After a record amount of support on the final day, the Bernie Sanders presidential announced it raised $26 million in the third quarter, closing the funding lead held by rival Hillary Clinton substantially and proving that his small-donor strategy has the power to compete with the big-money operation maintained by the Democratic frontrunner.
A while back I read an article about Sanders, which advised readers not to discount him. If anything, he knows how to campaign. I'll say he does! Everybody should contribute the cost of a movie ticket to his campaign, as it is among the best political entertainment around, and it would send a very loud message to candidates everywhere: YOU DON'T NEED TO BE BEHOLDEN TO BIG MONEY DONORS TO RAISE THE FUNDS YOU NEED!
More good news for Bernie.
This is a great idea, and I'd take it a step forward: suggesting a donation equal to an evening at the movies, the Sanders campaign should air a one-hour on-line production--consisting in part of clips from his riveting speeches in Congress, including--
--his dressing down of Greenspan about the failure of trickle down economics
--his prophetic prediction of what war in Iraq would lead to
--highlights from his 8 1/2 hour speech on 10/12/10 against extending tax cuts for the wealthy
--discussion on the role Citizens United has played in creating an oligarchy
--clips from his speeches against Nafta, Cafta, TPP, etc.
and then specific commentary on his economic platform:
--what he means by social democracy, comparisons to FDR, Scandinavia . . .
--how much money Americans and businesses would save with single-payer healthcare
--the economic argument for free tuition in public universities
--the economic argument for $15 minimum wage
--supporting commentary from economists like Joseph Stiglitz
--clips from numerous standing room only campaign rallies
Essentially, it would be an hour long political ad that would raise money rather than cost money. In my view, it would be yuuuge!
Let me rephrase your last line. More and more the big money and Wall Street that support the Democratic establishment is coming to the conclusion that their best chance of winning in November 2016 is anyone except Bernie.
I was already mulling another contribution to Senator Sanders. I'm going to do it RIGHT NOW!!!
According to a recent CD article, Biden's son Hunter is CEO of a controlling Ukranian oil company. Why would anyone trade one billionaire's candidate for another when the whole point is to get the oligarchy's boot off our necks?
Bernie takes no Wall Street bribes. For that alone, he gets my vote.
Bernie's solicitation has been sitting on the end table for some time now. He is my candidate of choice, though I don't expect much as a result of one election, if he even gets the chance. Money's tight but we can afford the typical amount mentioned above; guess we haven't because of the betrayal we felt from the last time around. Yes I (we) voted for Obama twice, even though I was certain he was just an empty suit (yes it was a case of lesser-evilism.) I think Sanders is sincere, and it seems to me he thought about it a very long time before he decided to run.
Still a long way out from the election and a lot can happen. If the DP establishment decides to go at him in earnest he just may decide to renege on his promise to support Clinton if he is denied the candidacy he legitimately may win.
Please don't chide me for not supporting the green candidate, or the legitimate socialist candidate (is there one?) I have read all the arguments repeatedly made here and believe that despite a true groundswell movement for such candidates (which does not exist) the system will not allow other than the duopoly - at this time. But, that circumstance could be turned on its head if Sanders gains majority support and the establishment shuts him out.
These are indeed interesting times. Time to mail him my contribution.
Founded by the Clintons and others in 1985, the Democratic leadership Council (DLC) turned the Party into a billion dollar organization that depends upon Wall Street and its corporate cronies for 95% of its revenue.
Nominate Sanders, Chaffee, O'Malley, Warren or anybody else who doesn't play nice with Wall Street and the Party loses 95% of its revenue. Has any billion dollar organization ever voluntarily chased 95% of its revenue away ?
Clinton is the only announced contender who will continue drawing the revenue stream from Wall Street, but she lacks charisma and also has a lot baggage. Although he also lacks charisma, Biden will keep the Wall Street revenue stream flowing and has much less baggage.
The media keeps trying to resurrect Biden's viability but America doesn't forgive two time losers which is how Biden comes across. He has also become Obamafied as VP. What did Biden do that was so notable anyway? He's a Washington insider and old guard. I think Biden's name came up again simply to muddy the waters so that Hillary's falling numbers are not so obvious and clear cut as they have been. The media talks as if Biden is in the race although he isn't. The polls talk as if he is in the race although he isn't. How does that work? Hillary vs Sanders head to head was starting to look like a crash dive disaster for Hillary so Biden is brought in to make her dropping numbers less stark and obvious.
Again, you're ignoring the very clear trending in poll results. Hillary is going down and Bernie is going up. Biden will appeal to the few middle-of-the-road Dems who aren't happy with Clinton. Bernie's supporters aren't going to jump on the Biden bandwagon, but Hillary's might. So, unless Clinton withdraws she and Biden are going to be drinking from the same cup - and it isn't refilling.
Biden helps Bernie.
I'm not too sure about that. Why would Hillary's supporters go to Bernie and not to Biden?
If the primary is a 3 way race with Biden/Clinton/Sanders Clinton and Biden will be competing for the same 'centrist' Dems. The ones further to the left are already firmly in Sanders camp.
I see. I was assuming Biden could win in the event that Hillary dropped out of the race. Otherwise, I agree.
I'm about 98% sure Biden will run just because he would like to be president so damn much. Ambition is just oozing out his pores every appearance now. He's as much an establishment candidate as Hillary so the DLC doesn't care if it's him or her, just as long as it isn't Sanders.
I don't think we fully comprehend how incestuous Wall Street and both the Democratic and Republican party have been since at least the Clinton administration with the revolving doors between them--this is the money and power structure Sanders is threatening. Neither Biden or Hillary is any threat to that power structure, in fact they are both pillars of it. I don't think truth is important to either of them. Just power and money, money and power.
I'm in full agreement that Wall St. doesn't care who as long as it isn't Sanders (or worse Sanders/Warren...lol). Either Clinton, Biden, Bush and likely as not even Trump is fine with the status quo.
However though Biden may want it so bad that he can taste it, IMO he is a shoehorn to help Clinton fit the shoe. Sanders has made her look bad (almost shockingly so) and were it not that the media props her up and goes easy on her fall in popularity, Sanders would be a runaway win even this early in the race. So they've been ignoring Sanders rise and still Hillary keeps dropping in the polls. So the powers that be use Biden to make her falling numbers seem to be less obvious than when it is just her against Sanders. I think if Biden were chosen to run as the dem nominee, despite the media's help, it'd be a closer race between the repubs and the dems and a low turn out race too. He is nothing special as a candidate. A ho-hum candidate in fact. Sanders brings excitement and enthusiasm to politics and Hillary would at least be the first woman pres but Biden would be just an ordinary... maybe too ordinary candidate. I think he is just to soften the contrast between Hillary's falling numbers and Sanders rising numbers.
Congratulations to the campaign of Senator Bernie Sanders. The campaign and its supporters have done a terrific job at grassroots promotion, organizing and financing. $26 million dollars in small donations in a 3-month period is nothing short of ... remarkable. Job well done!
Interesting theory and I think probably right. The networks, excepting Fox of course, do love Hillary. I've noticed a slew of Clinton surrogates on discussion panels, MSNBC especially.
I just think that the script wasn't supposed to go the way things are going. Sanders has surprised them and they simply don't know what to make of it yet.
I think they tried shifting attention away from Sanders rapid rise in the polls by focusing on Trump as a kind of flaky safety valve to 'bleed off the pressure' (figuring he was a flash in the pan and would self destruct given time) and what happens? Trump does a number on the front running Jeb Bush!
The media has no idea of what to do...lol.
This election has been the best one of all of them (Gore got robbed) IMO. This one is getting exciting and to be honest... it is becoming fun. The powers that be and the money that is ... can't seem to rig the game like they usually do.
Gosh Hillary, you keep slinging mud but none of it sticks.