

Hesitant to board this train

I want to hear much more about what happened just prior to the Convention. Some kind of arrangement was made, with Bernie's payoff being the Platform Which Would Never Have Been Followed as his price for compliance to "HER!". I also want to know why it appears that Bernie no longer feels bound to whatever agreement was reached, as it looks like he is again attempting to be the populist as whom he began his campaign.

This dichotomy (as I see it) causes me pause. Something isn't adding up. Emotionally, I want to believe that the Bernie we hoped would win is back. Intellectually, I question the change as well as the timing.

I don't know that Bernie can again be the People's Champion. Past performance is to a degree a harbinger of future action.

—

Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.

Submitted by dkmich on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 10:03am

I am curious too....

To me, he is no longer bound to any agreement because he fulfilled his end of the agreement, and she lost anyway. Why he agreed in the first place is of interest to me.

Can he be a populist voice? Absolutely. Can he be trusted? That isn't as clear to me as it was before.

—

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

Submitted by The Voice In th... on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:50am

I'm starting to think he was smart.

Although I castigated him viciously for campaigning for her, it seems like it was smart politics.

No one can honestly say he didn't support her. This gives him chops to step into the power vacuum.
I hated him campaigning for her, but ... He went to the college campuses where he knew they were too smart to be robots and sure enough, they laughed! But he campaigned. They can't credibly say he didn't do his Democratic duty. IMHO not very principled, but it is politics after all.

No Bernie's not going to run in 2020 or 2024, but he canh influence who will.

As I see it, if Trump ends the ME wars and somehow, even by accident increases employment, he will be re-elected. The (R)'s will do ugly things to the defenseless and if a Clinton Democrat fails again in 2020, so much the better for 2024. Remember Obama ran as a populist. Sure he lied, but it worked, didn't it?

—

I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.

Submitted by Wink on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:41pm

Exactly right about Bernie.

Just doing what he had to do politically. With that over he can get back to being Bernie the independent.

—

the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.

Submitted by Citizen Of Earth on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 8:47am

Repubs Are Neoliberal, Dems Are Neoliberal

I'm sure Dems will agree with plenty of Trump's looting. Bernie's job now as Minister of Outreach is to sell the shit pies to the masses.

—

Donnie The #ShitHole Douchebag. Fake Friend to the Working Class. Real Asshole.

Submitted by Bisbonian on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 10:08am

Repubs and Dems are both neo-liberal

in economic policy. Both are neo-conservative on military policy.

http://www.newsofinterest.tv/neocon_globalist/index.php

—

"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X

Submitted by lunachickie on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 10:59am

If he's reaching out as a Democrat? Not interested.

but he's not reaching out as one of those.

I'll limit my trust in him to what he's pushing if it actually benefits humanity. Period.

Submitted by Wink on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:38pm

nope. n/t

—

the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.

Submitted by Ellen North on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 11:41pm

Except that Bernie plans to

Except that Bernie plans to do what Bernie does - and those shit pies will be aimed right back at both corporate parties faces by Independent 'insider'-informed activists and progressives running for public office.

—

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

Submitted by Bring Back Civics on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:13pm

I know many of us felt

I know many of us felt betrayed by Bernie's endorsement of HC at the convention and afterward. Personally, I like to believe that he had no choice -- for lots of terrifying reasons. I still love and respect the man!

Submitted by Wink on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 12:33pm

All you need to

know about Bernie is he's looking 2, 3, 6 years down the road with the same view, the same narative that drew crowds of 10,000 and more back on the campaign trail. So, regardless of what he said /says about Hillary, Trump, Schumer, whomever, it's all about what he talked about on the trail. Nothing has changed. That he tosses other players a bone... take it for what it's worth.

—

the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-2.1) All about building progressive media.

Submitted by lotlizard on Sun, 11/20/2016 - 1:22am

Okay, but the same was said about Obama all these years

“He’s got this.”

“He’s playing [n-dimensional] chess while his critics are playing checkers.”

People feel burned rather than Berned because of our collective experience with Obama.

Submitted by ThoughtfulVoter on Sat, 11/19/2016 - 9:37pm

Let's put our money where are progressive values are!

We could waste the whole 4 years of a non-establishment president and get nothing accomplished because we are so busy arguing with each other or with anyone who is trying.

Trump wants to bring back the jobs lost through NAFTA. Let's stop fighting each other, and help him do that.

Make a citizen commitment to buy MADE IN THE USA stuff!!!!