Millions of Americans registered a protest vote on Tuesday, expressing their fierce opposition to an economic and political system that puts wealthy and corporate interests over their own. I strongly supported Hillary Clinton, campaigned hard on her behalf, and believed she was the right choice on Election Day. But Donald J. Trump won the White House because his campaign rhetoric successfully tapped into a very real and justified anger, an anger that many traditional Democrats feel.
I, for one, am glad he's still pitching.
The congressional Republicans will be emboldened and tell Trump not to cooperate on anything. Here is a good discussion on the Intercept, Greenwald and others.
Thank you Bernie. You're the greatest statesman I've ever known. Please don't stop raging against the dying of the light.
I'm sorry your gamble with the Queen of War didn't pay off. But some of us had to support Trump since he seemed isolationist and anti-war. Many of us wished you would have seized your Gandhi moment and ran independent at the last second with a hollywood superstar as VP to counter the Trump showmanship.
Next time. There is no age limit anymore.
All very commendable, Bernie, but your view needs to be expanded to the foreign policy arena, as well. You cannot compartmentalize the two; they are intrinsically connected. This country cannot continue to spend trillions on foreign wars and then finance the changes you want on domestic issues. This country cannot make real progress on climate change with a military that continues to be a major polluter, not to mention a military being used to secure fossil fuel resources around the world. This country's foreign policy is very much part of the status quo that you want changed.
As for reforming the Democratic party, are we to believe the DNC will voluntarily turn down money from corporate and billionaire donors as part of your proposed reform? If not, shuffling personnel there is little more than a shell game. As you asked of Hillary Clinton, are we to believe that the big donations from Wall Street billionaires won't affect party policy? Are we to believe that party reform is possible while dark money continues to pour in? Specifically, how do you propose to break the party's addiction to dark money in your reform efforts? Sorry, trust us doesn't cut it, anymore.
For presidency no there isn't but it does apply for simple mortality. I would prefer a younger person like Tulsi to run but then again the last young president we got was Obama and look how that went.
And Bernie, most important of all, this country cannot make progress on human rights, here at home, as it continues to flaunt international law and be a major violator of human rights, abroad. In short, any progressive reform movement must include a foreign policy component. When might we see a total reform package from you?
Bernie I could understand why he did it. Conspiracy theories aside he seemed like he wanted to do his best to reform the democratic party. Warren though had no excuses. She didn't even endorse Bernie when he was running in the primary.
Message from the ruling crass:
the ruling class, its masses and democracy — preserving our way of life
TWILIGHT OF TWEEDLEDUM AND TWEEDLEDEE
November 12, 2016 · by regensordo ·
"Some of us had to support Trump". You didn't "have to", you wanted to support Trump. You must be so proud. But what do you imagine you have in common with Bernie?
To clarify, I advocated people stop Clinton's Mutual Assured Destruction with the Russians (out of a need for self-preservation.) I actually could not bring myself to vote for Trump, so I stayed home.
Clinton's "Gold Standard of Trade Agreements" the TPP, which Trump claimed he was against, had to be stopped. It was going to destroy our Constitution, our Judicial oversight, our Congress with no ability to Amend....
I sent Bernie $600 since I agree with many of his positions, especially his support of Unions. I was against his endorsement of Clinton, so I railed against her.
Yeah, fair enough--someone else would be pitching, and likely worse. I do not read the article that I would like to see under this title, however. Bernie will push for reforms, and that's fine as far as that goes. Where are the Democrats to go, however? I mean, that is not quite "How much wood would a woodchuck chuck?" There ought to be some concrete in the answer, particularly since he takes the trouble to specify Democrats, people working within that party or under some influence from it.
It would sure be something to work out just how the woodchuck could chuck wood. I wouldn't mind reading Sanders having a crack at that.
Bernie said these commendable things during the primaries and he excited a lot of people. Then he campaigned for a status quo candidate implying she would deliver the goods when he knew she would not. Now that the battle is lost he's again trying to rally the troops, but opportunities for real change are rare and the train has left the station. Bernie needed to seize the day.and he let it pass by. It's going to be a long, hard row before another pivotal moment comes along, if ever. Elizabeth Warren is also ranting after her best chance to change history has expired. I do hope their efforts are not ones of futility.
When Bernie Sanders becomes a Democrat I will pay more attention about what he says Democrats should be doing.
Had to support Trump! Or are words utterly meaningless to you?
Well, if the edit function would have worked past 30 seconds, I would have modified it to say "Verbally supported Trump." Since your one-line memory has failed you, I'll remind you that I was the only one saying to vote for Trump on this website, after Bernie was kicked off the ballot by DNC provisional ballot fraud.
I admit, I didn't have the fortitude to actually pull the lever for a guy like Trump, even though it was necessary to stop nuke war and TPP tyranny.
Where the Democrats Go From Here
Who cares? I'm not a Dem, Bernie is (supposedly) not a Dem, this is not supposed to be a Dem news site, and many including me do not believe the party is capable of representing workers, minorities, women, etc. - i.e. the 99%. The Dems have a silk purse, but all the people get is the sow's ear and depending on who you think the sow is, not even that. Bernie was the one-eyed king, an outlier in the land of the blind duopoly, and he obediently poked out his good eye to prove he was a player, one of them. Phooey.
Give us some articles about how all the people can organize together to overcome the major parties, the elite, the shadow government, the broken system. We are better than this.
It is similar to the Brexit referendum: After the results are in: "Oh my god, what have we done!"
Interesting article, in that it sort of encapsulates George Carlin's explanation, that, in the US, we have "Owners".
It's concluding question of "...who will lead the masses along now?" and its answer of, in so many words, "We the People" was told to me, a couple of years ago, by Peace Activist Larry Darcey.
While I didn't, then, quite understand how, I think, today, that it is probably the only real answer.
I'm not sure what "leverage" they were holding over him, but even without it, at some point he had to come to terms with the fact that the Hillary machine had the party locked down and he had no path to the D nomination. His options at that point would have been to bail out and withdraw from further political action, to go outside the D party and continue pursuing the office on a third party ticket, or to end his bid, and remain with the D's to support HRC. The first option is not Bernie's style. The second option would have had very high odds of splitting the left and helping to ensure a Trump victory. At that point, Bernie would have been a scapegoat for HRC's loss, a pariah within the D party, and he would have been used henceforth as a morality tale of why D's can never leave the fold and support outsiders.
The third option had two possible outcomes. HRC wins, and some in the party (not HRC herself, of course) might have felt some gratitude to Bernie for his contribution to that, and Bernie might have come out of this race with a bit more political capital than he had going in. The other possibility was that HRC loses, in which case Bernie has a credible argument to make that the plutocrat D leadership has totally lost touch with its base, right on the heels of showing how much energy and excitement he was able to generate (in a very short time with severely limited media coverage and all kinds of obstacles thrown in his way) by running a populist campaign aimed directly at the base. In this scenario, he winds up with a large amount of influence within the D party at the very instant there is a power vacuum at the top after a humiliating drubbing at the hands of the worst and weakest R candidate the D's could possibly have hoped for. I think this was the best case scenario for Bernie to advance his goals--possibly even better than if he had won both the primary and the general election--only to be balled up by a recalcitrant Congress. Reforming one of the two parties and getting the political pendulum swinging back the other direction could well accomplish more in the long run than any ephemeral achievement he might have had as President.
Even better, this defeat comes right after all the e-mail leaks which laid bare how deep the rot within the D party was--and how much Sanders was cheated by dirty tricks and bully tactics. That's more capital for Bernie, and more disgrace for the discredited leadership among the rank and file. We might not have been able to get Bernie the party nomination, but with enough people supporting him, he could yet play a leading role in the remaking of the party.
And the cherry on top may be Trump himself. Right now, he seems like a political genius, but he had HRC's help in getting the R nomination, and she did him the inestimable favor of being clueless, imperious, and thoroughly repellent in the general. It remains to be seen whether he can look the genius as he goes forward without her help, and without her odious example to compare him against. And if he turns out to be the disaster many expect him to be, that will happen when the R's have control of all the branches, it will be the albatross around their necks for years, and it may mean a fairly short time in the wilderness for the D's if they can get their act together and reconnect to their long-neglected base.
I didn't vote for Trump, and I do think things are going to get worse for a while, but we may have dodged a nuclear war with Russia, and we have a very large reform opportunity here, if we can seize it. (And I have a suspicion Bernie is seeing the same thing--and he may even have foreseen that this is how it would wind up.) So I don't see this as a time for weeping, wailing, gnashing of teeth, and panicking. I'm actually feeling a bit vindicated to see HRC go down in flames, taking the prospects of a Clinton dynasty with her, a bit celebratory that I might actually live long enough to see the D's pry the dead hand of the DLC from their collective throat, I'm very much looking forward to seeing what reforms Bernie and other progressives are going to propose, and I'm genuinely curious to see how the wild card Trump experiment plays out. So if anything, I'm feeling almost excited--something I haven't felt in a long time.
These aren't the best of times. They aren't the worst of times. But they sure as hell are going to be interesting times.