A Path to a Different Sort of Victory

The pundits are all abuzz about whether or not Bernie Sanders has a "path to victory" in the Democratic primaries. Handicapping the horse race in all its minutiae from "the true math" to speculation over superdelegates and the size of campaign war chests fills the airwaves and plugs the tubes of the internets.

They are talking, largely, about a victory within the arcane electoral rules set up by the parties, but they are generally studiously ignoring the elephant in the room - the struggle of the 99% to achieve political and economic power.

Underneath all of the bloviating and rhetoric, power is what the so-called insurgent candidacies are really about.

Insurgent candidates threaten 1%-dominated party structures

The success of insurgent candidates is making for some interesting discussions about the future of the the two American corporate parties. The parties hold a virtual monopoly on national elective office and the people seem to have caught on that America is an oligarchy where, in the words of a noted academic study of political influence by Gilens and Page:

“In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.”

How did the people catch on? Well, despite the media and politicians talking up an economy that doesn't appear to include them, the fortunes of average Americans are in decline and there is anger in the land:

Over the past 35 years the working class has been devalued, the result of an economic version of the Hunger Games. It has pitted everyone against each other, regardless of where they started. Some contestants, such as business owners, were equipped with the fanciest weapons. The working class only had their hands. They lost and have been left to deal on their own. ...

Over the past 35 years, except for the very wealthy, incomes have stagnated, with more people looking for fewer jobs. Jobs for those who work with their hands, manufacturing employment, has been the hardest hit, falling from 18m in the late 1980s to 12m now.

The economic devaluation has been made more painful by the fraying of the social safety net, and more visceral by the vast increase at the top. It is one thing to be spinning your wheels stuck in the mud, but it is even more demeaning to watch as others zoom by on well-paved roads, none offering help.

What's more, average Americans, despite a bunch of snotty economists telling them that they don't understand free trade and that they are better off because of it, are experiencing righteous rage against the technocrats and expressing it at the polls:

Were the experts wrong about the benefits of trade for the American economy? ...

What seems most striking is that the angry working class — dismissed so often as myopic, unable to understand the economic trade-offs presented by trade — appears to have understood what the experts are only belatedly finding to be true: The benefits from trade to the American economy may not always justify its costs.

In a recent study, three economists — David Autor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, David Dorn at the University of Zurich and Gordon Hanson at the University of California, San Diego — raised a profound challenge to all of us brought up to believe that economies quickly recover from trade shocks. In theory, a developed industrial country like the United States adjusts to import competition by moving workers into more advanced industries that can successfully compete in global markets.

They examined the experience of American workers after China erupted onto world markets some two decades ago. The presumed adjustment, they concluded, never happened. Or at least hasn’t happened yet. Wages remain low and unemployment high in the most affected local job markets. Nationally, there is no sign of offsetting job gains elsewhere in the economy. ... In another study they wrote with Daron Acemoglu and Brendan Price from M.I.T., they estimated that rising Chinese imports from 1999 to 2011 cost up to 2.4 million American jobs.

These trends are being dealt with by the insurgents in two different ways. Bernie Sanders is organizing what he calls a political revolution. A mobilized public will force popular changes on the government. He is taking no money from the usual 1% sources and is funding his campaign through small-donor money. This provides a sense that his priorities lie with the 99% that mobilize behind his issues and fund his campaign.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, is already rich, he has funded other people's campaigns in the past and is now going out on his own. He claims that he's "unbought" and makes the seeming rift with the Republican establishment a theatrical production of epic proportions. Fortunately for him, much of his support base has not figured out that he is a candidate of the 1% for his party. The clue is in all of the free media coverage he gets from the 1%-owned media. When the 1% media wants to freeze out a candidate, they cut them off from coverage or trivialize their campaign as they have done to Bernie Sanders.

While Trump has his establishment enemies, and they are nervous, Donald Trump at this point in the election cycle looks like he has a better than fair shot at becoming the Republican nominee, thus the chances of a Republican party split are diminished. The Democrats are quite another story.

Conditions Favorable for a Democratic Party Split

The contest between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders is tightening. For the Democratic establishment, there is considerable fear generated by polling showing that large numbers of Sanders supporters will not support Clinton under any circumstances.

Many people are wondering if the Democratic party can hold together as the schism grows between the Democratic establishment, which has cashed in its credibility as a party of the people and become the other party of the 1%, and the left/liberal/progressive base.

In the late 1980s, the DLC Democrats (and now the Third Way/Clinton Democrats) embraced the professional class and embraced complex solutions to our nation’s problems. They consciously moved away from labor/working class and towards an elitist embrace of banksters, the emerging “geniuses” of Silicon Valley, and the college-educated at all levels.

They even went so far as to suggest it was a good thing that much of America’s blue-collar working-class high-school-diploma jobs go to China and Mexico, as we here in America needed to move to the “new economy” jobs of technology, medicine, and finance, requiring a college education.

This ideological change in the Party led to the Clinton-era 1990s policies that gutted our industrial base, ripped apart the social safety net (ending “the era of big government”), and financialized our economy. ...

The policies that came out of this new Democratic Party ideology (largely taken from the 1950s Republicans) have resulted in a boon for the professional class, but almost totally left behind the bottom 90%.

Within the Democratic base, people are angry, disgusted with the establishment and ready for a change.

The Sanders campaign was right on time in responding to this trend. Many pundits are now saying that win or lose, Sanders has irretrievably affected the election. In fact, by showing the base that something better is possible, Sanders has opened the space for a much larger change than just the results of one election.

The party is now in the position of having to sell itself to a major portion of its base again, it can choose to change or it can run the party institution into the ground with the likelihood of competition arising.

This is an Opportunity for a Negotiated Surrender by the Establishment

While the pundits are bloviating about whether Bernie Sanders has a path to victory, there is a larger victory available for the movement that has coalesced behind Sanders.

What is happening here is a struggle for power.

There is a path to victory for the 99% whether Bernie Sanders wins or loses.

Sander's movement should take a cue from Bernie himself. Sanders' choice to run as a Democrat had little to do with his love of the Democratic party. It was a pragmatic choice to leverage the resources of the party against the malefactors of great wealth represented by the Democratic Party:

Asked by an Ohio voter why he chose to run as a Democrat, despite having served for years as an independent, Sanders explained his thinking. "We did have to make that decision: Do you run as an independent? Do you run within the Democratic Party?," he said. "We concluded -- and I think it was absolutely the right decision -- that A) in terms of media coverage, you had to run within the Democratic Party." (B, if you're curious, was that you needed to be "a billionaire" to run as an independent.)

There is no good reason for the movement to have any sentimental attachment to today's Democratic Party which has done all that it can to destroy the insurgency growing inside its ranks and gathering outside its gates.

If Sanders wins the primary, he and his movement could begin the arduous process of rebuilding the Democratic party from within. It might be worth it, but the 1%ers and their liveried lackeys inside the party are not going to give it up easily. Over the long haul Sanders' people could swell the ranks of the party and begin to take it over from the grassroots up. But there will be considerable internecine fighting with the vast numbers of third-way, neoliberal morons like Chuck Schumer who occupy elective office and will not just desert their ambitions because Bernie won an election.

Sanders, if elected, will have proven beyond doubt that the money and connections of the DLC corporate faction are not needed and that will encourage decent people to run for office again against powerful party trolls.

It's important that this battle is also carried on from outside the party to keep party gatekeepers with their manipulations that favor incumbents and foundation funders from sabotaging reform efforts and limiting their scope and scale.

Win or lose, the movement that Sanders has encouraged to mobilize will have to organize itself for independent action.

This asymmetric struggle between the party establishment and the left/liberal/progressive base will require us to construct independent channels for communication and promotion before and after the election is over.

After the primaries if Sanders does not win, the struggle is one where the weaker power's eager cooperation and energy is desperately needed by the stronger power for it to succeed.

Concessions will be offered, soothing platform platitudes will be spoken. The party machinery is already preparing the paperwork:

If Sanders arrives at the Convention with a sufficient number of primary victories and between a third and half of the delegates, he will also be able to influence the Party’s platform. ... “He will come out of this with a prominent voice, with a committed e-mail list of people united around his issues,” Anita Dunn, who worked for Bill Bradley’s unsuccessful campaign against Al Gore, in 2000, and was one of Obama’s top strategists during the 2008 race and later in the White House, said. “That is the beginning of a potential movement, if he chooses to build on it. It’s not as though these issues are going to go away. Fundamental inequality and the inequities in the political process are not suddenly going to be fixed by anyone.”

Sanders' supporters should not accept this far less than half-a-loaf, no matter what platform concessions or promises (carefully-worded for later parsing or denial) are on offer from the party establishment.1

Surely after years of experience no left-leaning group should play Charlie Brown to the establishment's Lucy holding the football. Everybody knows that the establishment candidates will say or promise anything to get elected.

From the article above, in the words of Sanders himself:

When I spoke to Sanders last week, he refused to speculate about any Convention scenarios that didn’t include him as the nominee. “I look forward to her dropping out and giving me her strong support,” he said. He was adamant that Clinton could not deliver the kind of change that voters are demanding, no matter what policy positions she adopted. “The issue is creating an economy and a political system that works for all Americans and not the one per cent,” he said. “That does not happen through a speech. That happens by reaching out and mobilizing millions and millions of people. There is no indication that Hillary Clinton has ever done that, or ever wants to do that. You don’t go and give speeches behind closed doors to Wall Street and be the same person that is going to rally the American people. That just does not exist.” ...

“What matters is whether or not, if she is elected President—and we’re in this to win—if she’s going to stand up and fight. And I think there are many people who will tell you, look, that will not be the case. Look, anybody can give any speech they want tomorrow—somebody writes you a great speech—but the day after you’re elected you say, ‘Well, you know, I talked to my Republican colleagues and they think this is not acceptable.’ ”

“The question is not what she says. The question is what her record has been and what she will do if she is elected President.”

The good news is this, in this situation, all that is necessary for the weaker power to win is to walk away from the table and stay away until the stronger power concedes.

There will likely be a furious war of words. There is likely to be a progression.

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

-- Mahatma Gandhi

We have already been ignored. The needs of the 99% base have been cast aside in order to serve the 1%.

We've been through the laughing stage. Hillary is inevitable. We have the true math. If you leave Hillary, where are you little people going to go, to that madman Trump?

We are now in the fighting stage, and Clinton is bringing the sleaze. The good thing is that Clinton's negative campaigning is making it easier for people to stay away from the table.

In a microcosm of the larger conflict, the web community that calls itself the largest Democratic progressive community blog in the United States, recently declared its support for Hillary Clinton and issued an ultimatum to its community base that criticism of Clinton must be reined in.

Significant numbers of very active members of the community, well more than a thousand, voted with their feet in response to the forceful exertions of the party site in support of the establishment and its candidate.

The party establishment is being a bit more careful than the occasionally excitable owner of the largest progressive community website; they are being careful with their rhetoric. They will try to take in as many Sanders supporters as they can with lies, intimidation and appeals to fear about the rising tide of Trump's fascists.

The movement will have to keep its priorities in order during the tidal wave of election rhetoric.

The Prize is Power

There are two ways to win. If the establishment concedes and the insurgent movement seizes the party, that's one way of winning. If the party establishment refuses to relinquish power and essentially commits suicide, that's another way to win. It happened to the Whigs and it can happen to the Democrats.

Without the support of average Americans, the party cannot be used as a tool by the 1% to promote austerity, rigged trade agreements, imperialism, wars of choice, militarization of police, domestic spying and rules that rig elections.

Left-leaning people can take back the political space that the Democratic Party occupies to block meaningful progressive change if they choose, the opportunity awaits them.

Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

featheredsprite's picture

What do you think about a third party?

up
0 users have voted.

Life is strong. I'm weak, but Life is strong.

joe shikspack's picture

i'm willing to go with whatever the movement wants to do.

i've been pleased to vote for third party candidates before (i've gotten damned sick and tired of voting against the greater evil) and i'd be happy to help build a third party either from scratch or on the framework of the green party.

up
0 users have voted.

For it to become a major party it needs to establish or align itself with internet news channels and other messaging tools.

up
0 users have voted.

Beware the bullshit factories.

Arrow's picture

Caucus delegates won by Bernie's landslide victorys gives an opening inthose states.

In many states, the Bernie movement racked up a supermajority.

Can we coordinate those delegates?

There are lots to do at those state conventions besides elect national delegates.

Party rules, state committee members, anywhere we can assert a progressive influence.

up
0 users have voted.

I want a Pony!

I'd put one (or more) on my car now.

up
0 users have voted.

there are some websites that will do it for you. Cafepress and Zazzle are just a couple.

up
0 users have voted.
Hawkfish's picture

So ordinary people can contribute a few bucks to the electoral process without having to starve their children.

up
0 users have voted.

We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg

joe shikspack's picture

heck, i'd be willing to go with a guaranteed annual income or some other scheme for making sure that everybody has what they need to live a decent, dignified existence. but, yeah, absolutely, if somebody is going to work then they ought to get enough to have a decent standard of living. if an employer can't afford to pay somebody a decent wage for working, maybe what the employer is doing isn't worth doing.

up
0 users have voted.

The Panama Papers prove it. America can afford a universal basic income.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/07/panama-papers-taxes...

up
0 users have voted.
Bisbonian's picture

up
0 users have voted.

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

up
0 users have voted.

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

joe shikspack's picture

well now, there's something that i am shocked to hear.

up
0 users have voted.

Our elections make third world countries look good. Imagine the hubris of Obama waltzing into Cuba with his family and entourage to lecture them on democracy and human rights. It took him eight freaking years to even mention that taxes ought to be fair.

Great essay. I'm ready for the war.

up
0 users have voted.

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

up
0 users have voted.

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

joe shikspack's picture

i'm pretty sure that rt posted it recently. i was going to post it in eb, but i already had so many vids that night that i was afraid that a lot of our users with older machines wouldn't be able to load the diary if i added much more.

up
0 users have voted.

up
0 users have voted.

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

Thank you JtC for edit.

up
0 users have voted.

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

joe shikspack's picture

how people in other countries manage to stifle their laughter (or in some cases tears of rage) when el presidente comes to lecture them about democracy and human rights is beyond me.

presumably it's the fear of military action that keeps them clapping politely.

up
0 users have voted.
mimi's picture

el presidente's secret accounts ...

up
0 users have voted.
snoopydawg's picture

Obama lecturing just after he had DHS brutally disband OWS.
Hubris much. Or just plain hypocritical.

up
0 users have voted.

and what we are doing overseas as well

and hiding it under lies

up
0 users have voted.

he's lecturing on them on democracy and human rights and a few miles away sits Gitmo. Now that's irony...

up
0 users have voted.
mimi's picture

up
0 users have voted.
lotlizard's picture

Not the most credible leader and party to be criticizing anyone else’s record on torture, be it Cuba’s or Trump’s.

up
0 users have voted.
Steven D's picture

But the billionaires will not go gently. Which means we have to be prepared to boycott the election. The reality of that threat is the only thing that would even make them consider "negotiations" with us peons.

up
0 users have voted.

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

joe shikspack's picture

absolutely. there's a lot of verbiage spewed at election time about how this election is the most amazing, important, decisive election of all time. we have to think longer term than one election cycle. after all, the establishment may need some proof that we're serious about this stuff enough to let them sink.

up
0 users have voted.

I'm in Ohio and if this is like every other election every vote here will be important. I've always said I'll vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination because the alternative would be worse. And of course SCOTUS. First, regarding SCOTUS, I've decided that there are no guarantees that Clinton would nominate progressive/liberal justices. With her record of cozening up to WS/Banks/MIC etc, I've really taken SCOTUS off the table as a reason to vote for her. As an example, Obama nominates someone like Garland which I'm inclined to believe that's pretty much would be the flavor of Clinton's nominees. Second, I'm inclined to think when it comes to nation building and wars, Clinton will be no better than the repubs. On trade? Same as repubs. Civil Rights? I guess Bill answered that a couple of days ago. I think she would be light years ahead of the repubs on women issues such as fair pay and access to healthcare, but who really knows where her loyalties lie. And the big one, Climate Change? I don't see her doing anything...
I think, for a change, I'm going to vote for the person my heart tells me to. If Bernie's the nominee I know my heart will vote for him. If Clinton? Nah, I think my heart will be more inclined to vote Green.
And what would be crazy but probably possible? What if enough Bernie supporters in "safe" blue sates (should Clinton win the nom) refuse to vote for her and put blue sates in jeopardy. Wouldn't that send a message...

up
0 users have voted.
WindDancer13's picture

allows write-ins should write Sanders in. that would be a far bigger message than voting Green. People need to check and make sure their state allows write-ins as some have rules that require the person who might be written in to send a letter or something saying it is okay.

Can you imagine if HRC does squeak by (primary and general) the consternation of finding a huge vote for Sanders? If she doesn't get the message (and I am sure she won't), there are some in the party who will.

While she may be ahead in women's issues (that is ahead of Republicans, not Sanders), she will not be able to get anything done about it, and I expect things to get much worse. A SCOTUS nominee who is pro-corporate has a very good chance of being pretty wishy-washy on pro-women's rights.

up
0 users have voted.

We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass

joe shikspack's picture

not only would you need to find out from the sos whether you can write-in vote, but you need to find out if those votes are counted, tallied and made available somewhere for public viewing.

also a vote for a green will help build that party and in many states help them to get ballot access. greens challenge democrats from the left and that sort of challenge is desperately needed.

up
0 users have voted.
WindDancer13's picture

I will check when I get the energy and post what I find. Another thing people need to find out in their states is when the cut off date to allow write-ins if if there is one.

If a write-in won't be counted in my state (MI), then I will go Green, but I would much rather have a vote for Sanders.

up
0 users have voted.

We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass

SnappleBC's picture

It's just going to be oh so easy to occlude the write ins but the green vote will be tabulated. And it's not like Jill isn't also a Berniecrat. Then, as you say, we may end up needing a new party and we might as well start building it.

up
0 users have voted.

A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard

up
0 users have voted.

Beware the bullshit factories.

I recently watched this interview with George Galloway. It's a huge disservice by the media that they shut her out.

up
0 users have voted.

Beware the bullshit factories.

joe shikspack's picture

yep, i can't think of any good reason why voting for hillary would be much better than voting for a rethug. they are cut out of the same cloth.

if hillary or a rethug wins, then this movement has to be ready to make change despite whoever is in office. there are things like climate change that we just don't have any more time to wait for. we are going to have to do what it takes to get our agenda enacted.

up
0 users have voted.
Bisbonian's picture

Joe, you hit every point I am concerned about...except one. Bernie has said a couple times, in the last few days, that if it came down to it, he would support Hillary over Trump, Cruz, or whoever the R's throw out there. I won't, but if he does, a fair number of his supporters will follow suit. And then those of us who do sit it out, are just lumped in with the majority of people that don't vote anyway. Then we're just apathetic. This worries me.

up
0 users have voted.

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

joe shikspack's picture

there are two ways that i propose to address the concern you bring up.

first, it is essential that the movement becomes independent of candidates and parties so that it can be the voice of people rather than an institution.

second, i deal with the apathy thing by voting for candidates that espouse the politics that i approve of regardless of whether they stand a chance of winning. i have stopped voting against people. for example, i happily voted for jill stein last election and i'd be happy to vote for her again this time should bernie fail to run in the general.

up
0 users have voted.
Bisbonian's picture

Voted for somebody who wasn't the establishment EVERY time...even Perot, once. So, I will gladly vote for Jill Stein (if she gets on the ballot, and Bernie doesn't). But getting ~5% or so, cycle after cycle is kind of depressing.

up
0 users have voted.

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

joe shikspack's picture

if people stopped voting strategically against "evil," at least for non-corporate dems, the green party would be getting a significant share of the vote.

up
0 users have voted.

What I think the new politics has been missing is a manifesto that can draw voters to it, rather than relying on individual candidates or hollow promises from corporatists. That, I think, is the real value of Sanders' candidacy. His unorthodox policy proposals are mostly based on widely popular ideas, and his platform as a whole makes for a strong start to developing a Social Democratic manifesto. Formalizing that policy agenda, and transferring the campaign movement into an issues-based movement, is the vital next step.

We can acquire real power by giving voters a coherent set of ideas to support, and give candidates the leverage that a popular political platform could provide. Purity is not a bad thing, when the alternative is liars and sell-outs. Support the candidates who support the issues, and turn our backs on those who don't. If enough of us do that, the Democratic party will face a choice to follow or die.

Outstanding essay, by the way. Thank you so much for it.

up
0 users have voted.

Please help support caucus99percent!

joe shikspack's picture

thanks for the kind words.

i think that bernie has done a masterful job of creating a platform largely based on the demands of the occupy movement, which is a great start for a progressive policy agenda.

i'd like to see it fleshed out, especially in the foreign policy area. i believe that both the democratic base and a large portion of independents are further left than bernie is on opposition to a foreign policy based upon having a big, nasty military that gets regular exercise.

a while ago, i started working on a pie-in-the-sky platform that was a bit of a tongue in cheek exercise, but it has some things in it that might be borrowed as a start for the sort of platform creation that you mention. It has many glaring omissions because I mostly wrote it as a brain dump with the idea that it might be added to later, but if there's interest i'd be delighted to revisit it as a community project perhaps.

it's here: I'm a Nobody, and you can be, too.

up
0 users have voted.

I agree that Bernie's foreign policy agenda isn't bold enough, and that's something a movement liberated from a presidential candidate can address. I don't see enough emphasis on cutting back the security state either, although at least he's willing to take on the Pentagon.

A manifesto has to be well-prioritized, fairly comprehensive and punchy enough to sell to a broad electorate. Gingrich's Contract with America is a model of how to do it, although the content would be vastly different. The detail should lie behind the bullet point headlines. A manifesto also has to be logically and morally coherent, with a simple mission statement behind it. It's not something one or two of us will write, but I've been impressed enough by the talent and the brains bubbling up in Sanders' campaign that I'm more optimistic than I used to be that such a manifesto can be developed by collective action. The transition from the Sanders campaign to an independent, self-sustaining and coordinated movement is the critical step, and the most likely failure point.

up
0 users have voted.

Please help support caucus99percent!

WindDancer13's picture

but I think Sanders has a much more progressive foreign policy than he lets on. Right now, in the primary and in the general taking a total non-interventionist or less than gung ho military stance could harm him greatly. Another aspect of this issue is that we have been at war in the ME for over 40 years now, and getting out of it will not happen overnight. I do not think he believes the Saudis are our allies, so there is a hint.

up
0 users have voted.

We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass

Lady Libertine's picture

I know there's plenty of folks on The Left who are really critical of Bernie for his reluctance/refusal to just blast Israel and stand up full throttle for Palestinians but I think it'd be political suicide for him (or just about anybody in public office) to do so and he knows it. It would tank his whole campaign / movement in about 30 seconds.

up
0 users have voted.
Pluto's Republic's picture

Global Risk Insights just published an analysis of the military/foreign policy positions of each current candidate, including Bernie. I can't speak for its accuracy about Bernie, but he did get Trump half right, and was somewhat straight about Hillary. Not a big-picture analyst, though.

up
0 users have voted.
Azazello's picture

and leave the top line blank. The "Democrats" will notice the undervote, especially if there's millions of 'em.

up
0 users have voted.

We wanted decent healthcare, a living wage and free college.
The Democrats gave us Biden and war instead.

SnappleBC's picture

Why not vote Green and let your vote be counted? I see no useful purpose to simply not voting but there's plenty of good reasons to build up the Green party.

up
0 users have voted.

A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard

everyone will do something different and diffuse the message to such a degree it can't be heard. When the time comes, I hope there is enough visible leadership to direct the opposition. Bernie may or may not support her. If he does, it will be totally irrelevant.

up
0 users have voted.

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

Lady Libertine's picture

unless Im wrong, going by memory... Bernie was backed into a corner (several times) with some of this recent nonsense with the "QUALIFIED" stuff, so he eventually said that she is "more qualified than" Trump or Cruz (an easy enough 'giveaway'). Even if he did say "support her" over them, I dont care, heh. I don't really want to nitpick over that point.

My sense is that right now - in the midst of this recent onslaught especially - Bernie's is playing his cards close to the chest (wrt this). He has to win NY. He has to campaign and build on the momentum, etc. going forward. No doubt many of us here are ready and willing to 'cut the cord' and walk away from the Dem 1%'ers Party, but I don't think we've reached critical mass - yet. And, depending on how things go over the next several weeks, he might not be in a position to pull out that Ace card at the Convention. Or, he will but how forcefully he will (or won't) will depend a lot on him having sufficient support from we the people. Not sure what that will look like really, but as joe says in the piece, there's a couple different ways it could go.

Bernie may be the lightning rod (this round) but we gotta bring the thunder.

up
0 users have voted.
Haikukitty's picture

But let's see what happens, when it actually happens. Bernie may or may not "endorse" Clinton, but if he does, I can't blame him. Until very recently, I also felt the lesser evil was still "lesser" and therefore preferable and he's spent his whole life trying to make government work from within government. Now I suddenly realize that either lesser or greater - its still evil, and nothing will change unless we change it.

But what I'm trying to say regarding Nernie - there's supporting Hillary over Trump enthusiastically, and then there's preferring Hillary over Trump but leaving it open for people to support Jill Stein or anyone else they are aligned with. Until it actually happens and we can see what he really says, we can't worry about it.

But I do know that, as much as I love Bernie, I won't be voting for Hillary no matter what he says. I may not be the only one.

And I've only come to that realization fairly recently as her true colors have come out more and more - other people might be waking up, too. I do think it would be great for people to align behind one or two candidates, though, whether its Stein or whoever, so our votes are still counted, but don't go to support either of the big two. If we end up not winning, we can at least remove our consent and show the DNC that things are going to be changing.

up
0 users have voted.
Shahryar's picture

I'm not happy with his foreign policy and support for attacking people. I'll write a diary about this....first, more importantly, I have to take a walk.

up
0 users have voted.
Martha Pearce-Smith's picture

As long as some people vote, and you can bet the 1% would do so...and all of their little minions... it would be a legal and binding election...too bad y'all missed it, eh? THEY don't care if only 1 or 2% of the population elects the government...hell they have been trying to keep the peons from voting for 200 years...

up
0 users have voted.

Please help the Resilience Resource Library grow by adding your links.

First Nations News

joe shikspack's picture

that's why i generally don't care for election boycott strategies.

i've always felt that a protest vote is the only way to make a mark and demonstrate your disapproval if there is no candidate worth voting for on the ballot.

up
0 users have voted.
Bisbonian's picture

I've been trying to tell people, if Trump gets two votes, and Hillary gets one, then Trump wins the election. Everyone else was apathetic.

up
0 users have voted.

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

Steven D's picture

Not vote. FWIW

up
0 users have voted.

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

Martha Pearce-Smith's picture

that's a given...but I know other's mileage may vary...

up
0 users have voted.

Please help the Resilience Resource Library grow by adding your links.

First Nations News

The perniciousness of the "SCOTUS!!!1!" argument is that it demands unconditional surrender from party insurgents. It is the "We Suck Less" motto in real life. The reason progressives have no power in the Democratic party is that they can't take anything away from the owners of the party that they really value.

If we want to take over the Democratic party, we have to be prepared to destroy it. Schism is about the only way to do that. It risks a Republican presidency, but as it stands we'll get a Republican presidency with Hillary anyway. She'll just moderate the Bircher bits to pretend she's our friend.

I'm not sure what Bernie has in mind if he comes to the convention without the delegates to win the nomination. I suspect he'll bend the knee formally to Clinton, give a strong prime-time speech that will differ little from his stump speech, and go back on the campaign trail to keep pushing his revolution. Building a constituency the Clintons can't coopt seems like the next step in the process, and I would expect Elizabeth Warren to join him in promoting the Social Democratic wing of the party.

If the Clintons try to freeze Bernie out with some empty platform promises, Bernie may encourage his supporters to be a lot more confrontational with the Clinton campaign. Not falling meekly into line, but making strong demands and threatening to stay home if those demands aren't agreed to, would begin to give Bernie's movement some power. A President Hillary could then be held hostage to active opposition from the Senate when she backtracks or sells out the base. She will need all the favorable numbers she can get when the Republicans go into scorched earth mode on her, because she's not as clean as Obama is. If Bernie can sink her favorables, then he has power over her.

Regardless, the movement behind Bernie's campaign needs to cohere and advance, and it should stay outside the Democratic party in doing so. I strongly suspect Bernie will be encouraging and fostering the movement independent of his inside-game efforts, and calling on it to help when needed for fights. The movement should make the issues Bernie builds his campaign around its permanent candidate, and continue running those issues as they evolve. Recruiting and supporting local and state candidates is the logical next step for the movement, building a quasi-party that can work within the Democratic party or threaten to split from it. In this way, the movement can build enough power to credibly kill the Democratic party if the party doesn't adopt the movement's platform.

up
0 users have voted.

Please help support caucus99percent!

mimi's picture

I don't believe it would:

I'm not sure what Bernie has in mind if he comes to the convention without the delegates to win the nomination. I suspect he'll bend the knee formally to Clinton, give a strong prime-time speech that will differ little from his stump speech, and go back on the campaign trail to keep pushing his revolution.

How can a man, who campaigned on wanting a political revolution, bend his knees, (and I would not think that there is something like a "formally knee bending", bending is bending), and then convincingly go back to push for his revolution. If your spine is not standing straight up, at least your knees should.

I think Sanders needs also some strong pushing from the people, telling him he must NOT bend his knees, he should work to split away with his followers from the Democratic Party and immediately use his followers and the nascent movement behind him to build a yuge Third Party movement which includes the Green Party and the Socialists.

In my mind he would not be convincing if he were to ask his followers to support HRC, when he doesn't get the nomination. No way. I would lose the respect I have for him, if he did. And so far I haven't heard any explanation of why bending his knees is justifiable.

Regardless, the movement behind Bernie's campaign needs to cohere and advance, and it should stay outside the Democratic party in doing so. I strongly suspect Bernie will be encouraging and fostering the movement independent of his inside-game efforts, and calling on it to help when needed for fights. The movement should make the issues Bernie builds his campaign around its permanent candidate, and continue running those issues as they evolve.

agree, outside the Democratic party. As Joe said in his real good analysis:

in this situation, all that is necessary for the weaker power to win is to walk away from the table and stay away until the stronger power concedes.

You gotta have the nerves to walk away from the table. If you don't, who will take you seriously? And somehow I believe that a firm anti-war stand and for a reasonable policy vis a vis Russia would gain you some sympathies in European countries, whose leaders are too coward to stand up by themselves. But they would follow, if the US would go ahead and change is awful foreign policies and follow a new route under a radical revolutionary leadership of a Sanders presidency. (at leat I guess and/or hope)

up
0 users have voted.

I can see him endorsing Clinton if she's the nominee, though I'm sure he'd frame it in such a way as to imply that she's for a lot of his issues. Then he can go out on the campaign trail and campaign much more for his agenda than for Clinton. He can essentially hold her to whatever promises he can extract from her, and campaign on his issues. That way, his endorsement of Clinton will be couched in terms of her supporting his agenda. It's a finesse, but that's how he can parlay his campaign into power in the Democratic party. We need that inside game, and he is well placed to lead it. Between Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, we would have two strong leaders in the Senate holding Clinton to account.

I strongly agree with Joe, and have argued frequently at TOP, that progressives have to be willing to withdraw support from the Democratic party before the party will take us seriously. Only if enough of us show the party establishment that we can sink their party will they share it with us.

up
0 users have voted.

Please help support caucus99percent!

mimi's picture

how this inside game is going to work. It makes me nervous though.

He can essentially hold her to whatever promises he can extract from her, and campaign on his issues. That way, his endorsement of Clinton will be couched in terms of her supporting his agenda. It's a finesse, but that's how he can parlay his campaign into power in the Democratic party. We need that inside game, and he is well placed to lead it.

I am just too much a faint of heart for such "games". But I guess, it's because I am not an American and not raised here, so everything scares me easily. I hope he has not or will not play that game and he wins outright.

up
0 users have voted.
Oldest Son Of A Sailor's picture

Once she's elected those concessions will be a puff of smoke into hurricane force winds...

The only answer is "Bern or Bust" meaning if Bernie doesn't get the nomination then a write in for Bernie if you can, a vote for Jill Stein if you can, a vote for any other minor party candidate with a platform you can support, or abstention from the top line of the ballot.

If we cannot reform the Democratic Party from within then it is not our party and we should let them Bern...

If Hillary cannot win the election it is not our problem! The Democratic Party chose to ignore a significant portion of the party, and circumvent the democratic process, to bring forward an "Unpalatable" candidate. Their loss is not our fault or problem, we gave it our best shot...

If you consider a Clinton presidency or, a tRump presidency, to be the consequence, then really neither will have much difference than the last 36 years. If the continued decline of the middle and lower class continues, the rights of racial and ethnic groups, the rights of religion, the rights of women, the rights of LGBT, etc. continue to decline, then perhaps those who voted against their best interests will finally reach their bottom, and seek the cure...

Having failed at reforming the Democratic Party, we will need to move forward, and create our own Progressive Party to become the new home for the Progressive Democrats leaving the party, and the "Unaffiliated Independent Voters" who share our progressive beliefs...

It is wrong to attach to a party as we have thinking our numbers in the party will bring reform, and where people who share our views may elect to buy the propaganda of the party doing things like "Super Delegates" showing a convincing lead before the first primary vote is cast, and all the other bull shit they have pulled, then voting for the winner of the rigged horse race...

We need to create a party for our movement and a force to be reckoned with even past our effort for Bernie. Even if our new party cannot come up with a winning candidate, we can offer a separate line on the ballot for another party's candidate we endorse in many states or, simply endorse one of their candidates in states where we can't have their name on the ballot and they will know the size of or vote coming in the election. Such would be the case of lets say Elizabeth Warren running as a democrat and our party supporting her as our choice as well...

What we need is a continuing Progressive Party with its own primaries, and permanent ballot access in all of the states. When we succeed at that we will see reforms... Finally!

Our numbers are strong enough, and our platform has the support of enough people, we just aren't organized as we have mistakenly placed our support in the wrong place.

up
0 users have voted.
"Do you realize the responsibility I carry?
I'm the only person standing between Richard Nixon and the White House."

~John F. Kennedy~
Economic: -9.13, Social: -7.28,
joe shikspack's picture

well said!

up
0 users have voted.
SnappleBC's picture

We burn the candle at both ends.

On one hand the movement needs to stay coalesced into a movement after the election whether or not Bernie wins... we need to find a support berniecrats... much better than we have been doing in fact... much MUCH better.

On the other hand we need to deny victory to the DLC politicians. We need them to understand that they cannot win without us. That is likely to be the hardest thing because it means allowing Republicans to control the government pretty much entirely. I suspect most Democratic voters will vote for their Democratic senators and representatives no matter what they actually stand for.

up
0 users have voted.

A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard

snoopydawg's picture

When the democrats are in power, the GOP places holds and filibuster bills, but when the GOP is in power, the democrats roll over and let the GOP pass horrible legislation.

up
0 users have voted.
reflectionsv37's picture

In my voting life time, it has never really mattered whether the democrats or the republicans won. We always end up being governed by republican viewpoints and policy. I've often said that if democrats had 100 seats in the Senate, before voting on any issue they would talk for hours on what the republicans would want and then pass amendments to make them feel better.

We have to stop enabling the Dino's by continuing to vote for them. When this campaign started I was certain that I could vote for Hillary if she became the nominee. About 3 months ago I realized there is no way I could vote for her, under any circumstances. If by writing in Bernie's name we end up under republican rule. So be it. If Hillary wins, we have at least 4 more years of being governed by republicans.

up
0 users have voted.

“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.”
George W. Bush

shaharazade's picture

to the 2012 selection in my district which is 85% (the rest mostly greens & indies) Democratic and very liberal, people saw and understood the Democrat's bait and switch, even the 'moderates'. I heard a lot of people saying 'Better then the Mormon'. I voted for Jill Stein and was appalled that she got less then 1% of the vote nationally.

The Green's do not seem interested in the US in being a strong opposition party with broad appeal. They are like the People's Judean Front. The same goes for WFP which I was a member of. Imo any movement that takes the complicit oligarchical duopoly on cannot tie itself to the Democratic Party. It is not by it's nature going to reform or incorporate any democratic movement. The platform is a joke it means nothing. As Nancy said of our Constitution it's unenforceable and a useless piece of paper.

We tried here in OR get 'progressives' Dems elected locally and statewide starting in 2004. It has been a spectacular fail. Oh these so called progressive candidate's won hands down and then proceeded to declare OR open for business and started in wrecking the place. MB's advise back then was work local grassroots. If you do you find that the tentacles of the vampire squid controls both the money and the power from dogcatcher, city consul to governor, mayors and house reps.

I'm very skeptical about using the movement Bernie has empowered to prop up or even support the Democratic party on any level. After voting for Jill Stein I went through my down ballot and voted for every socialist or environmentalist who was running against the Democratic local ,state and national, wolfs in progressive clothing.

I hope Bernie does not go the way of supporting Hillary in the general, but I won't be surprised if he does. He too is part of the broken bent, system. I think that this global movement from the left needs to find a way to form strong coalitions solidarity and unify the factions out side the rigged farce of or electoral political duopoly.

Divide and conquer, along with the stirred up culture war has been very successful at keeping people from coming together and fighting the real enemies of democracy, human/civil rights and economic justice. Or any justice for that matter. There is no road through the politically party's that are controlled and owned by the globally entrenched powers that 'own the place.'

People across the board, politically active and so called apathetic, seem to have had enough. Without Bernie or with Bernie, people need to use their power to come together and address their grievances. If we can't do it using the Democratic party as a vehicle then why not do it outside the locked gates. Solidarity instead of fracturing off into interest's that are used to play people and pit them against each other. I'm at a point where I consider the Democrat's more dangerous then the lunatic RW. They keep the fictional democratic game afloat and work for the same evil agenda once elected.

Just my thoughts on where this movement that has been in the works for a long time needs to go if Bernie tries to hook it to the Democratic party machine. I was a strong supporter and donated to 'Mr. Patriotic Progressive' Russ Fiengold until he came on my TV and told me that the American people did not need the heartbreak of the Obama administrations prosecuting the Bushies. It would undermine the US system he said. If ever a system need undermining it's this joke of a representational democratic republic. Time to stick a fork in it's done. This is just the start of something better beginning.

up
0 users have voted.
shaharazade's picture

thanks Joe for the great essay, this is a timely and needed discussion.

up
0 users have voted.
lotlizard's picture

I was a strong supporter and donated to “Mr. Patriotic Progressive” Russ Feingold until he came on my TV and told me that the American people did not need the heartbreak of the Obama administration’s prosecuting the Bushies. It would undermine the US system he said. If ever a system need undermining it’s this joke of a representational democratic republic.

up
0 users have voted.

I put that hashtag on everything I can everywhere I can. It is why we are getting the coverage we are about Democrats refusing to support her if she wins.

No way in hell Bernie or his supporters should walk into that conventions with fealty oaths taped to their foreheads. Personally, I hope they walk. No good making threats they aren't prepared to back up. That's how to get taken for granted. I am prepared to make her lose. I hope others are.

up
0 users have voted.

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

joe shikspack's picture

up
0 users have voted.
Bisbonian's picture

up
0 users have voted.

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

WindDancer13's picture

Thanks for the link.

up
0 users have voted.

We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.--Aristotle
If there is no struggle there is no progress.--Frederick Douglass

shaharazade's picture

up
0 users have voted.
Oldest Son Of A Sailor's picture

The plutocracy will go on with or without us...

We do not have to vote to sanction its existence...

up
0 users have voted.
"Do you realize the responsibility I carry?
I'm the only person standing between Richard Nixon and the White House."

~John F. Kennedy~
Economic: -9.13, Social: -7.28,

As I see it, we already rocked the campaign by showing that there are enough people willing to contribute to a candidate who stands against corporate money. The fact that people are fed up with policies that make their lives worse and are willing to get behind an insurgent is big. This is not like Perot big, John Anderson or other third parties. This is a lot of the base of one political party. When George Wallace grabbed the southern voters, what did the Republicans do? The GOP went where its voters wanted, except that much of the rest of us moved into the future. No party is going to suceed with angry, voting, active Millenials against them - I say this as a Baby Boomer. Those enacting 1% policies can get money but they cannot get votes, and I am a proud geezer who wants to stand with the future. #BernieorBust for me, because they only listen when we are using our outside voice. I just want to add, my sense is to support a third party, run hard support toward "Berniecrats" at all levels, and give the Democratic Party a chance to come around and then merge, but not before a lot of changes come.

up
0 users have voted.
gulfgal98's picture

up
0 users have voted.

Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

Just added my name. I'll vote Green (won't write-in because my ballot will be spoiled). The Democratic Party will not survive if Hillary Clinton is President. That's OK with me, because the Political Revolution is beginning to coalesce, and the lives of most Americans and most people around the world will not get any better if HRC is President. The handwriting is on the wall.

up
0 users have voted.
Bob Phillips's picture

Bernie or Jill? At once disarming the misogyny slander and suggesting a real world alternative.
The Green Party is sort of ripe for the picking.

up
0 users have voted.
Deja's picture

. . . I don't know if electronic machines where they scan your driver license, record the fact you voted, then give you an access number to put into the machine allow write ins. So much for anonymous voting - and I've seen the documentary Hacking Democracy, so I know it's possible to manipulate electronic outcomes. (Sorry, YouTube gave me the mobile link bec I'm on my phone. Wiki has a description if you want background on the film.)

Being in Texas, my vote in the GE won't likely count, but I'd so love for it to count. Sad Our system is screwed up, and my son says he's glad for the electoral system because it'll keep Trump from winning. I didn't say anything, but should've asked, in lieu of whom? Right wing $hillary, or Preacher Mole Man Cruz?

up
0 users have voted.
gulfgal98's picture

I have watched this numerous times. My own elections supervisor, Ion Sancho, is in this movie. This video is definitely well worth watching as it paints a very frightening picture of how easy it is to commit election fraud.

[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7W7rHxTsH0]

up
0 users have voted.

Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

If your state counts write in votes, you will vote for Bernie. If you state throws them out, then you will vote Green.

Since I don't follow rules all that well, I decided it meant that I wouldn't vote for Hillary. If and when it is time to vote, I'll make my decision then.

up
0 users have voted.

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

votes for Jill be the difference in a Hillary loss.

I like many am undecided at this point. There's too much unknown.

One of the most important things to become informed about is whether or not write-in votes are allowed in your state AND whether your entire ballot is cast out or just the write-in ignored. Your Secretary of State's website should have that info listed. If not please call them for clarification before you decide to write Bernie in.

My current thinking is to work to deny Hillary the presidency BUT to also work to win the senate and as much of congress as possible from republican grips.
The stage is well set for this IF Bernie people go vote and vote Dem down ticket. Vote against Hillary but we need the senate to weather the storm until 2020.
That's my plan until persuaded differently.

up
0 users have voted.

With their hearts they turned to each others heart for refuge
In troubled years that came before the deluge
*Jackson Browne, 1974, Before the Deluge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SX-HFcSIoU

SnappleBC's picture

mostly because I suspect write-in votes will get totally ignored and never tallied or reported but a vote for the Green party will be noticed.

up
0 users have voted.

A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard

Unabashed Liberal's picture

my vote in the GE will have to be cast for someone actually on the ballot.

And, if I thought that the corporatist media would acknowledge a voter boycott--the way that they do when it happens in other countries--I might consider it. But, I truly don't expect that this will happen in my lifetime, as long as the MSM is owned by the One Percent.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Excellent essay, Joe--thanks!

Pleasantry

(Music City) Mollie, C99P & DKos
elinkarlsson@WordPress


"Vision without action is a daydream. Action without vision is a nightmare."--Japanese Proverb
up
0 users have voted.

Everyone thinks they have the best dog, and none of them are wrong.

Shahryar's picture

(in case Bernie doesn't get the nomination)

I won't write in Bernie if he declares his support for Hillary. I would most likely vote for Jill Stein but I could possibly write in Eugene Debs or Ringo.

Oregon law says they won't bother distinguishing among the write-ins unless the total number of those is greater than the votes for the leading candidate. In 2012 Obama won with just short of a million in this state so that's how many write-ins we'd need before anyone knows who those were for. In that election there were 13,000 write-ins or so. The tally is shown as "write-ins" with no detail.

up
0 users have voted.
Pluto's Republic's picture

…that if the Green Party/Stein get five percent of the vote, they will qualify for Federal Election Funding next time around. I have no idea if that is true, but I've seen that tactic mentioned by folks voting for Jill Stein.

up
0 users have voted.
Dhyerwolf's picture

that supports many great things, is fighting the system from the outside and would be empowered by more votes.

up
0 users have voted.
Bob Phillips's picture

a delicious irony. And I'm not here, in any sense, to particularly stump for Jill. Every vote for Dr. Stein, of course, that doesn't go for Madam Secretary can hardly be counted as a misogynist vote. It's not that we won't vote for a woman, just not that woman.

Far more importantly, it's difficult to tell, at this stage, whether the revolution Bernie has ignited winds up in a transformed Democratic Party or an abandonment of the Left from the center-right DLC party for something that more truly represents our interests. If the latter, Katie bar the door, things could get really interesting.

Suppose, as I do, that we are on the verge of a great political realignment. Suppose, once again as I do, that one of the emergent parties will be be somewhere (you might "triangulate" this) between HRC's present public stances and whatever "moderate" Republicans share her ideals.

In truth, that's a large slice of the electorate. Whether we like it or not. When RINOs and DINOs and Third Wayers all get together they're at worst a significant electoral minority. Whether or not the non-racist elements of the Tea Party, e.g., and other "natural" allies can be brought together to overthrow corporatism, well, that's going to take some organizing.

Which isn't at all to say it can't be done. Only that it won't be easy.

During my time in military service it was my opportunity to be part of units who's slogan was "The very difficult we do right away, the impossible takes just a little longer."

We're in this for the long haul.

up
0 users have voted.
orlbucfan's picture

I live in the east central part of Flori-crook. I can write-in when we have a POTUS election. I already decided to do it after the 2010 elections. I'm voting for the Bernster in November. PERIOD!

up
0 users have voted.

Inner and Outer Space: the Final Frontiers.

mimi's picture

the movement on her alone. Sanders movement and Jill Stein movement have to work together. There is no excuse if they don't.

up
0 users have voted.
featheredsprite's picture

Interesting thought. Perhaps a mutually agreeable platform could be worked out.

ETA: I just checked out the platform of the Green Party. Lots of overlap with the 99% movement.

up
0 users have voted.

Life is strong. I'm weak, but Life is strong.

Pages