The problem was Bernie nor any of you were progressive enough. Void of expedition, demonstration and how to create jobs other than tax payer funded policy that will remove subsidies and initiate massive hyper inflation. Did you know that if we removed fossil fuel subsidies, gas would be$15 dollars a gallon? Talk about delusional. I have been accused of being delusional because I want to see civilization mobilize into co op community power purchase agreements with power park green energy conversion projects. small scale algae farms, Bio mass into bio gas, OTEC platforms for desalination and energy production communities all over the south pacific. I was expecting even smarter mobilization with upper class suburbanites from Atlanta, " get a sanctuary built, collapse is coming, the world is $233 trillion in debt and the planet can't pay it off. The Fracking is dehydrating life like fleas, sending water deep into the earth. And then there was Slow kill GMO Hillary, Bernie didn't even touch on Agriculture, and the food web destruction. The dying Bees. No, all you got was a labor union tax and spend old school vision. IT lacked everything for me. I am still alone. Still suffering despair about you.
Bernie: Clinton did very well in the deep South and we got creamed there.
I say that the south is totally irrelevant in a general election because I am sure Trump will carry most of those states no matter if HRC or Bernie is the Democratic nominee for POTUS.
One one hand, I'm disappointed that Bernie said he would support Hillary if she wins the nomination. On the other hand, it may be a politically smart move if she would select him as her running mate, the only way she might defeat Trump.
Most Republicans seem to think that Trump has no chance of winning in the general election. However, the Democrats aren't so sure. But the opponent might not be Trump. The stop Trump movement by many Republicans is gearing up. If they can't stop him from getting the nomination they might run a third party candidate. For Democrats it is going to remain a guessing game who they are going to face in the general election. No matter who they face if they don't regain control of the Senate it will not be that great a victory even if they win the presidency as seems more and more likely.
If Sen. Sanders is not the nominee, I will not vote for Sec. Clinton under any circumstances. She is a slow burn to the death of the middle class, stealing the last of whatever we have left, and handing it over to her friends at the top. All the while most idiot "Hillary liberals" (now there is a joke for you, Hillary and liberal in the same sentence) will be sitting back and allowing it to happen, because it's Sec. Clinton the "progressive" lol, until finally the thief is at their back door. At least with the ridiculous Mr. Trump everyone will be watching him at every turn and stopping all his unfathomable ideas. I won't vote for him either, but he would be gone in four years taking the disgusting republican Party with him. Think about it. If we don't change this horrible system now, my question is; When? Now is it, people. If I can't vote Bernie, I'll vote Jill Stein, but will never waste a vote again on the lesser of evils!
The problem that is really the most daunting for Sanders is that the corporate media mostly ignore him and when they do cover him, it's mostly negative, like saying he can't win.
This was an even more "Yu-u-u-ge" problem early in his 10-month campaign effort. Basically until he tied in Iowa and won in New Hampshire, he was not even covered. As a result, he's been playing catch-up just trying to get known. Exit polls in the early southern state showed that many people, including blacks who composed Hillary's supposed "fire wall," said they didn't know anything know anything about Sanders, or that they'd heard he had participated in the Civil Rights movement, but then said they wanted someone with "experience" in Congress. In other words, they didn't know he had almost a quarter century's experience in Congress, compared to 8 years for Hillary.
This kind of ignorance, which continues to this day, is a direct result of the disgusting and propagandistic coverage of the Democratic primary by the corporate media, which is shilling for Clinton.
If there were fair and honest reporting, Sanders would have already locked up the nomination.
founding editor of ThisCantBeHappening.net
If Bernie went back on his word, the MSM would make sure he would have hell to pay.
You might be right on your 1.).
I don't know about your 1.B) but I assume that as a Democrat, she would support him.
On your 2.), I think we might accept that half a loaf is better than none.
Strange stance for a so-called Buddhist.
Buddhists recognize that all living forms hold a Sacred Life force.
Under a Republican, the lion's share who mock global warming and also get major funding from the existing Fossil Fuel behemoths, Mother Nature will die more rapidly.
So this idea of "short term pain" is delusional.
Every year the planet's thermostat is rising and more and more intense events are wiping out people, places, and habitat.
No. There is not another 4-year cycle to waste.
Those who feign support for Sanders to use as a bludgeon against Clinton support the net outcome of TRUMP getting into office...
This logic would lead intelligent readers to question their so-called Sanders' support.
Who writes these Industry Approved Talking Points... an out of work Hollywood scripter?
It's pretty much the NRA-style angry, white male patriots who support Trump and/or use that support to insist that the only other alternative is bloody revolution.
You cowboys are really stuck in an 18th century cognitive frame.
Hint: 82% of U.S. citizens don't support Trump and don't see any virtue in war: civil, martial, revolutionary or otherwise.
What has war done but give warriors dominance over the entire world? And what do they do with that dominance? Destroy lives, invent reasons for more wars, use the ruse of national security to rob long-won liberties, and POISON the earth so that it will be less and less ABLE to sustain sentient life forms.
Sure. Let's argue for that! (NOT!)
I'm sure Hillary would rather have Sanders as a powerless VP than having him as an even more powerful senator.
I would be very disappointed if Sanders accepted the role as VP.
Sanders is about changing the future, he would get nothing done as VP.
I feel traitorous by speculating on a possible defeat for Bernie. Maybe MSM anti-Bernie propaganda is getting to me. But we need to be ready for whatever.
If Bernie does not get the nomination and gives Clinton a small token endorsement, would it be kosher for him to leave the Democratic Party, go back to being an Independent and run as such, taking our votes with him? I guess not, unless he retracts his endorsement. But I'm cool with that.
If its okay for Trump to say he would retract his support for Republicans if they mistreat him and run as an Independent, why wouldn't the same be okay for Bernie? Dems are giving him the short shrift anyway.
Here is a good essay from Corey Robin on the differences and points of contention between liberals, leftists, the right and each other:
We need Bernie Sanders more right now than ever. We will lose the possibility for this kind of change if Hillary is the nominee. We're out of time on saving the country and the planet. I hope the people voting in the following primaries are keenly aware it rests on them to pull this off.
VP's get to vote.
Being at the President's side, VP's may have more influence on him (her) than a Senator.
I hate to think it, but somebody may hate Hillary enough to JFK her.
I'm not sure we could discount Bernie's influence as VP. Look at Cheney. Hillary copies everything Bernie says anyway.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Not for you nature boy, but just a general comment so no need to respond to me.
28 posts so far and though the article IMHO was positive and realistic
considering those states voting on Tuesday, all I've noted so far is a
load of very negative discussion mostly discussing very unrealistic
As a resident in big and very blue California, I firmly believe Senator
Sanders is going to take the State, but we don't vote until June. Instead
of speculating about unrelated negative crap, why not take Bernie at his
word from the published article here on CD when he states, "With more than half the delegates yet to be chosen and a calendar that favors us in the weeks and months to come, we remain confident that our campaign is on a path to win the nomination."
I'm still looking for links to Sanders stating he will specifically support HRC. Haven't found them.
In the meantime, I posted this on another thread in case you missed it---- excellent article (imo):