Home | About | Donate

Bernie Sanders Gets Group Endorsements When Members Decide; Hillary Clinton When Leaders Decide


Bernie Sanders Gets Group Endorsements When Members Decide; Hillary Clinton When Leaders Decide

Zaid Jilani, The Intercept

In the war for endorsements in the Democratic presidential primary, there is a clear trend.

Every major union or progressive organization that let its members have a vote endorsed Bernie Sanders.

Meanwhile, all of Hillary Clinton’s major group endorsements come from organizations where the leaders decide. And several of those endorsements were accompanied by criticisms from members about the lack of a democratic process.


I'm sure there is a similar connection to the Clinton campaign with NARAL, if someone were to look closely enough. Bernie's only "sin" in calling these groups part of the establishment, was not in putting "Democratic" in front of "establishment". They clearly are part of "big Democratic Party". They all play in the same sandbox, and all take money from the same rich individuals, corporations and foundations. That is what Bernie meant, he just didn't define it well enough. Now he's had to walk it back and give Hillary some brownie points. Bad move on Bernie's part, but hopefully not fatal.


How did Bernie walk it back? I must have missed it.


In other words:

The supposed breadth of national organizational support for Clinton, is actually nothing more than a Potemkin village.


While the R's seem to delight in their clown car circus, the D's may just implode with their "super delegate" version of "democracy". Interesting times, indeed, as the Chinese would wish upon us.


I represent the krill union and our members don't have a vote because we're only 2 inches long and are not represented in the U.S. Congress or anyone's parliament.

Yet, there are trillions of us krill down here in the Antarctic, which sounds like a lot but we've lost about 80% of our population in recent years because the ice which contains the frozen algae we survive on during the winter months is now lasting 90 days less each year and this has decimated our population. This may not sound consequential, but we are the very lowest of the food chain (though we like to say we are the first link in the chain though being the smallest of the small). If you give it some thought, your survival depends on our survival.

Bernie Sanders has said that climate change is the most urgent global security issue we face. For this single reason our members, who have no voice, enthusiastically endorse Senator Bernie Sanders (though many of us fear it is already too late).


" It is perhaps the clearest example yet of Clinton's powerful appeal to the Democratic party's elite, even as support for Sanders explodes among the rank and file."

The Democratic party's elite are so corrupt that they would rather see Trump win than support Bernie, even though Bernie would trounce Trump and his supporters like the pistol packin mama from Alaska.

The reason for HRC's powerful appeal to the corporate elite is they know she is as rotten as they are!


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


what hopefully happens in some of these organizations--especially the unions--is an insurgency movement to dislodge the economic elites at the top of the food chain. The teacher's unions are so disappointing given Clinton's support for privatization....sigh.

We'll at least see how independent the rank and file are. So far, not independent enough to regain control over their organizations. Hopefully this starts changing things.


+1000. What's happened to unions the last 3-4 decades is horrifying. Need to get us pinkos back in there to stir things up again! :slightly_smiling: leadership that live like CEOs and members so docile as to be unworthy of the name, "unionist".
Shame the Democrats didn't dispatch Taft-Hartley with the dozen or so opportunities they've hadto do so over the years.


Many of these organizations have been around for decades - they are established into the system with their lobbying, relationships with elected officials, etc. Though their missions are laudable, their leadership in the form of administrators and board members, etc. are settled into cushy jobs. They are thus part of the establishment. These leaders now have something more to consider in addition to the missions of their organizations, keeping their jobs, whereas the grassroots membership remains focused solely on the mission.


Sander got the postal union by executive action, not even a poll. Most of hers were from polls. Obviously not all union members think alike and if they vote there will be some that vote for Bernie and some for Hillary. The problems with this line is that it looks like sour grapes, each of them got one by executive action. In the meantime the supreme court is deciding on union membership requirements, and the argument for not having to join is that the leadership doesn't necessarily represents the view of each member. Eugene V. Debs would not be pleased with attacking union endorsements based on that argument. The union leaders are elected to represents the views of the majority of their members, watch for this reasoning presented by the Sander's campaign to favor allowing workers to opt out of union membership. Then Sanders can wince, but it'll be too late for those unions.


I agree he did not clarify what he meant by establishment during the interview with Rachael Maddow. My guess is that he is running against the Democratic establishment as well as the broader establishment so he automatically equates any support for Clinton as being from the establishment. Plus he has been opposing the establishment since his activist days in the 1960s so it is such a part of him I think he almost can say this stuff without thinking which actually seems to be what took place. Hard to explain how a politician can equate Planned Parenthood with the establishment but he did.


Do these matter much; except at the national level of formal receptions and audiences with the Usual Washington Suspects? I know local union people who don't trust the Clintons as far as they can throw them. And, won't vote for them, ever. Remember that scam artist Lanny Davis? He's behind a lot of nefarious undertakings and unsavory union investments, at home and in S. America, at the behest of Clinton & Bush Family Triangulation, Inc. Why Sen. Sanders doesn't open up this avenue, for further clarifying the 2 candidates historical and political differences, is sort of surprising. Exposing Hillary's Neo-Con business connections while Sec. of State, and her husband's foundation failures ( with former adm. officials ) in Haiti and other " hot spots " in S. America should be fair game when debating foreign policy, right? The " walking around money train " is pulling a lot of freight and baggage, methinks.


The "Potemkin Village" analogy is OK....cutting to the chase and identifying the villagers as denizens INSIDE THE BELTWAY is the precise characterization.

Harry Truman said "if you want a friend in DC, get a dog". What Harry meant is that nobody is your friend in DC unless they are getting something from you.

Nearly every large for profit or non profit corporation and other special interest organization has at least a branch office in greater DC, many have moved their headquarters there since the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) was formed in 1985 and the pay to play culture expanded. Most of the "leaders" in question are part of the inside the beltway club, hence they are hedging their bets, knowing that if Hillary does get elected and they were not waving her flag that they will loose whatever little bit of clout they once had and they will probably lose their jobs. All of these "leaders'" salaries are way into the six figures with very generous perks, with some of them making more than a million per year, so they don't want to have to go back to working for a living like the rest of us.


Ever since the Clintons and others formed the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) in 1985 and turned the Party into billion dollar organization, winning elections is secondary to sustaining the billion dollar per year of corporate cash flowing into the Party. If Hillary is nominated the Party will continue to enjoy the cash flow whether or not she wins. If Sanders is nominated 90% of that cash flow is likely to dry up and no organization lets 90% of its cash flow disappear without a fight.


Planned Parenthood, like many labor unions, Boys Scouts and other organization have a noble mission and a dark side. We are seeing the dark side of Planned Parenthood. In view of the attacks from the GOP Planned Parenthood has serially sustained, Cecile Richards is demonstrating very poor strategic planning and damage control skills by making ANY endorsement when there is no requirement for her organization to do so. Hopefully she will be canned soon and replaced by somebody who will be a better leader.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.