To Those Who Said The Dems Could Not Be Reformed
I've been waiting to see how much progress the various groups attempting to reform the Dems - Our Revolution, Justice Dems, Brand New Congress - would make before finally throwing the towel in. For the simple reason that if the Dems could be taken over by the voters then our path to overall victory would be much easier. If.
My barometer on this has been the Our Revolution attempts at taking over several state parties. Earlier this year they took 650 out of 1140 delegates in the CA Dem party. At the end of May there was a vote to elect the state chair and a corporate medical insurance lobbyist was elected because those 1140 delegates are only a third of the total vote.
If Our Revolution had been permitted to elect their chosen candidate we could then have had the conversation of whether or not they and/or Sanders are sheep dog sellouts 
But we are not even getting there. For me this is the clear final straw that eliminates any doubt, ambiguity. The Dems are neither capable of nor desire reform. This last vote in California is that final nail. They have set up their corporate structure to prevent progressives making an impact. There is no refutation.
As the Nick Brana interview above points out we have the demographics on our side and talking to Millennials in the Bay Area not a one of them is buying this RussiaGate nonsense. It is clear to them that it's just an ego massage for the Clinton supporters. Oh and they hate Kamela Harris too for the right wing police apologist she is 
Labor Day is coming. I've been thinking about it for a month or two and I keep thinking someone is going to use the symbolism to launch a new party.
If not them, then us.
Comments
@enhydra lutris As a member of the
As a member of the bourgeoisie, let me say that I put about as much faith in that as I do in Putin sending nefarious agents to subvert our elections.
The upper middle class is being stupid. They think because the elites haven't come for them yet, they never will. I'm under no such illusions. On the other hand, I'm at the very bottom of the upper middle class, and probably most of those people wouldn't hobnob with me anyway.
"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
@MrWebster Actually, the change
Actually, the change happened first on the levels of high politics, when the DLC was founded in the mid-80s--and, of course, accelerated through the 90s. After 20 or 30 years of Clintonian politics, I'm not surprised the base changed. How could they not?
"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
The 10% aren't the enemy.
The 1% are and the 0.1% are mortal enemies that have to be destroyed.
No one person should have an income greater than 10,000 average people.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
@The Voice In the Wilderness I've noticed, since
I've noticed, since Thomas Frank's book, that there is a strong tendency to focus hostility on the upper-middles rather than the elites. I haven't read Frank's book, only the responses to it that have been all over the left-wing-political side of the Net, so I don't know if that's the aim of his book, or if the guy just did some real work and then had his work cleverly co-opted and sent around encased in a clever reframing.
You can sum up how his book has been received and transmitted around the internet like this:
IT'S NOT THE 1% VS THE 99%. IT'S THE 10% VS THE 90%.
That's a message that serves the 1%, and ironically helps the 10% fulfill their cultural function of deflecting blame and hostility away from the 1% (just like every overseer that ever lived had the real function of deflecting hatred and hostility away from the man who lived in the mansion up on the hill). It's pretty obvious the entire function of the managerial class is to deflect anger away from the elites--and that's what Thomas Frank's message, as it's been interpreted and circulated, is doing.
It certainly is true that there are very real issues and tensions between the working class and the managerial/professional class. No doubt. Maybe Frank deals with those issues solidly and honestly. I can't speak to that. But the way his work is being interpreted is less than helpful.
"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
@The Voice In the Wilderness And I appreciate your
And I appreciate your distinction between the 1% and the .01%, who are a class run by psychopaths, apparently.
I'm sure there are some among them who aren't psychopathic monsters, but they don't seem to be able to get any traction against their crazy, genocidal brethren.
"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
re: .01%
I don't think they can get or keep their position without being psychopathic monsters.
It's dog eat dog at the top. Sure they come together to defend the system, but are ruthless at destroying one another to get another meaningless billion or their goal of being the first trillionaire.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Remembering my own enthusiasm for Bill Clinton
It's pretty unbelievable to me, the b.s. I swallowed when I was 33 years of age. In 1992 :(.
To review, I looked up the demographics here: https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/polls/us-elections/how-groups-voted/how-groups-voted-1992/ blah blah blah, omg I am right there in the Clinton column the whole way down almost, including the 72% lgbtq
Identity much? lol
Clinton...Bush...Perot, NAFTA was a big deal, Iraq I was a big deal, healthcare was a big deal. He admitted smoking weed "but didn't inhale". Woot the guy was progressive! Unfortunately, Clinton betrayed on practically everything, and then some.
Upon further review found this article from July 2015: Bernie Out of the Closet: Sanders’ Longstanding Deal with the Democrats
...
Bernie's actions sometimes betray his words I think, that bothers me. I am more Sartre than Sisyphus, but I get both philosophies. If there's going to be another third party run, I think it should be somebody new with no baggage, a true independent.
If you all think the Bay Area is "different" now, well gosh darn it that is where I met Donna Brazile the first time, right down on Castro Street when my brother was on the State Central Committee. And I thought I was part of some "new" thing in the 90s too. Mea Culpa.
LOVE to all that find joy in pushing the boulder like Sisyphus, and LOVE to us that don't see the point like Sartre. We are the same.
Peace
One thing that people don't look at
is Bernie's foreign policy views. He is a progressive on economic and social issues, but how many wars has he voted for? And after the wars have been stated, he votes to keep funding them.
During Israel's last war, they ran out of bombs and congress had to vote whether or not to sell them more.
Both Bernie and Warren voted yes.
So how will we find a real progressive on the important issues?
There were problems with running a campaign of Joy while committing a genocide? Who could have guessed?
Harris is unburdened of speaking going forward.
Worked on the '92 campaign myself.
Was fighting back against Reagan and Bush. It took Obama to show me that fighting (R)'s by supporting (D)'s that are their clones won't work.
All politicians have feet of clay. all humans have feet of clay.
This last presidential election shows the peril of electing an amateur as President.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Where did the other two-thirds of the votes come from? n/t
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
@dervish Superdelegates.
Superdelegates.
"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
Yes, superdelegates: aka why reform of the Dem party is a no go
The dem party has set up a game that literally cannot be won, but keeps people trying by maintaining an illusion that it might be possible to "take over" the party through voting.
Until the challengers actually win a vote, like in CA, then it's sorry kids, but the super-people actually decide. Thanks for playing. Better luck next time!
What a sad joke.
I don’t think I really grok this discussion,
but I’ll just add my two cents anyway.
I believe that there are multiple issues that are equally significant to our personal and universal wellbeing. When we begin to measure and qualify all meaningful endeavours into a list of priorities, where #1 must be achieved or made dominant before anything else is considered; then I think we sacrifice some of the possibilities that are achievable. I believe we basically all want the same things - peace and justice and love and ….
I watched some of the speakers at The People’s Summit this weekend, and found their presentations quite powerful. It made me wonder why we (I include myself at times) resist the imperfect. Sanders is probably the most beneficially influential American politician currently; even if he’s not perfect. He and his most ardent supporters are still passionately promoting and energising much that needs to be encouraged; not dismissed for their imperfections.
Peace all.
The People's Summit good vibes
thanks I watched a bit too. I liked Rob Quist, he seemed nice and mellow. Definitely agreed with his "serve two years and move on" idea about representing. I disagree with the money they took outside of Montana to run his campaign. Berniecrats are fully invested in door-knocking again I guess, the fifty state thing.
I am not resisting the imperfect, I am resisting the same marketing hype I've always resisted, it looks the same as it ever was. "I feel your pain. Vote for me." "Yes we can." Throw another billion down the toilet why not.
Citizens United really did kill off any fairness left in electoral politics, I don't know what to do after that. The politicians seem to have amnesia, no one dares mention a word about the math, the number of people and how much money it will take to overthrow the established oligarchy. Either no one knows, or it's impossible.
Which actions proposed will move the power from the Waltons to the People? How much money will it take? How many votes? How many elections? Talking about building something new while the ditch dwellers die off in droves doesn't sound like a very good plan to me, down here in the ditch. I read the self-help "Power of Positive Thinking" in the 70s if I recall correctly, it did assist me through a lot of struggles. Applying it to politicians is a mistake though, that's the lesson I've learned.
Thanks
Absolutely!
Anyone that says there is no significant difference between Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, and Hillary Clinton is nuts, even though Bernie is not Jesus Christ. People would find fault with Jesus, too. The Sanhedrin did.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Pages