Home | About | Donate

Beyond Attacking Trump, Sanders Says Biden Campaign Must 'Give People a Reason to Vote for Joe'

Thanks to all who offered the ‘equations’ which illustrated the stupidity of any argument that voting 3P
or even not voting was “depriving” X or Y candidate of a vote to which he was ENTITLED. The PRESUMPTION that a candidate is EVER ENTITLED to have anyone’s vote is not true, has never been
true, and never will be true. If X candidate or Y candidate loses for lack of votes or electoral votes, it is
because he or she lacked sufficient support by the voting public. There may be many reasons - some
valid, others not - but you either have sufficient support or you don’t.

It seems beyond clear from what has occurred in Wisconsin and in Pennsylvania with selected complainants doing the suppression vote of the DNC, that the DNC is convinced that they do NOT
have the votes to win the election. Apparently the ‘shaming’ thing in 2016 proving to be not a
successful strategy, this year the suppression efforts have been directing at forcibly removing
choices to X and Y by removing the Green Party (or in Pa’s case, one of the two person presidential/VP
ticket). But in Wisconsin, which for the last year unrecognizable, we now have the top level appellate
court basically saying, ‘oh well, Greens did it right but its just not convenient now and we’d have to have
the ballots reprinted and some have already gone out’, etc.

Pennsylvania is known for being prissy about its rules and there was some plausible explanation for
why the VP candidate was to have been removed. I’ve yet to hear the answer to 'what happens if
the Greens by some miracle would win - how would the Green VP be handled.

For those who have moved on to 3P choice, it sounds like it would be helpful to know at least hypothetically how the Dems repeated efforts to force them off the ballots for November, 2020,
at least where they were successful, would affect any election result. Surely seems that the
anticipated postal mess-up occurs perhaps it will not be between X and Y. For anyone who
has thought down the road a bit, even a remote possibility of a Green Party win - and I think
while a long shot such a possibility does exist, for the people hardest hit by the fallout of this
past 6 months may have no other choice than to do a 3P vote. Both X and Y parties have failed
them, ignored them, mocked them. Why would they notgo 3P. The Green’s candidate in 2016
was quite well-spoken, well-educated, and without baggage. Do we recall the DNC filing suits
to keep the Green Party and Jill Stein off the ballot so that folks who hated both Trump and Clinton
would have no other choice?


Even though I do not agree with your perspective, I appreciate your reply. The sad thing to me, from my perspective, is that Bernie’s Progressive rhetoric does not match his actions. Sadder yet, it seems to me that so many well meaning Progressives still cannot see how they are being played; especially now that Bernie has backed two of the most corrupt, Wall Street sycophants and war mongers…Hillary and Biden!


It’s true. If Biden assumes the office, indications are that it will be business as usual for the neoliberal unDemocrats unless those “TRUE progressives” you mention manage to coalesce and direct pressure on Biden and his party sufficient to force change. Really meaningful change, by that I mean change that responsibly addresses the needs of the people and the crises they face, would only come from a broad and sustained movement by committed progressives and enlightened others that reaches critical mass. For what it’s worth, there are encouraging signs that meaningful numbers of the masses are beginning to wake up to these crises and the immediate need for action.

But your first posit is wrong and clearly so. There’s overwhelming evidence that should Trump remain in office, the far “greater chance” is that what now passes for government in the U.S. will morph into a full fledged fascism in very short order. The Senate would likely remain in the hands of the Trump Death Cult and the House would become even less effective. The open criminality and very clear tendency to fascism that’s happening with Trump and his Death Cult even now will pale in comparison to what would likely occur. To a second Trump administration, the law would mean little and convention would mean nothing.

The foundation for such a rapid transformation to frank fascism is already well laid. The agencies of our government have already been largely disassembled and recreated to Trump’s liking with his cronies in charge. The majority of state governments are already full fledged chapters of the Trump Death Cult with their own military organizations, paramilitary police organizations and White Nationalist militias. The courts have been loaded with right wing crazies, with a solid majority of right wingers already on the highest court in the land. Trump would appoint hundreds more right wingers to our federal courts and further assure that the Supreme Court would be in the darkness for generations to come.

No, it’s not even close. Another four years of Trump would mean far less hope for progressives as well as the rest of the nation. With a Biden administration, the rule of law and the nation’s other important institutions will not simply disappear. With a Trump administration, doing away with the rule of law and those other institutions is the goal.

1 Like

Thanks Shanti. I suggest this is similar to a glass half-full or half empty. Bernie believes, as do millions, that trump is an existential threat to the people and planet, proven daily, and 4 more years a potential death sentence for much of priceless value.

The record of both Hillary and Biden are clear to me and the same millions; that is not in question for me, you, and I expect Bernie as well - “supporting” them, even superficially, like eating ashes

That is/was the choice Bernie had to make - who do you serve? self or people and planet?- His reasoning for a forced tepid “support” (hardly enthusiastic" for both Clinton and Biden - He is/was also forced to live-up to his pledge of honor to support the eventual nominee of the DP regardless who - that was the deal he made, like it or not, and he is keeping faith with that, as well as focus on the perceived existential threats of trump & co.
Going it alone or dividing voters would certainly lead to a second trump term, and that , I believe, no one should accept…
I do not agree that Bernie is “playing” anyone, he is in a political and moral bind - give the election to trump who he no doubt loathes by dividing the voters, or “supporting” the corrupt candidate of the DP sellout establishment - a bargain and deal forced on him by especially voters in South Carolina and Super Tuesday that sealed the deal. Peace

1 Like

On “Bullshit Promises”


This is something we can’t just ignore.

Yes, I see the way you feel, but I would submit that the reason Bernie pledged his honor to support the eventual nominee, Bernie knew how corrupt the DNC was ( like just about 100% of Progressives!) and knew he had no chance for the eventual Democratic nomination for POTUS and yet took in millions of $$$$… to me that is called a con!


I do not believe he thought he had no chance, and I as well as millions of others also believed in his chances (the “about 100% of progressives” believing he had no chance is inaccurate, IMO, as the turnouts for his rally’s showed) Bernie fought than as he is fighting even now in the ways he can. I believe people must have some measure of faith when warranted and I still believe in Bernie’s intentions, integrity and dedication to all the issues he still fights-for.

Guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree, until something happens that changes one of us. Peace. .

1 Like

Yes, different strokes, for different folks. I try to keep an open mind so my opinion is not set in stone…thanks.

1 Like


(extra text for evil AI software)


is progressive america really winning?

the quotation on your comment made me think you deliberately truncated the important part of my comment. with strategizing i 've meant i want to win. i want to put my boot in the faces of the billionaire and rule 'em with fear hahaha…

…but seriously my recommendation for you sir wasn’t meant to be used by „politicians“ in Washington, instead i 've tried to recommend a strategist for progressive america (and you guys here on CD) because to me it seemed progressive america doesn’t think. and with a chief strategist i 've meant somebody like Doug Henwood i.e somebody that can pen over the (third rate) writings of the journos, to open up a perspective… i think a perspective is a luxury most people can’t afford to buy (or create) so it’s up to teachers and educators to create a perspective for everybody, but the progressives have hopelessly failed to create that perspective… progressive america has no solutions, no economics and no inspirations for the little people Bill Mahr doesn’t care about, as he openly admitted… all the progressive journos have to offer for us havenots is elitism, cynicism and the sheeple-isms from journos like Tom Hartman.

however the (climate) solutions of the progressives are dead in the water because they were cornered by the liberal elites from the Silly con valley, i think the nexus around the Silicon valley — with TED and DAVOS as unforgiving war machine — has defeated the (informal) progressive alliance i.e the elites of the capitalist emerged victorious (from a invisible battle Naomi Klein has failed to lead) by using climate change as a means to sell „solutions“ for climate change they won it all — instead of progress people might get business as usual because the businesses create the „solutions“ against climate change i.e the „solution“ to save the environment is well on its way — GMO, electric cars and nuclear energy are the new green but i like to call it the new fordism: everything is green as long it’s not natural hahaha.

wrong or not, fair or not, to me it seemed the progressives are losing on all fronts…

…the new green could also be described as capitalism’s „solution“ for everything but please consider this before you raise the troll flag: whether or not the „solutions“ (from the Silicon valley) are visionary (or environmental friendly) doesn’t matter what matters for the academics is the science, if the new green „project“ works on the papers of James Hansen et al then they might get away with it, but what do the critics from CD say about the „solutions“ from the Silly con valley? e.g did the critics take a liking in electric cars from Elin Musk?

a few days ago on a thread on CD the critics were giving their best to TRASH Elon Musk as hard as possible… however the critics failed to spot the very obvious: Elon-kun is a boy with irrelevant ideas but instead of going for the easy kill the commentators (on CD) started to attack his skin color hahaha… i 'll leave it up to you sir, to decide whether or not CD’s comment section succeed at trashing Elon Musk — i believe they failed horribly but i never understood a progressive — however one thing is sure: Elon Musk is a super star and the Youtuber love him, the internet loves him, Lori Harfenist (from RT) loves him i.e dismissing the obvious popularity of Elon Musk and the popularity of the „solutions“ from the Silly con valley — i.e the nexus that created Elon Musk — is terrible stupid!!! and i 'd dare to claim: some things are how they are and the college kids (that don’t want to grow up) will always love what they love i.e progressive america needs to deal with it (as they say).

the liberal elites from the Silly con valley won it all — not so fast!!! don’t give us bull and self defeating determinisms, my followers might complain if i 'd had any — well they totally won because they already did plz observe what happened recently…

…the british Guardian declared Bill Gates (yes Bill Gates the billionaire) as leader of all the worlds climate activists i.e the things i 've described aren’t a mad joke (or a conjecture) they already happened!!! so the liberal elites (around the Silicon valley and TED) really conquered the leadership of all climate activists and the grand global progressive alliance therefore lost their powerup — i.e climate science was meant to be used as a high octane powerup to fight capitalism and its ills — but the powerup was lost when James Hansen et al changed their priorities as they aligned themselves with the elites of the capitalist to make more global capitalism hahaha — this would explain why so many oldies panic when they encounter a nuclear troll i.e the trolls are the manifestation of a pyrrhic victory that came out of nowhere — another depressing event that already happened.

so do you still think the progressives don’t need a new strategist? or strategy to create a strategy? i think so, but you sir made it abundantly clear that you don’t care about my ideas.

i probably have failed to present my ideas, but it changes nothing for my premise… the progressives need new attitudes, new projects, all new economics and kickass independents, think Abby Martins armed with katana sharp ideas… i want to win but with XR and Chris Hedges on their front i feel like i 've lost already.


1 Like

…and stop calling me SHirley

Trumps fault?


At least publicly, Schumer has no worries about his party’s dwindling fortunes among working-class white voters.

“For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia, and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin.”

1 Like