Citing the need for "urgency" and "big ideas" to take on dueling threats to democracy and the planet, Oregonian Democrat Jeff Merkley broke with his colleagues and became the first U.S. Senator to endorse Bernie Sanders for president.
It is starting to sink in that this is supposed to be a democracy and that the will of the people (and not of the party) is what really counts. Isn't it amazing that a senator who thinks for himself (despite the wishes of the party's status quo elites) becomes a newsworthy item?
I'm thinking some questioners do not grasp the whole tide concept.
Political movements often take decades, as witnessed by the Populist movement in the late 1800's and early 1900's. Win or lose, Bernie Sanders will have his place in history as the person who began a Progressive movement to take America back from the extremely wealthy. Now with Senator Merkley, Nina Turner, Tulsi Gabbard, Kshama Sawant, and other young people in the movement, perhaps we can feel some hope that we are at the beginning of new age in U.S. politics.
Better late than never. A few more Senators need to get off their high horses and support Bernie. This is why Americans have such contempt for our, "so-called", representatives.
Merkley - "this really is all about the person who has the boldest and most fierce vision on the biggest issues facing America and the world."
Well shucks, Jeff - get out of your Dem box, because that person is obviously Stein ... Oh, but once you put yourself in the Dem box, your vision is severely limited ..
Hey there Senators and Congress-persons, I've a blue bucket with a handle I'll give you so you too can help bail-out this here boat. Whatya say?
Our Senator Jeff Merkley has been working tirelessly for we the people and doing the right thing for the planet.
Elizabeth Warren, if not now? When?
Geeze, purists and 3rd parties do not work, haven't worked and won't work this time. I love the Green Party and Jill Stein and Ralph Nader. Butting your head against a brick wall is not that smart and gets nothing done.
Bernie did the right thing by going democrat and changing it from within. Ralph Nader even is on board with that. I worked hard for Ralph in 2000 and he has a man that has worked for we the people for 60 years and appreciated very much by we the people. He got not very far as a Green Party candidate. We really tried but where did it get you.
Your heart is in the right place.
When it's her turn, that's when! The blond lady looks great in blue and more than that, who knows? Except she is adroit at playing both sides against the middle.
In the increasing unlikelihood that Bernie obtains the nomination (those "super delegate" bought and paid for party hacks continuing to be the critical factor, along with corrupt state election officials and Diebold adjustable voting machines), Bernie now has a perfectly good VP for his ticket. East coast meets west coast, eat your hearts out fly-over country!
I don't think Bernie's campaign would be helped by choosing a white male for his VP.
Not that - electoral considerations aside - Merkley wouldn't make an outstanding VP.
I think most Dems in office fear the 'Wrath of Hillary' (like the 'Wrath of Khan', but less forgiving). .
She's still the front-runner and it doesn't take a lot of imagination to think of how she'll treat to people who opposed her coronation if she wins.
So it takes real political courage for Democratic politicians like Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard and Senator Jeff Merkley to endorse Sanders.
Here in Oregon, Governor Kate Brown and our other Senator, Ron Wyden, endorsed Clinton. So Merkley isn't just going against the DNC/national Democratic party establishment, he's also out of step with the local one.
But he's totally in line with average Oregonians.
Thank you, Senator Merkley, for your courage and representation.
Do you have any interest in running for governor? A lot of us Oregonians aren't happy to have an establishment politico running our state.
Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard.
Sen. Sanders campaign has exposed the media, the D.N.C., the Congress, the Black Caucus among many others, as being for the status quo. We must not forget, when Bernie wins it all.
Way to go Jeff!
Now c'mon all you others - you know you're being used by the Clinton machine! Either stand with business and corruption as usual or stand with real leadership, decency, and integrity - Bernie Sanders!
I consider myself an independent and have been a third party acolyte since Nader ran and if I had a choice and thought Jill Stein was a viable candidate she would get my vote. But like you, I do not think in this election it is pragmatic to not support Bernie.
The caveat, of course, is can a honest man reform a corrupt party from within? Like Bernie says, he cannot do it alone and Bernie needs millions of good people to enable him to reform the Democratic party. But first things first, Bernie needs the nomination for POTUS and if that fails, I will write in Jill or even vote for the most evil...Trump just to vote against Hillary!
Cynthia McKinney. Of course she's now a Green, so that would put two non-Democrats as the Democratic Party ticket. Heh heh heh.
Don't you have to be a at least 35 years old to run. If so, Gabbard isn't old enough.
What is "pure" about supporting the best candidate? What is "pure" about supporting the ONLY candidate committed to slashing the "defense" budget, closing overseas bases and pursuing a FP based on international law and human rights instead of one where "drones have their uses"? Especially when it is pointed out over and over here and elsewhere that such a policy makes more, not fewer terrorists? And, btw, that all those wonderful domestic programs will be stillborn for lack of funds because we need to feed that "defense" budget with more boondoggles like the F-35... What is "pure" about pointing out that Stein is the only candidate who refuses to throw an entire generation under the educational debt bus and vows to bail them out just as we did with the banks? And what is "pure" about pointing out that it is duopoly politics and our succumbing to the politics of fear that has gotten us into the mess we are in ..
I know we are the United States of Amnesia, but have folks forgotten already that O, too, promised a lot and also said we had to "push him", and even through the considerable "honeymoon" period, when he failed to produce, we blamed it in the Reps or, amazingly, "our" failure to "push" him hard enough ..
You say "we really tried" - Really? When Nader got his 3% in '00, it was a good start and TPTB got nervous, bringing out those nonsensical "spoiler" and "can't win" memes big time to nip it in the bud, and they worked, and apparently, still do - he then got less in '04, and '08 - so "really tried"? I don't think so, we chickened out .. You say you worked, and, i presume(?), voted for Nader in '00, but what about '04 and '08? I voted for him 4 times, and if more others had joined in we would have seen a considerably different politics ... Nader, IMO, now suffers from PTSD - politically traumatized stress disorder - I can't say as i blame him so much, considering the considerable beating his name and reputation took, and, i suppose, he is looking for a way to get back into the halls of Congress, the expulsion from which, as he himself said, prompted his runs. And remember that your current hero, Sanders, opposed him in each of his runs, preferring to support much inferior D candidates ... and promise to support the DP nominee now .. Doesn't that tell you anything?
Consider that Sanders jumped in after Stein, consider that when he first got in, his claim to fame (other than his label of "indy socialist") was 1) his opposition to Bush II's Iraq war, his purported support for SP, and his marching in Civil Rights causes decades ago - so when did he "get religion" on BLM, the PIC, the environment, e.g. fracking, free college education, etc - issues the Greens have been talking about for years ... You might say, "who cares? now he has them" - Does he? To what extent? "Let's find out, eh?" Sure, like we found out with the last Dem wunderkinds, O and BC? And in any case, even if got some incremental changes, we don't have time for "incrementalism", we can't afford leaders we have to push, we need some to push us ..
Both my heart AND my head are in the right place - "purist"? No, Realist, in terms of what we need, now, and what we could do to get it, Yes, indeed ...