Home | About | Donate

Why the Nation’s Nurses are Supporting Bernie Sanders for President


While I don’t think this is even remotely possible right now–nor desirable–I would agree that re-cobbling together a new New Deal coalition (the NNDers?) would be an outstanding first political step for organized electoral political players, especially unions.

At the very least a reprieve from the relentless assault on basic decency we’ve endured for 35 years, yes?

I was reading some of the awful comments this morning on an MSN column about the GMI (Guaranteed Minimum Income for neophytes) that was surprisingly fair and those comments made my skin crawl. It reminded me how insanely difficult it’s going to be to reverse the mind damage done to two generations of Americans --and not just Republicans! Amazing how Pavlovian many people have gotten. Oh well, gotta walk before we can run.


Thank you. I am out-numbered by the slander Bernie Sanders chorus along with the “We Clones” who are here to lend cover to any egregious violation done by Big Money, Big Corporations, and Big MIC.


Progressive Troll’s Manifesto (updated)

The candidacies and policies of real progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Congresswoman Donna F. Edwards (Maryland) and Mayor Bill de Blasio and the 72 members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus could provide the best hope for permanent hybrid political structures that lay the foundations of a progressive state. My wishlist includes: Such state would, inter alia,

  1. Enact Term limits for all elected and appointed politicians, including judges (2 terms). This issue divides people more than any other on the list. Should people value more integrity, fresh ideas or expertise and stability? Along with publicly funded campaigns, term limits could help clean up politics of corruption and prevent life-time office holding, such as the cases of Congressman John Dingle, Senator Robert Byrd, Senator Strom Thurmond, Sen Ted Kennedy, Sen Jesse Helms, Jr. and many others.
    2.Overturn Citizens United that stripped out federal election rules limiting independent political expenditures by nonprofit organizations. It gave corporations and unions the green light to spend unlimited sums on ads and other political tools, calling for the election or defeat of individual candidates. For starters, implement the Disclose Act proposal of 2010. At a minimum, it would have enforced a mandatory disclosure of the sources of campaign spending. Progressive candidates for Democratic nomination should pledge to their voters to appoint Supreme Court justices who oppose Citizens United. “If there was one decision I would overrule, it would be Citizens United.I think the notion that we have all the democracy that money can buy strays so far from what our democracy is supposed to be.”~ Ruth Bader Ginsburg, an associate Justice of the Supreme Court.September 28, 2014.
  2. Campaign Finance. Implement publicly financed political campaigns. For starters, adopt the Fair Elections Now Act, introduced in Congress in April 2011. Public finance reduces corruption by limiting conflict of interests and opens elected public service to the qualified from all walks of life.
    Read the rest here: progressivewish.wordpress.com


I seriously doubt Bernie is getting money from the Democratic Party/DNC. He isn’t the anointed one.


Naw - don’t worry, seem to be several SR clones that inhabit these environs as well …


This piece by DeMoro made me laugh - the whole piece could, essentially, have been written about Stein now and - 4 years ago, including debunking the “can’t win” routine … So where was NNU then when Stein was raising all these issues and policies … AND they could have had, still could, a woman to boot - and as icing on the cake, a doc with sympathies and experiences in the same field … I remember thinking, before Stein picked her running mate, a great ticket would have been Stein/DeMoro, a doc and nurse practicing political medicine to Rx the ills of the country …

It is really depressing to see, time after time, would be progs jumping on the Dem bandwagon when there is a better candidate … but actually i suppose they have always been on that donkey cart and still don’t get that it is time, past time to jump off …

And sites like CD providing all this free political advertising … they say they are “Breaking News and Views for the Progressive Community”, but the need to add another descriptor before “Community” - Democrat …

The bottom line seems to be - any prog, as long as its a Dem …

Good for you to keep trying, and i may now and then as well - but, as in medicine, one realizes that no cure is possible as long as folks deny they have a disease called D/Rs


You’re conflating support for Bernie with support for Dems. They’re not the same thing. If Bernie doesn’t get the Democratic nomination I’ll vote for Jill. Hillary isn’t an option.


Well, Bernie has slapped a D on his forehead … so somebody is getting fooled …

Question - if Sanders, the same Sanders, ran as an indy, which he has always claimed to be in the past, would these same folks be so ga-ga over him?

And if Sanders does get the nomination - why pick him over Stein?


I think Bernie made a tactical decision to run as a Democrat. He’s getting a lot more press and support than he’s likely to have gotten as an independent.

Between Bernie and Jill Bernie has more political experience. He’s also got a much better chance of winning.


A very strong endorsement with nothing equivocal about it (like Sanders himself). Up early this morning, pulled up the NY Times and read an article by Nate Cohn “Is Hillary Clinton in Danger of Losing the Primary?” (No, she’s too strong he concludes).

Then I read the comments. There were 167 ‘Readers’ Picks’ (highest upvoted). The highest voted comment (written by ‘Joe’) had 238 upvotes, and was in strong support of Sanders. The next 40 Readers’ picks also supported Sanders. Hillary’s first positive comment ranked number 42, with 27 upvotes.


It seems to me you have to ask yourself why a “social democrat”, an avowed indy, is “getting a lot more press” from the corporate MSM media, who, if he actually meant what he said about the oligarchy", would be cutting them off at the knees … And “prog” sites, such as this, who could be enormously helpful to indy politics, are notorious for shutting them out, if nothing else, they don’t want to offend their donor base as well … As for getting more “support” - he is getting more press and, perhaps more importantly, enjoying the benefits of access to the enormous Dem political machine … again, ask yourself why the corp controlled and funded DP would allow him such access and use it to promote him without feeling sufficiently confident that he wouldn’t really do anything to upset their donor base, and we know who that is … O is a perfect example of how that works …

As for “political experience” - yeah, he’s been around a long time, he knows how the game is played and has shown himself quite willing to play it …

As for chance of winning - well, just see DeMoro’s take on “can’t win” - as i have been saying for some time, anyone on a ballot can win if enough folks vote for 'em … things that “can’t be done” aren’t, until they are, but that means we have to dump that “can’t be done” nonsense, playing those “odds” (and remember who is telling us what those “odds” are) instead of working to change them … As they say, on any given day, any given horse can win a race, odds be damned …


Do you really think the Dems are so worried about Jill Stein that they’ve put Sanders out as a stalking horse?

They don’t worry about the Progressive vote. They certainly don’t want to have to talk about oligarchs and campaign finance reform.

The DNC doesn’t like or want Sanders as a candidate. They’ve got their anointed one and anything else is a distraction. Their response to Sanders popularity will be to do whatever is necessary to bring him down.

In the meantime we’ve got someone out there talking about issues that matter to us and the rest of the 99%. Someone the press is paying attention to because he’s running as a Dem.

That’s a good thing.


Right after i posted my reply to you above i ran across this, as reposted on PR (Popular Resistence)

And at the bottom it references a previous article by the author:


"Johann Rupert, the owner of Cartier, is worried that the commoners are ready to run the jewels.
What’s especially interesting is that Sanders is relying here on a rhetoric that is actually echoed by Johann Rupert.

The revolution he worries about is not here yet. It could be avoided, provided the elite sort who pal around in places like Monaco to talk about their toys get to remedying the clearly identifiable causal factors.

In fact, they might consider advocating for politicians like Sanders,

It’s a compromise, what Sanders proposes, not a revolution."

I suspect they already are …

PS - O’Mally is running as a Dem, too, where’s his press? And if the DNC would never accept Sanders as a candidate, why are they featuring him in their campaign lit?

Yes, he is talking about issues that matter to us, but so is Stein - a big difference is he is telling us, in essence, that the DP has the solutions …


Excellent article, thanks for the link. From the end of it:

“Bernie Sanders forbids big-dollar donations of the sort sent to pro-business politicians of both parties, but they might consider, as I argued previously, working to elect him as a bulwark against the upheaval they fear. Sanders is merely proposing that we return to the bargain achieved in the 1930s and post-war years. I’m sure they’d scoff at the idea, but it’s not crazy. What’s crazy is to believe that capitalism can be saved by the capitalists themselves, like all lions agreeing to hunt without claws.”

The author doesn’t see Bernie as the puppet of the plutocrats.

It’s interesting to see that billionaires can see where income inequality is leading and want to address it. I’m reminded of Nader’s “Only the super-rich can save us” - not that I agreed with it.

Still, I can’t see billionaires wanting to reduce income inequality as a bad thing, or as something that makes Sanders less appealing. If the DNC is listening to them, all the better.

Someone needs to address income inequality.


They want to “address it” safely, within the framework of a party that has always claimed to be “addressing it” though using a different vocabulary, and that will leave them essentially intact and in charge - note that what they fear equally is a gov’t that might tax them at the 90% level, that won’t do either …

No, the author doesn’t see Sanders as being a “puppet”, but he makes it rather clear, it seems to me, as being a useful agent …

The DNC is listening to them, no doubt, as they always have - and that is my point, in a nutshell …


I think “agent” is a mischaracterization of the authors intent. And I can’t see Billionaires wanting to address income inequality as a bad thing, even if they’re doing it for selfish reasons.

You argument seems to be that it isn’t possible for a Progressive to run as a Dem.

Bernie is a Progressive. He is running as a Dem.

Will he be co-opted? Are the Dems just using him?

I can’t say.

Now, if I recall correctly, you got Obama right from his first Presidential campaign on while I was disastrously wrong his first time round.

I’m hoping your crystal ball is less accurate this time.


Well he does suggest it is a good idea for that 1% to support Sanders … that says “agent” to me, just as whom we choose to support is based, i would think, on our expectation (s)he will be OUR agent …

And “doing it for selfish reasons” means they will do it only to the extent of taking the edge off, while, as i said, leaving them intact and in control … let the heat die down, for now … then, it’s off to the races again … I have seen this dynamic over and over in my quarter century of observing - starting in a local Town I lived in where i first came out of Plato’s cave …

No, it is perfectly possible for progs to RUN as Dems, it’s done all the time, e.g. O, it just isn’t possible for them, when push comes to shove, as Dems, of whatever stripe, to actually behave as progs … e.g K …

And, rather like when you sign up for that exciting new service - and have to click the button that says “I accept the terms of service” without actually reading the pages and pages of those terms … I am quite sure the Dems had Sanders click the button … they haven’t been in control as part of the duopoly for this long without vetting their candidates …

I take no great credit for the call on O - it was out there to see if one allowed oneself to step back and peak behind the curtain at who was behind the Great and Powerful Wizard … we just get so caught up in the excitement of hearing what we long to hear from the engine that we don’t peak under the hood …

All i am suggesting is that peaking under the hood and finding a donkey there should give one considerable pause - especially when, if where you really want to go is where Sanders says he is heading, there is a nice little Green car in the back lot that is much more likely to get you there …

As far as “crystal ball” - well why take a chance, when every time we have before we have gotten screwed …

So whom did you choose the second time around?

PS - like your polar bear (smile), but he looks worried …


Rocky Anderson was my choice in 2012. I chose him over Jill Stein because he had government experience as Mayor of Salt Lake City.

The bear is actually my dog - although I think he has a slightly different view of our relationship. :slight_smile:


Maybe I’m off base, but it seems to me that all you are doing is whining in the corner about how “it will all amount to nothing, so why do anything!”

Nurses, like millions in our nation, are actually finding a way to fight against corporate rule. Thing about people’s movements—they rarely conform to our preconceptions of how they should look.


OK, I’ll bite! I’ll be glad to support a “Keynesian liberal Democrat” for president! Am I missing something—why shouldn’t we all?