Home | About | Donate

US Labor Leader Says Case for Bernie Sanders 2020 Is Simple: The Democrats Have No Better Choice


#61

Sanders/Gabbard 2020! That is how we win 2020-2028 : )


#62

As long as Bernie is beholden to the corrupt, dems., in my view, Bernie will not be able to implement his progressive policies. But I would hope I will be proven wrong!


#63

I’m from Ohio. I am a supporter of Brown, or used to be. But when he advocates “buying in to” Medicare he has lost me.

Besides, I’ll decide where a politician falls on the progressive scale. If they accept corporate contributions they are not progressive to the degree I find acceptable.

Sherrod Brown couldn’t carry Bernie’s jock strap.


#64

Okay. Progressive grievance list update on Sherrod Brown—check.


#65

So who IS your choice please?


#66

Dr. Jill Stein.


#67

Its funny…not really, but…when pressed to provide answers to how and who the Bernie Bashers would support they do not respond. I, like others despise the entrenched DINO establishment and its sold-out corporate whores and Goldman speech-givers, but the HOW to defeat the trump fascist destroyers and gain some progressive/left leadership on the way to more, is not expressed, only the “not Bernie as long as he remains a Dem”…even tho a third party right now is a fantasy, and the Greens moribund and vote-wise stagnant at 1 1/2% or so…sure their platform is great…but.

So, if not a politician that has not gotten rich, always fought for, and still fights for justice and economic parity fairness, and builds a progressive coalition, doesn’t tear-down…like Bernie Sanders, WHO for love’s sake!!?? A Sanders and someone to take the reins after Bernie is what is needed, not the usual divisive easy-said “he did this” or “didn’t do that” crap!

How about an answer people? Just denouncing without adding something positive is just weak jive and BS!


#68

Yes, Shanti, I voted Green for Dr Jill in '16 and whenever I can, but voting for Dr Jill was wishful thinking in today’s polarized tribal political realities, manipulated electoral vote con, billions to run a campaign, corporate media blackouts, and overt corruption …she garnered only, what, 2%?..there must be a win NOW to move the needle toward a stronger coalition, not voting to sooth ones conscience and allow the scum destroyers to continue rule…like trump & co and the corrupt DINO DP.
The candidate that today can and does inspire the masses is Sanders…the most popular politician in America…add a strong progressive VP candidate, like (?)… and we might just have a winning ticket…IF…keep the faith!


#69

Looks we are on the same wave length on this one Emphyrio. Bernie or no Bernie. Don’t throw out the good while in search of the perfect. If anyone has someone to support that has people and finances enough to win go for it. But if they don’t match Bernie’s bonafide’s why not put out a few signs and knock on a few doors for Bernie?


#70

Writing from a European perspective, I really REALLY don’t understand the Bernie bashers. Having been cheated out of the Dem candidacy by the usual suspects - the Dem power brokers - what the hell was he SUPPOSED to do? Retire gracefully and wash his hands of the whole business, thereby probably handing even the popular vote to Trump? Campaign FOR Trump? The only option he had, so far as I can see, was to throw his support behind the despicable (but not as despicable as Trump - that would be pretty much impossible) Hillary Clinton. Talk about being between a proverbial rock and a proverbial hard place! Some of the commentators on this site ARE the definition of the BeeTeeBO syndrome (copyright!) (Blindness to The Bleedin’ Obvious, since you ask!)


#71

I can’t help but think that many people are really out of touch with the Democratic Party when they talk about Sanders. Many Democrats really, really hate that guy. The “Never Sanders” people are loud and a large part of the Democratic Party.

Right now, Harris, O’Rourke and Booker seem to be the ones that Dems are most excited about. Personally, I think Barbara Lee is better than any of them, but the Dem establishment doesn’t seem to know who she is.


#72

I would certainly prefer Sanders just focus on saving the nation, but if he insists upon bringing the Democratic party along for the reforming ride back to being a truly Progressive party of the People again, I’m more than pleased to help a big tent toward the benefits of being a coalition working to better the world we all live in.


#73

Thank you for voting for Dr. Stein. But from my perspective, voting for Bernie ( and I would love to be wrong!) is also wishful thinking, the only difference it seems to me, is Jill has absolutely no chance now but may in the future, while the corrupt Democratic Party is using Bernie as a shill to fool the masses that Bernie has a chance at POTUS.


#74

That is my biggest worry. I will admit though if Bernie runs again I will vote for him in a heartbeat because I do still think he is the closest thing to a progressive leader we have.


#75

Hi celticfire: I’m with you about Bernie. : )


#76

Hi allen 1, but you just never know about elections Eugene Debbs got like a million + votes when he ran for president and he was in jail. The there was the famous Dewey/ Truman----and Truman won. Of course, I think that voting was more honest back then. When you look at old newsreels, the old conventions were at lest entertaining…it all went south when all the behind the scenes stuff really took place behind the scene, and before the campaigns had even started .
I guess Lincoln was wrong when he said : " You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time-----but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time. I think Bill Clinton did that. ( at least for a while, and so did Obama, but I can’t even discuss the GOPers because it seems like dirty ticks is the enduring Nixon legacy. : (


#77

HI Emphyrio: Maybe it would help if the campaign season was a lot shorter----it would save a lot of money and time and resources. It would also be nice if the people who act like they own the airwaves had to give free air time to the candidates. Since the airwaves don’t seem to belong to the populace----and they all sell so many ads, the airwaves wouldn’t suffer too much
I would have the population write in their most pressing issues. Then each candidate would present a detailed plan on how to solve the biggest problems. It couldn’t be like “create more jobs” but HOW to do that. I think that 6 weeks is long enough before people are already sick of the same repetitive promises. If a candidate has no plan----then that person doesn’t get TV time. it should be FREE, because once elections all became begging and donations , a lot of politicians had already made themselves into serfs of the wanna-be mighty.

It would also be fun to have instant fact checkers and any time any candidate spewed out a blooper of truth, a bell would go off, the wrong fact explained and then the candidate would have to self correct or leave the stage. I know this kind of sounds like a game show, but politics had devolved into that anyway----maybe we would hear better ideas and find better candidates this way. and in a shorter campaign time PLUS it would get rid of the rich buying everything.


#78

Actually, Sen. Sanders lost much of his former base over the last couple of years, as he dropped his years support for democratic socialism/advocacy for the US poor. Younger people might not know that Democrats split apart their own voting base in the 1990s, middle class vs. poor, workers vs. those who were phased out of the job market. The Obama years confirmed that this split is permanent. Most voting choices come down to economic issues, and we expect that there will be many more poor by 2024. (On 2020, Americans almost always re-elect presidents, no matter how bad they are.)


#79

Just curious: Until those jobs come along, what do you think we should do with our very poor?


#80

HI DHFabian: I lie the idea that some of the Scandinavian nations have, where there is a guaranteed level of employment / living money. However, in America the majority of people make less every yer or find no jobs with livable wages or find no jobs at all. I’ve written this before but in Eisenhower’s time, the taxes on companies and the rich were 90% I’ve read and and the rich were still rich.
When people have a decent place to live, food to eat, and a less military -like police force, crime doesn’t exist as much. I look at this nation and think, compared to Europe, the resources were bountiful, but greed took away much of that and when crime at the top because a legal mafia, then crime at the bottom happens so people can survive. : (