@irishking

given that you'd said in your OP: "Those interested might listen to her CNN interview,again posted by Wendy Davis." coupled with 'Fooled again' in your title, i'd thunk you might have been referring to her playing handmaiden to Dems just like bernie, including the Red Queen, and and inadvertently, cuomo.

guess i can't say i'm sorry i got it wrong, as i'd thunk i was following your directions, lol. what if the DSAs joined the greens, for instance? wouldn't that be interesting? nah, bernie turned down jill stein's invitation to join her green ticket. Ds are the Big Tent Party.

#5

I didn't put it in the essay above because the interview does not touch foreign policy- imperialism question.

Should have been more precise as to its location.

My reason for mentioning it was that I saw enough there to cause me concern.
Didn't want to say "all's well",just because peace plank is back in platform.

It is the first video you show here. This seems to be cleaner version. The disturbing "I'd back the devil if he ran as a Dem" comes around 6;20. But she is much less an independent voice than I expected all through the interview.

@Pluto's Republic

now declared themselves centrists like that should be something to be proud of. This was because they have accepted what Obama really was. I just can't believe how they have accepted that the democrats needed to move further right to get elected. And you should see how they defend the blue dawgs even though they vote with the republicans most of the time. "This is the only way they can get elected in their states" is the excuse they give them. Best scam republicans have pulled. Get a red blooded republican and say they are democrats. It's worked.

#7

...are operating under the semantic principle that Liberal Democrats are working on behalf of the Corporations and Progressive Democrats are working on behalf of people and society. They have naturally divided the Party to make sense of it.

This distinction is sharply drawn in these smaller communities, while it is blurred in larger places by people who are deliberately using "Left, liberal, progressive, and Democrat" interchangeably. This distinction is suppressed the closer you travel toward the Center-Right Democratic establishment, because they want the votes and money from the non-represented, as well.

This has forced Millennials to begin defining themselves as "Socialist."

The term "Liberal" has always been a reviled word among Republicans and Right Wing activists. They accuse the Media of being Liberal, and it turns out they were right all along. The Media is a corporate client of the Democrats; they cater to the interests of the same advertisers and big donors. Practically speaking, that's the defense industry.

Republicans call Hillary "far Left" and now I realize they never knew that we (the Real Left) existed at all. They're not anxious to talk about it either. Such a discussion merely highlights the fact that the Left never established a political Party in the United States, as it did in all other countries. In the US, the Left had their movements, forming unions, fighting for workers rights, rallying against the latest war — but the Left's comprehensive social values and aspirations never had a place at the table, Federally. They never had a share in the budget, either.

Right now there is a likely majority of Americans who are politically disenfranchised and their values, marginalized. We saw them pour in from the shadows during Bernie Sander's campaign. They think they are waiting for a certain kind of Democratic leader, one who shares their social vision and will make government work for the benefit of the people. They have voted and voted, and even though their world continues to degrade, they are willing to vote again. They don't know what else to do.

Things are starting to happen fast, now. The world is moving on.

@Pluto's Republic

"...and now I realize they never knew that we (the Real Left) existed at all. as in: 'we whom', i'm half-decoding it as 'we the Democrat far left'. of course 'the far left' in general would be actual socialists of one stripe or another...who would never vote D. dunno if the greens might nominate an actual socialist this time; ajamu baracka ha already indicated: Nyet to that, smile.

that said, i did cast one sole primary vote, and that for a D for county commissioner in montezuma county that ed abbey had dubbed 'dipstick, colorado' (not that affiliation means anything much for those races). unaffiliated voters were sent both ballots this year.

#7

...are operating under the semantic principle that Liberal Democrats are working on behalf of the Corporations and Progressive Democrats are working on behalf of people and society. They have naturally divided the Party to make sense of it.

This distinction is sharply drawn in these smaller communities, while it is blurred in larger places by people who are deliberately using "Left, liberal, progressive, and Democrat" interchangeably. This distinction is suppressed the closer you travel toward the Center-Right Democratic establishment, because they want the votes and money from the non-represented, as well.

This has forced Millennials to begin defining themselves as "Socialist."

The term "Liberal" has always been a reviled word among Republicans and Right Wing activists. They accuse the Media of being Liberal, and it turns out they were right all along. The Media is a corporate client of the Democrats; they cater to the interests of the same advertisers and big donors. Practically speaking, that's the defense industry.

Republicans call Hillary "far Left" and now I realize they never knew that we (the Real Left) existed at all. They're not anxious to talk about it either. Such a discussion merely highlights the fact that the Left never established a political Party in the United States, as it did in all other countries. In the US, the Left had their movements, forming unions, fighting for workers rights, rallying against the latest war — but the Left's comprehensive social values and aspirations never had a place at the table, Federally. They never had a share in the budget, either.

Right now there is a likely majority of Americans who are politically disenfranchised and their values, marginalized. We saw them pour in from the shadows during Bernie Sander's campaign. They think they are waiting for a certain kind of Democratic leader, one who shares their social vision and will make government work for the benefit of the people. They have voted and voted, and even though their world continues to degrade, they are willing to vote again. They don't know what else to do.

Things are starting to happen fast, now. The world is moving on.

@Big Al

Unfortunately there are so many people who believe this load of horse pucky.

We believe that while our military must be the strongest in the world, it should only be sent into combat when the terms of engagement are clearly presented to the American people and our troops have what they need to fulfill their mission. We believe that war must always be the last resort, never the first choice.

These principles have underpinned important progress in the last eight years. When President Obama and Vice President Biden assumed office, the world economy was in the worst crisis since the Great Depression, our alliances were strained, Osama bin Laden remained at large, Iran was racing toward a nuclear weapon, and we were mired in two costly wars. (those two costly wars were still going strong when the Empty Suit left office as well as the at least 3 more wars that he started as well as the unknown ones he started and the same unknown number of countries he bombed from drones.) We brought bin Laden to justice, crippled al Qaeda’s core leadership, saved America from a second Great Depression, repaired our alliances, reestablished relations with Cuba while pressing for reforms, and—without firing a shot, dropping a bomb, or putting a single American soldier in harm’s way—blocked Iran’s ability to pursue a nuclear weapon. America is stronger abroad and safer at home because of this principled leadership.

But there is much more to do to keep our country prosperous and safe. From defeating terrorism and combating climate change to managing China’s rise and strengthening our nation’s cybersecurity, the next Democratic administration will confront the complex challenges that lie ahead by staying true to our principles and core values.

But this is the real kicker!

Donald Trump has a different approach. There has never been a major party candidate less qualified or less fit for the office of President of the United States or to be Commander-in-Chief than Donald Trump. He wants more countries to have nuclear weapons. He thinks our military should engage in war crimes. He wants to build walls and keep people—including Americans—from entering the country based on their race, religion, ethnicity, and national origin. He has no strategy for dealing with key threats facing our country, including climate change and ISIS. He wants to abandon our allies and empower our adversaries. His dangerous, incoherent policies would undo the progress we have made.

The rest of the democrat's ramblings here are just as delusional, but this takes some gaul to say with a straight face!

We must defeat ISIS, al Qaeda, and their affiliates, and prevent other groups from emerging in their place. Democrats will continue to lead a broad coalition of allies and partners to destroy ISIS’ stronghold in Iraq and Syria. We will press those in the region, especially the Gulf countries and local forces on the ground, to carry their weight in prosecuting this fight. We will dismantle the global network of terror, which supplies terrorists with money, arms, and fighters, and stop them from recruiting and inspiring potential radicals.

I'm in agreement with you that no matter who's elected to congress in either party that anything is going to change. Whether it's this young ex bartender or any of the ex CIA and ex military people who are currently running. I only posted Caitlin's tweet to show Ocasio's foreign policies that had gone missing from her website. Don't worry, I stand by my plan to not vote for anyone regardless of their party affiliation, but I will vote for legalization of medical marijuana or any other ballot initiatives that affect me locally.

#7 this:

https://www.democrats.org/party-platform#principled-leadership

I could say I'm surprised by Johnstone and all of this, but I'm not.

@artisan

and the essay @irishking

I like David. I agree with his conclusion also...a lot to expect from this young woman -

She must use the War Powers Act to force a vote on each illegal, immoral, disastrous war she has listed and any others like them, she must seek to reduce military funding — perhaps creating legislation along with her one Congressional backer Ro Khanna along the lines of his recent attempted amendment that would have cut 5%. She must seek to block weapons sales abroad and to local police. She must introduce legislation that would make the U.S. military subject to environmental agreements that everyone else is subject to. She must work to replace military “service” as a means to citizenship with free college as a right of the same. She must support diplomacy even when Trump does it. But she must support impeaching Trump for the reasons she already does plus the reasons included in her “Peace Economy” platform.

One Congress member cannot do any of this without a massive public movement that compels other Congress members to do so too. But part of so moving them must be showing our support for one among them who takes the lead. Right now the future Congress member in the lead is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

#9

I see it much the same. Particularly useful is his comparison to the platforms of "progressives" Warrren & Sanders.

Several more breakthroughs here, that is: statements common in the peace movement but unheard of on television or Congressional campaign platforms.

the one downer-

she blows it in the end by proposing that war is sometimes needed. It is not. Yet how far she has come, or failed to retreat, in comparison with the Congress she hopes to join!

Here is David Swanson's take:
Why Ocasio-Cortez’ Platform Is So Great