He may be thinking that it is easier and quicker to take over an existing party than to start a new one. If the Clintons and the DLC Neoliberals could take over the Democratic party what's to stop decent people from taking it back again ? That's my guess, anyway.

rather than any issue, what a fucking surprise, not.
Todd like all the media shit manics could care less
about anything other than their paycheck.

…really speaks to what's going on. It was a pantomime of an interview, their lips were moving. It didn't matter what Chuck Todd asked. Bernie was giving out his message about some other thing. Chuck meant nothing, even to him. Ever notice that he has never had a deep thought, has never offered a penetrating insight? He's mostly a news prop.

What's going on out there is that they have run out of political news. They're like circus animals listlessly going through their routines. The fact is, there's some major freakin' news out there. Huge game-changing events unfolding. But it's news that is off limits for Americans. So, they are cocooned in their media reality bubble, thinking they are in touch with the Universe. Meanwhile, Bernie's in his DC bubble. That's what's up with him. He doesn't know he appears to be pandering. Chuck doesn't know he's making people dumber. And the Democratic Party doesn't know how far they have actually fallen. From inside their bubble, they think they are leading their constituents into an enthusiastic new cycle of even better Democrats. They're high-fiving that platform they think is so progressive. They're doing some outreach. If they only knew that they've started to look like ghouls, ghouls with their hands out, trick or treating the American people. The world has moved on and left them behind.

I can't say I haven't been thinking about Hillary's Dilemma™ with her book tour darting in and out of "places" and photobombing our daily lives. It occurred to me shortly before her election loss that something big had changed in the vast non-bubble areas of America. Perhaps we split off into another universe. In that other universe, she won. She's in the White House right now, planning the holiday decor and defending America from marauding enemies. But in this universe, I can tell you, Hillary not only lost, she was always going to lose.

In this universe she was campaigning into an impossible election. Much of the world was, and still is, hungry for outsiders with new and unorthodox ideas. They want everybody involved in screwing this place up so badly to pack up and go home. That goes double for Hillary because she was part of several offensive administrations. People are a little woke up and they've been looking back a few decades — wondering how they missed some of the telling signs. Consider that a presidential contender from the same party as the incumbent administration is flashing one big message: More of the same. If the People aren't clamoring for "more of the same," look out. I think Hillary's Dilemma™ was probably as simple as that.

Historian and author Allan Lichtman — famed for his 100 percent accurate presidential predictions and regularly featured during the 2016 campaign by the Washington Post thought it was something as simple as that. Eighteen months before Election Day, he predicted that Hillary Clinton would win the 2016 election, based on his system of 13 true or false questions. Then, on September 23, 2016, he splashed across the pages of the Washington Post once more, to announce that he changed his prediction. He had never done anything like that before. He explained that one of his "true" questions had flipped into "false." It was a simple thing, but it changed everything. I knew Lichtman was a Hillary supporter. That must have been tough for him, but reality changed and he had to adapt.