Home | About | Donate

It’s Not Over Until It’s Over


#1

It’s Not Over Until It’s Over

Robert Reich

The other morning I heard from an old friend here in California who said “I’m for Bernie, but he doesn’t really have a chance anymore. So isn’t my vote for him in the California primary just prolonging the agony, and indirectly helping Trump?”

I told him:

1. True, the electoral numbers are daunting, and Bernie faces an uphill task, but a win Tuesday will help enormously. One out of 8 Americans lives in California.


#2

Thanks Robert, this commentary is far more positive and, IMO, constructive supporting Bernie and our collective issues, than your last, many including myself considered to be sort of tossing-in the towel - granted you prefaced the "Be prepared to work hard for Hillary Clinton if she gets the nomination" with "don't give up yet", but no negative waves Bob!

"a win for Bernie in the California primary (and in other Tuesday primaries in Montana, New Jersey, North Dakota South Dakota, and New Mexico) will send an even clearer signal to Washington, the Democratic Party, and the establishment as a whole, that a large and growing share of Americans is determined to wrest back control" - now that's the positive outlook that will carry our movement into the nomination and beyond!

Many including myself will never work for Clinton, or vote for her, or stop trying to get people to see she is also a great threat, being corrupt, a deceiver, utterly unprincipled and a warmonger.

Millions support Bernard Sanders because he is a genuine Human Being, very rare for a politician, for his courage and his moral leadership in these desperate times. "He who is not courageous enough to take risks will accomplish nothing in life" - Muhammad Ali

We support and admire those of great vision, courage and moral compass.
Bernie or Bust!


#3

I agree that voting for Bernie Sanders doesn't help Trump. However, contesting the convention even though way behind in pledged delegates as well as the popular vote will probably help Trump as it makes it that much more difficult to try to unify the party between the end of the primaries and the convention. Nobody is sure what Sanders's goal is. On the surface it would appear that he is delusional but I think his actions are part of some goal that he has in mind.


#4

"Nobody is sure" Everyone is sure what his goal is: defeating Clinton. Here's what's delusional: uniting progressives behind Clinton.


#5

Bob, this is a much better article than your last one.

You especially, as a Democratic insider of sorts (are you a Superdelegate? You should be by the terms they use to name them), should be twisting as many arms as you can among those 500+ superdelegates who have cast their lot with Hillary Clinton, including the 400 who did so before the first primary even happened, and helping them to confront the reality that she's likely to lose to Trump, while Sanders is likely to beat him.

As for backing Hillary if she wins the nomination -- sorry. Nobody who is stupid and ahistorical enough to compare Putin to Hitler, and to promote an idiotic policy of pushing NATO up to Russia's borders, backed by combat troops and offensive weapons -- or who offers uncritical backing to the right-wing lunatics governing Israel, and who is so clearly corrupt and greedy into the bargain, will ever get my vote in November. I'd sooner cast a protest vote for the Greens. Though if Bernie decided to accept the proposal made by Jill Stein to seek and get the Green nomination for president at the Green's convention in August, I'd enthusiastically support that effort, and would urge you to do the same.

These are unsettled and turbulent times in US politics. If Bernie doesn't get the Democratic nomination, given his huge success at activating a movement of millions of progressives, it could be the historic moment to blow up the Democratic Party, which has been a dried up corpse of its former New Deal self for several decades now, and seek to construct a new socialist style party offering a real alternative to the corporatist Republicans, instead of a pale imitation of that party as the Democratic Party does. The Greens, with Bernie as their standard-bearer this year, could possible achieve that beautiful result.

Dave Lindorff
founding editor of ThisCantBeHappening.net


#7

What is delusional is people like Lrx coming to a progressive website and hoping that he can change everyone's opinion over to his way of thinking.


#8

I don't know all the facts but it seems because of the convoluted primaries/caucuses and counting the vote and not allowing independents/greens/independents vote in run not to nomination distorts the votes and the media is always lumping in super delegates in count. Media has played a big part as a spoiler for Bernie. They miss represent facts. I am hoping we break up media conglomerates with Sherman anti trust laws. Chris Mathews should be fired stating that MSNBC is going to announce Clinton winner before California primary over.


#9

Are you dense? How can you not know Senator Sanders' goal?? It is to get elected President of the United States of America and begin to turn this rotting corpse around.


#10

Agree, but I think the Lrx doesn't care. The Lrx gets paid to post no matter what.


#11

REICH - WHERE DO YOU STAND?
Dear Mr. Reich,

Hm, a picture shows you smiling while shaking hands with Sanders. I guess commondreams is editorializing to show you like the man and his message.

I trust you do. So far we agree.

But do the smile and handshake show you are on his side, and on the side of the Sanders movement - a movement that, as John Atcheson wrote several weeks back, "is not Sanders to command"? I am not sure, but tend not to think so.

Like some other respondents (Emphyrio, Lindorff), I accept you as a progressive, and like your supportive-sounding acknowledgement of what the Sanders movement means: a struggle to reclaim "our democracy and economy from the moneyed interests."

Here, crucially, I note that you refer to the "Democratic Party" as one of the groups from which progressives want to reclaim our democracy.

OK, let's clarify that. You appear to be saying the Sanders movement is not just about challenging money; it is about challenging the right liberal moneyed interest of the Democratic Party - a party whose rules - closed primaries, super-delegates - work against progressives winning.

I think we agree on this point, despite your vagueness...

However, for many progressive Sanders suppporters, 'what the Sanders movement menas' is not the defining issue in this election.

So what is the defining issue? As I see it, power-sharing.

The progressive half of voters likely to vote Democrat that support Sanders want the Democratic Party to share power - versus using its organizational power and rules to marginalize the progressive half. And an indeterminate number of those progressives are prepared to withdraw support from the Democratic Party - e.g., not vote for its candidates - if it does not share power.

In other words - contrary to your last opinion piece in commondreams - many progressives will not vote Democratic if the party does not share power.

As things stand in the Democratic Party, it is winner-take-all; and - as things stand due to the ruling Democratic faction's connections and rules - that winner will always be the right liberal faction. Leaving the burden of support entirely on the progressive half of Democratic voters.

Not in this election. If the Democratic Party does not negotiate with its progressive half, many progressive voters will not vote for HRC.

In my view, that does not necessarily mean Sanders must be made the Democratic candidate for President. But it does mean the Democratic Party will have to give more than empty and symbolic things like progressive delegates for a nonbinding Party platform; or politically expedient, non-binding feints left by a right liberal candidate.

Substantive power-sharing - as I and some other posters have stated elsewhere - could include abolishing the closed primary and super-delegate systems that eliminate Sanders supporters in primaries; and progressive cabinet official short-lists.

Short of substantive organizational reform and binding cabinet commitments, I will not vote for a Democrati candidate.

I certainly will not reverse my views and fall into line to rally for a right liberal candidate.

Do you want progressive support, Mr. Reich? Then I suggest you present these demands to the Democratic Party, and begin to negotiate on behalf of your better half, rather than telling pro-Sanders progressive what to do if HLC is nominated.


#12

Oh Reich, there you go again.

His last line says it all doesn't it? This schmuck of course would not acknowledge that those yielding power in today's Democratic Party are just as opposed to the movement behind Sanders' candidacy as are Republicans.


#13

Delusional? Seriously, stuff it.


#14

For some time, Americans have been asking where this country is going in terms of 1) foreign policy and 2) domestic affairs. The two - foreign and domestic aspects - are intertwined.

As Muhammad Ali noted, this country must practise democracy before it talks about bringing democracy to other lands. A Sanders administration would give credibility to a human rights-based foreign policy, something that HRC is supposed to care about (though of course she does not and never did).

It would also unite a very divided nation, and set the US on the road towards progress and prosperity for all. Therefore, even at this stage, Reich’s friend should work towards a Sanders presidency: what should be everyone’s immediate concern is not whether progressives should be in full force in the coming Democratic convention, but whether a genuine leader of America’s 99% - one who’s democratically elected - would head the next administration.


#15

What a sickening and false indictment.


#16

Having spoken for "miss" represent, what about Mister represent?


#17

I hear all these over-the top streams of vitriol directed at Hillary Clinton but can you provide evidence that she is any different than any other US politician - including Bernie Sanders?

And if the positions of Clinton and Sanders are really so different, and if Clinton were really so right-wing, then why would virtually all Clinton supporters vote for Sanders in the general election? Yet many Sanders supporters would never vote for Clinton even if allows Trump to be elected. Some Sanders supporters will even vote for Trump! Whose followers might be little unreasonable here?

The whole thing is starting to sound like something from "The Lord of the Flies". I look forward to you all rolling a big rock off a cliff onto Sanders then voting for Trump when he concedes to Clinton and recommends his followers support Clinton in order to stop Trump.

Disclosure: I'd love to see Sanders be the candidate, but I am also grounded in the real world and the constraints that real world imposes on us.


#18

No.

The point is that Bernie is different from any other US Politician.

At this point hasn't that been proven to anyone with ears to hear and eyes to see?

No one is trying harder to deprive the Nation of Bernie's leadership more than Hillary.

Why, given these facts, would anyone who recognizes this want to support Hillary Clinton?

To quote the Walrus "...the Time Has Come!"

Or, to quote the Other Walrus, "...Just Gimme Some Truth."


#20

Robert Parry has a thoughtful and terrifying article up, asking:

"The Bigger Nuclear Risk: Trump or Clinton?"

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/06/02/the-bigger-nuclear-risk-trump-or-clinton/

I hope Robert Reich will read it.


#21

Not "vitriol" but accurate statements of actions by both Clintons. You have confused corruption and self interest of the Clinton's with moral compass and selfless public service exemplified by Bernie Sanders.
If you cannot see or do not know the corrupt actions by both Bill and Hillary, you have either not been paying attention or ignoring the Clinton's numerous acts of overt corruption and accumulation of great personal wealth derived from the same players their actions benefited! From banker.corporate ties to warmongering and destruction of nations/societies/cultures, to environmental /oil & gas and trade issues, the Clintons have served big money and power over the people and sustainable future as their MO almost exclusively.
If you read any of the numerous linked pieces exposing Clinton corruption over the past year you would not ask for "evidence" on Clinton corruption and Sanders very great difference - if you listened and contrasted honestly speeches by Clinton and Bernie Sanders you would not ask for "evidence", the difference is stark!
Your "grounding in the real world" needs reappraisal and greater faith and commitment to change.........

A few pieces on some issues for you.....


#22

[quote="Emphyrio, post:2, topic:23385"]
"Be prepared to work hard for Hillary Clinton if she gets the nomination" with "don't give up yet", but no negative waves Bob!
Well with that statement the rest of his argument simply falls apart. This period has been compared to the Obama-Clinton fall in line period but really there you had two politicians with big funds from Wall street and very similar views on how to proceed. They both would balance the budget on the backs of seniors....both very Wall street friendly similar views on energy. Sanders actually believes in something a lot of things most which benefit average people .Really anyone who thinks that Sanders is going to support the "Queen of Wall Street without some part in writing the platform and at least beginning to switch the party from the pay to play Clintonite corporate party it is to a more populist agenda is dreaming. Anyone who thinks those supporting Sanders positions will support Hillary the Hawk when she starts her mad dash to the right. Is also overly optimistic.