Home | About | Donate

In California and Beyond, Sanders Democrats and Independents Needed to Stop Trump


In California and Beyond, Sanders Democrats and Independents Needed to Stop Trump

Jennifer Nix

Despite the acrimony and​ deep​ ideological debate raging within the Democratic Party, the vast majority of both Clinton and Sanders​ supporters​ know America must defeat Donald Trump. ​They​ ​just vehemently disagree about how to​ best​ ​ ensure his loss.

Californi​a primary voters can ​force Democrats to engage​ productively​ across the divide​​ ​ if they mak​e​ the unconventional​ political​ move​ to register the big picture, not simply the dynamics within the Democratic National Committee confines.


The country deserves outside-the-DNC-box thinking at this moment of national existential crisis, because what seems lost on Clinton and the DNC—and the television news media—is that preventing this nomination process from running its full course will only increase acrimony and alienation. Time alone, in tumultuous and uncharted 2016, will not heal the divide for ​much of the Sanders bloc. ​

At this late date, there's nothing the DNC can do to win my support for the Democratic candidate unless the ballot line says Bernie Sanders.

Conventional wisdom suggests Clinton needn't worry about earning their votes and must now pivot right.

How true, how true. Here's a little not so conventional wisdom: After years of being victimized by the Democratic Party's pivots to the right, this lefty will pivot right on Election Day should Clinton become the Dem Party nominee. It's time the party gets a taste of their own medicine. Trump and Clinton are equally officious, abusive of the law, and are in bed with billionaires and their corporations. Only Clinton has the blood of thousands, including women and children, on her hands. If Bernie loses the nomination, Trump wins the presidency.

Bernie or bust. Onto Philadelphia where these words were penned:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.


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


The strategy of Democrats moving right to attract independents was a marginal (at best) strategy in past elections. Considering that Trump has been more successful (than ANY candidate from any party during my lifetime) at attracting independents during the primaries, that is indeed a losing strategy for Democrats this time around.


There is no other way to spin it, the DNC had its finger on the scale from the beginning of the primaries, and the major news networks joined in to help prop up the Clintons (yes, they are a team). I can not understand how anyone would want the Clintons back in the White House after what they did the first time around. Talk about no bad deeds going unrewarded.

The DNC has made its callous calculations that they can prop up the least popular Democratic nominee in modern history. If they manage to force the Clinton nomination by making sure that independents couldn't vote in many of the primaries, the end result will be winning the primary and losing the general election when independents decide they would rather risk Trump than have to live through another Clinton presidency.

I can't vote for the Clintons simply based on principle. I hated their first time in the WH, and I won't reward them for what they have done then, and since. I will have to vote for Jill Stein again, like I did in 2012. I agree with the Green Party platform, so it is a vote based on principle. If Trump wins because the DNC shut out Bernie Sanders, that is their fault, not mine or other voters who refuse to back the corrupt DNC and their corrupt and unpopular candidate.


"California​ ​has the power​ ​to . . . move Clinton and party leadership at an open convention to incorporate more of the creative and bold policy and messaging ideas that, in these anti-establishment times, have proven most effective in resonating beyond the party-loyalist base."

What kind of naive Clinton sheep-dogging is this? This is a candidate who just initiated a Republicans for Hillary campaign. This is a candidate who vacations with the war criminal, Henry Kissinger. This is a candidate endorsed by PNAC neocons in Washington.

Incorporate bold, policy and messaging ideas? Clinton is a neoliberal neocon. Hopeful thinking ain't gonna change this leopard's spots. Bernie or Bust.


The Dem establishment won't generate enthusiasm for HillRod by scaring voters with the message that Trump is dangerous. The same can be said of her.


I find it difficult to believe that the DP leadership will allow HRC stand as its nominee, due to the private email server matter. If she should win in November, and the Congressional leadership remains in Republican hands, she´ll be impeached.

My guess is that HRC and DP leadership will continue collude in order to ensure that Senator Sanders does not get the nomination. After such time as Sanders releases his delegates at the convention, we will see a damning FBI report, and a third candidate will be put forth. But ultimately, if she is nominated and elected, it´ll be a very short HRC term in office in which practically nothing is accomplished--unless maybe a declaration of a state of emergency and so on. I know, not a pretty picture.

Incidentally, regarding the already notorious AP declaration, I´m hoping for a variation on that historical moment when banner headlines declared "Dewey defeats Truman." Only thing was, it turned out Truman won.


Not "difficult to believe" when you consider that the closer Clinton gets to the coronation the wider the corporate money gates open. After Clinton is nominated, the Democratic Party will be flooded with so much corporate money they won't know what to do with all of it.


"must now pivot right" Clinton has already started this pivoting, err.. pandering, and imo, it will continue much further.


This article is based on the assumption that Bernie supporters must vote for Clinton in November.

I'll be brief, like Bernie Sanders is when asked a direct question.



I wouldn't vote for Hillary if she said she believed all of Bernies policies. She is a liar and is so corrupt Obama has to cover for her emails and no doubt has instructed the FBI to hold their report till after the election. Where is Anonymous with those speeches?
The fact that all of the players would go to the extent they have to coronate her makes me feel there is something else afoot.
Like Johnny Depp said "this may be our last election". I don't doubt it either, with the TPP waiting to be passed if she is there we will basically lose any freedoms we thought we had. She may end up the Queen of AmeriKa.


Given that there are more blue state electoral votes than red state electoral votes, stopping Trump should not be that difficult. The Republicans need to win more swing states than the Democrats. The Republicans have never one a presidential election without winning Ohio so a big goal for the Democrats is to win Ohio. If Gore had won either Florida or New Hampshire he would have defeated Bush so those two states have a high priority. With Hispanics very angry at Trump, winning New Mexico and Colorado looks doable. If the Democrats win Virginia, which is likely, it will be very difficult for the Republicans to win. If the Democrats also win North Carolina it will be that much more difficult. A big task for the Democrats is to keep Pennsylvania blue. This could be a problem as Pennsylvania seems to becoming more Republican. Obviously if the Democrats can put together the Obama coalition and get a big turnout they will win. Whether Hispanics and African Americans and younger voters or older whites who buy Trump's messages of hate come out to vote in bigger numbers might determine the outcome.


I propose that obvious propaganda be termed "Political Porn."

This is a LOADED piece meant to sound neutral.

Here are the facets that stand out most in their veiled effort to reinforce Establishment memes. Remember how the "Do not touch: Wet Paint" sign operates? Many people will touch it. There's also this idea that there's no such thing as BAD publicity. Add in "lies told often," or George Lakoff's reminder that when you use the "enemy's frame" to defend yourself, what people hear is a repeat of that same frame. THAT is what sticks. I presume the writer knows all this:

"Sanders supporters believe an arcane and biased nomination process will hand Clinton the nomination and leave the party with a candidate whose private email-server activities are still under FBI investigation and who was publicly rebuked by the State Department for breaking rules and putting her personal privacy above national security."

By framing obvious GRAFT under the guise that "Sanders supporters believe..." the intention is to essentially suck the air out of the true nature of this fraudulent election charade.

"Clinton supporters and DNC leadership believe Sanders is a spoiler who must concede—yesterday."

Appearing "fair and balanced," what's really going on is reinforcing the frame of Sanders AS spoiler. Thus the subliminal message is that Hillary has already claimed the throne and it's hers!

"Conventional wisdom suggests Clinton needn't worry about earning their votes and must now pivot right. As the first woman presidential nominee, they believe her message of being "qualified" and "ready to lead on Day 1" combined with amassing opposition research and offering a steady stream of attacks on Donald Trump will deliver her to the Oval Office."

Who is the author or source of this purported "conventional wisdom"?

Again, this is a paean to establishment punditry aimed at securing the Oval Office for what many here term "the red queen."


The Bush Presidency WAS a plague and calamity upon the world.

It's arguable if the players who orchestrated the Inside Job would have been able to do so, get away with it, and launch the already planned Middle East Wars if their boy wasn't in the White House with Daddy's whole deep state/CIA entourage backing him.

That's the weakness in your "case."


Your call is made too soon... as per this idea that Trump has been more successful than any other candidate in attracting Independents. Since Independents were eliminated from many primaries (where Hillary had a shot at losing openly), it's impossible to make the assertion you just made. My understanding is that a huge percentage of independents would vote for Sanders.


I agree, although I will probably write in Sanders. After all, if Parry is right and Hillary is acting on behalf of the New World Order elites who WANT a war with Russia, the continuously inflamed provocations on Russia's border could lead to something horrific. And who wants THAT blood on their hands?

I can't vote for Hillary or Trump and I hope that millions of people will find ways to show their outrage at just how illegitimate this "contest" has been from the get-go.


The proper strategy for the DNC is to have Clinton stand down and concede the nomination to the better candidate. They know this the better choice when it comes to the well being of the people of the United States of America and by extension the world given the War Hawk Ms Clinton is.

They have known this all along. Ms Clinton has always been damaged goods just as the supposedly "liberal" media has known this.

The reason they will not consider this is they are totally owned by the Corporations and that 1 percent and what the one percent wants the one percent gets. This being the case it beyond reason to suggest that Ms Clinton and the DNC will compromise in any way whatsoever with Mr Sanders. With Clinton as President all promises of compromise will fall to the wayside and she will choose to compromise with the Republicans instead..


Jennifer Nix: What part of "Bernie or Bust" do you not understand?


It begins--the rehabilitation of Hillary in the eyes of Bernie supporters. So all of you who are "Feelin' the Bern", are you willing to put on your red white and blue t-shirt and declare "I'm with her"? Or will you fall for the old line that the alternative (The Dreaded Donald) is simply too unthinkable to contemplate?

Some things to consider:
If Don Vito Corrleone believed in keeping his friends close and his enemies even closer, could it be any different for the organized crime families known as the Democratic and Republican parties?
Watch closely who is chosen as running mates for the two presumptive nominees--realize that everyone of them, sooner or later will be sat down and given the "listen here sonny (or sissy)" talk.
King Donald and Queen Hillary will soon enough settle down or they will be gone-one way or another and a more suitable ventriloquist's dummy replacement brought in.
For those of you who believe that there is any substantive difference rather than one of style between Clinton and Trump it would be wise to make sure that you either:
vote for some third party candidate
or stay home and let by a record low turnout show our overseers that you are not going to be tricked by their same old show anymore.
If you are a Bernie delegate at the convention in Philly:

When Bernie does his "Kucinich" at the convention in Philly, he should be as lustily booed as Hillary, Obama, or even Trump.

Obama deserves to be greeted by a sea of protest placards on the floor of the convention floor proclaiming "Get lost" or "Sell it like soap, Barry".

Hillary deserves to be booed lustily and greeted with a sea of signs proclaiming "I'm not with you, not now, not ever".

What are they going to do to Sanders delegates if you do it--throw you out of the convention? You have already had that done to you in a thousand and one ways over the past year.