Speaking to an estimated 18,000 enthusiastic supporters who packed the Colorado Convention Center in downtown Denver on Saturday night, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders proved that the mometum behind his campaign shows no signs of waning less than a week after shocking the nation's political and media establishment by walloping rival Hillary Clinton by 22 points in the New Hampshire primary.
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." --JFK
Bernie Sanders = peaceful revolution; I've done the math.
Firewall cracking? Great! Hillary is nothing more than stale bread--and stale bread that has unchecked ambition. In case you missed this one:
And this one too a must see:
This is not nuclear science folks. Bernie Sanders is the only option. Hillary is connected at the hip to the Wall Street Crime Syndicate.
Bernie Sanders 2016
We must all remember that none of this will be possible without "we the people" remaining active AFTER Sanders wins the election. WE must be as influential as amassed individuals, as the millions of dollars that are waved in the faces of our "elected" officials. We have to demand loud enough that campaign finance laws and lobbying access are changed dramatically. This influx of money is the trough from which many of our congressional representatives feed and satisfy their sundry addictions. This is also a Revolution in the sense that the electorate changes their behavior toward how they live their lives. They no longer will wait for something to be changed; they will affect that change.
The Titanic was deemed unsinkable, - until it hit the iceberg.
It looks more and more, like corporate Hillary is on a straight course toward hers.
And this time there won’t be a recovery as in 2008
This speaks to a theme I have long been advancing, that being the people must take power into their hands by voting for the person best representing their views even as the media and establishment deems them as unelectable.
Over and over again in these forums and in the like up here in Canada there that group that suggests one should not vote green or for the NDP or for a party of the left because "it will only be a wasted vote and the Conservatives will win"
After a given election as people heeded this advice they then point to the single digit percentages of votes received by that party and say "see I told you so".
The Sanders campaign is very much like a snowball rolling down a mountain slope and gaining size as it overcomes that inertia.
The next step is for the electorate to recognize that "yes if we unite together behind a common cause we can elect ever more progressive candidates and yes, even divorce ourselves from the established parties"
It is this and only this that will redirect those parties from their ongoing pursuit of the fascist and corporate state.
So the next time people claim a given party unelectable so why waste a vote on them it has to be understood this is exactly what the parties of the establishment want you to believe.
Hopefully an election of Bernie to President occurs, but that just a first step.
From that Salon article:
“What do you tell voters who are new to the process who say this makes them feel like it’s all rigged?” Tapper asked the DNC chair.
“Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists,” Wasserman Schultz calmly explained.
I thought, that the DNC would at least try to keep up the PRETENSE of being progressive and grass roots???
Is Bernie Sanders running a grassroots campaign?
I looked around the 'net for a definition of "grassroots," and from what I found he apparently is. That surprised me. Here I thought Sanders was a sitting U.S. Senator and a member of the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party encouraged Sanders to run for a the Senate as a Democratic when one of the two Vermont Senate seats became vacant? Sanders certainly isn't running on the establishment Party line the DNC is pushing, but does that mean he's not a Democratic party official? What's the deal?
The recorded statement by D. W. Schultz looks to me to be as big a gaff as that spoken by g.w. bush when he said, "This whole thing would be a heck of a let easier if this was a dictatorship ..."
When Schultz said super delegates insure Party officials don't have to run against grassroots candidates, that's very telling with deep implications for everyone who believes their vote matters for something.
"By definition, the grassroots is the bottom of the political pyramid, opposite the "establishment," which controls the top. ... — the grassroots includes virtually everyone else, those common people who do not necessarily hold any political office and who may even be getting their first taste of politics in a particular cause."
When I read that definition, and then read Schultz's words I'm forced to conclude that in Schultz's mind she believes the thoughts, fears, hopes, cares and will of the average Voter are insignificant, and this entire primary voting process is a farce.
Looking at how Obama has run his administration, and the way the Congressional Democrats have failed to respond to the will of the People, and the way in which the Congressional republicans are able to out maneuver the Democrats on such a regular basis, I have to agree with myself.
To pretend a Green Party or some other very small 'fringe' group is comparable to a major party is wishful thinking. To ignore the record of past performance of these parties in prior elections seems standard practice by those who want others to think of these fringe parties as serious contenders.
The Green Party in America got a grand total of 161,000 votes in the last election. That is about 1/3 of 1% of the vote. To try and make this number be considered as a serious challenge to the powers that be is absurd. At best it is a wasted vote ... a wishful thinking vote.
It is telling that in the last election that rightwingers donated money to fringe candidates because they recognized that these groups drain off votes from the left. What does that tell you?
It may not be what some folks want to hear but voting for a fringe candidate helps no one. This election in the USA is like no other. Oligarchy and Corporate rule looms over us and perhaps like no other time voting in this election it is most important to vote for the future.
With Republicans denying global warming and supporting Citizens United as well as expanding the endless war, it behooves Americans to choose one side between the two because we only end up with one or the other... not three or four.
If our voting system was proportional, I'd vote differently but it isn't. Therefore I vote against the republicans.
... and support Bernie 100%
Exactly! Viva Revolucion!
Bernie fans must watch:
Michael Moore's "Who Will We Invade Next".
Best movie ever! Guaranteed laughs.
Hillary's firewall may be cracking as this article suggests but Bernie has only gained 3 points in three weeks in the CBS News/YouGov South Carolina poll and in a very recent ARG poll (2/12-2/13) was 38 points behind. I think more movement toward Bernie is needed in the polls in South Carolina to conclude he is making real progress that could result in a victory.
Today's CBS poll shows that Sanders has narrowed the gap to 19 points.
That looks like progress to me.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
"It wouldn’t be surprising if this firewall is crumbling, or whatever it is that firewalls do when they stop being firewalls." —Jim Newell, Slate
When "firewalls . . . stop being firewalls" they become tinder.
The Bern momentum continues which is great! But let's keep our eyes on the prize. The 2016 election is a campaign within a movement. The work does not end in November and involves far more than voting or even volunteering in the campaign. It is the work of transforming the system electing Bernie will help do that. But the work you do in your own communities are really what it is all about.
One of the best signs I saw at an early occupy event held by a young man..." The systems not broken, it's fixed". Another great one..." I don't worry about sex anymore, i get fucked by corporations everyday".
"They just want free stuff"--Funny it is Marco Rubio wanting to increase the earned income tax credit and not raise the minimum wage.---------Sanders wants a $15 minimum to empower people---Sanders is saying that healthcare is a right---and its not free--we will all pay for it but in a more equitable way,eliminating the middle men,and moving away from the employer having control over healthcare.-- Sanders is offering the beginning of economic freedom.
And the assault against Sanders continued on "Meet the Press" today.----
-I would be listening to Dr.Cornel West any day before Al Sharpton
I cannot stand DWS. I think she is a party apparatchik who is so clearly biased for HRC that it disgusts me. She once acted like she had no idea that Obama had a kill list of who gets droned.
I also think that super delegates are extremely unfair and undemocratic.
Nevertheless, I think people might be not understanding what DWS said here. I know I did before I read the article.
Her point wasn't that the point of super delegates was so candidates who are elites have a firewall to keep them from losing to candidates who are grassroots activists. (I think that is exactly the point, though, but it's not what she was saying here.)
What DWS meant was that in her mind the point of having super delegates is so grass roots activists can run to be delegates who are chosen in the primary process and not have to worry about competing for those positions with the party big wigs who'd have an advantage over them.
So Clinton grass roots activists don't have to compete against Congress critters who are Clinton surrogates to be one of the delegates selected in the primary and the same for Sanders grass roots activists.
I think this argument is a sack of stinky stuff. But it's not DWS just admitting that the point of super delegate is so grass roots activist candidates can't get a nomination if the elites decide otherwise.