Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bradley won exactly zero states in 2000. Dean was pretty much dead after Iowa but did better than Bradley. Then Obama came along and actually beat the establishment candidate and went on to win the presidency twice, and he actually did manage to get a good bit of his agenda enacted.
Now we have someone who is well to the left of Obama doing remarkably well in the primaries.
There clearly is a progressive movement afoot and Bernie Sanders is its leader.
However, you are right that little to none of that progressive agenda will get passed until people start turning out in the midterms and vote in a congress that isn't composed in large part of right wing extremists.
I agree. The pendulum appears to be swinging toward the left, and the political arguments in the coming years won't be if we need to raise the minimum wage and increase taxes on corporations -- it will be by how much. Bernie is at the helm of the movement now, but by this time next year he'll be a historical footnote. I hope the latent energy he has tapped into will continue to build though.
I agree. The pendulum appears to be swinging toward the left, and the political arguments in the coming years won't be if we need to raise the minimum wage and increase taxes on corporations -- it will be by how much. Bernie is at the helm of the movement now, but by this time next year he'll be a historical footnote. I hope the latent energy he has tapped into will continue to build though.
So there is a "Bernie Sanders movement" but at the same time there isn't?
My takeaway from reading through the responses: we have to again vote for the least bad candidate because there is no real way to effect change anyway.
Bottom line: better the Devil you know.
Not for this voter, not this year.
For years Democrats have tried to be the "reasonable" party. We've all trumpeted how we are less crazy than those other people, less extreme, but what we really were were cowards.
Afraid to be called "liberals" we let the Clintons and their ilk convince us that we had to support a right-ward, corporatist shift in the party in order to be relevant.
Much like the progress that ground to a halt when Reagan was elected and removed the solar panels from the WH, we allowed liberalism and social justice to be supplanted by NAFTA and support for the Iraq war.
Even after all that, too many still believe the propaganda from the GOP right that accuses Democrats of being left of Stalin and vote for candidates, like Clinton, to show just how liberal we aren't.
And yet, despite this massive support for Clinton, we continue to get threads and articles supplying reasons for why Sanders is not the answer rather than threads and articles detailing why Clinton is.
Why?
If you support Clinton, you support her vision of nation-building, her embrace of Henry Kissinger, her belief that questions regarding her positions on various issues should be met with disdain.
Time to step up and own that instead of continually trying to convince voters why Sanders is wrong.
1. a conservative
2. a republican
3. a liberal
4. a democrat
5. a progressive
in order to win?
People like him because his unmistakable sense of outrage at how things are.
The Democratic debates revealed OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN, Sanders’ true strength. He was honest and open about his record on guns — a record for which many on the left will fault him — and open about his reasons for voting no on the 1993 Brady bill. This is a man with principles, this is a man with a vision, this is a man with crazy amount of swagger, and gentle strength.
Win or lose, who cares at this point? This is the voice of the new left (I hope.)
1. a conservative
2. a republican
3. a liberal
4. a democrat
5. a progressive
in order to win?
People like him because his unmistakable sense of outrage at how things are.
The Democratic debates revealed OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN, Sanders’ true strength. He was honest and open about his record on guns — a record for which many on the left will fault him — and open about his reasons for voting no on the 1993 Brady bill. This is a man with principles, this is a man with a vision, this is a man with crazy amount of swagger, and gentle strength.
Win or lose, who cares at this point? This is the voice of the new left (I hope.)
EXACTLY! He is the ONLY....... 'D-E-C-E-N-T' person running!
If I was going to vote for Hillary, I think I would keep it to myself. It's not the kind of thing I would want to admit to in public.
Why do you assume that just because you don't have the courage to publicly stand up for what you believe even on a topic as minor as who you favor for a presidential candidate that other people are as cowardly?
Why do you assume that just because you don't have the courage to publicly stand up for what you believe even on a topic as minor as who you favor for a presidential candidate that other people are as cowardly?
I state who I am voting for all the time. It's not the war mongering liar.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
