Bernie Sanders Continues to Spew Hot Air

[HagridOfTheDeep]

This time in the Washington Post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/06/23/bernie-sanders-heres-what-we-want/

[This account no longer in use.]

Glad to see that you support party unity, Hagrid.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Glad to see that you support party unity, Hagrid.

"Party unity" necessarily requires the loser to at least congratulate the winner. Offering a list of demands like some kind of blackmail manifesto, especially when the list actually doesn't contain anything actionable at all, is not a step forward. No one asked him to write this article, and it certainly isn't a step towards reconciliation.

So that's the thing. Hillary has taken on most of his issues. There's not much divide at all. She's fighting for the backing of Bernie's supporters. He's got to face the music and do his part too.

[Green Line]

Keep going Bernie, It's not over yet!

[Ebsy]

The thing is, they didn't vote for a political revolution, they voted for Bernie Sanders. Political revolution wasn't on the ballot.

[Suck my caulk]

Keep going Bernie, It's not over yet!

Sadly, it is over, and us Bernie or Bust folks would be best served by switching our allegiance and votes to Jill Stein this November.

[Virginiá]

Keep going Bernie, It's not over yet!

Sadly, it is over, and us Bernie or Bust folks would be best served by switching our allegiance and votes to Jill Stein this November.

How is that? Stein would be a terrible president. Just because they support your values doesn't necessarily make them qualified or even capable of doing the job. However, that is moot because she will never get close. She'd at best play a spoiler to help Trump, who, if he won, would aid Republicans in hurting progressive goals.

I guess I get why you don't want to vote for Clinton, but to say you'd be better served seems wrong.

[fhtagn]

Keep going Bernie, It's not over yet!

Sadly, it is over, and us Bernie or Bust folks would be best served by switching our allegiance and votes to Jill Stein this November.

How is that? Stein would be a terrible president. Just because they support your values doesn't necessarily make them qualified or even capable of doing the job. However, that is moot because she will never get close. She'd at best play a spoiler to help Trump, who, if he won, would aid Republicans in hurting progressive goals.

I guess I get why you don't want to vote for Clinton, but to say you'd be better served seems wrong.

So you expect progressives to just suck it up and vote for Clinton when there wasn't any reason to vote for  her previously?

It *can* be argued that neither Trump nor Hillary would make a very good President. Why ask voters to give up their morals voting for a candidate they don't believe is fit to run the country properly?

I acknowledge that she wouldn't actually win, but shouldn't we be wanting to break away from the two-party system and give viable third parties their chance? Or are you a fan of politics as usual?

[Landslide Lyndon]

Keep going Bernie, It's not over yet!

Sadly, it is over, and us Bernie or Bust folks would be best served by switching our allegiance and votes to Jill Stein this November.

Yes! We all remember how great was the 2001-09 period under president Nader.

[Flake]

Keep going Bernie, It's not over yet!

Sadly, it is over, and us Bernie or Bust folks would be best served by switching our allegiance and votes to Jill Stein this November.

Yes! We all remember how great was the 2001-09 period under president Nader.

I hate this argument so much because Jebs!/the FLSOS's removal of many (almost all black) voters from the rolls prior to the election contributed *much* more to Gore's defeat than Nader voters. Buchanan "voters" too.

[Ebsy]

So you expect progressives to just suck it up and vote for Clinton when there wasn't any reason to vote for  her previously?

If they are actual progressive and not just edgy leftists, yes.

It *can* be argued that neither Trump nor Hillary would make a very good President. Why ask voters to give up their morals voting for a candidate they don't believe is fit to run the country properly?

Good luck with that argument.

I acknowledge that she wouldn't actually win, but shouldn't we be wanting to break away from the two-party system and give viable third parties their chance? Or are you a fan of politics as usual?

The two party system is fine and there is no way to break from it without removing FPTP, and "politics as usual" gave us our great president Barack Obama and will hopefully deliver us another great president in Hillary Clinton. In any case, any viable third party isn't going to be a leftist one, since the Democratic Party isn't actually unpopular.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Keep going Bernie, It's not over yet!

Sadly, it is over, and us Bernie or Bust folks would be best served by switching our allegiance and votes to Jill Stein this November.

Yes! We all remember how great was the 2001-09 period under president Nader.

I hate this argument so much because Jebs!/the FLSOS's removal of many (almost all black) voters from the rolls prior to the election contributed *much* more to Gore's defeat than Nader voters. Buchanan "voters" too.

All these people did everything they could for W. to win. And still would have failed if not for Nader.
And let's not forget that Nader himself was saying back then that his goal was explicitly to hurt Gore.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

It's probably more worthwhile to write yourself in than vote Stein. After all, Stein has zero percent chance (like you would) but at least you'll probably agree with yourself one hundred percent of the time.

[Flake]

It's probably more worthwhile to write yourself in than vote Stein. After all, Stein has zero percent chance (like you would) but at least you'll probably agree with yourself one hundred percent of the time.

[RaphaelDLG]

Outside of races where the third party actually has a chance (few and far between), there's only one logical reason to vote third party, in my opinion - to help a political party get access to the debate stage in the long term.  It's not an insignificant goal but it must be weighed against the moral responsibility of helping the country by selecting the clear lesser of two evils.

Writing in Bernie Sanders or anyone else who isn't actually on the ballot in all 50 states doesn't really accomplish anything and kind of just serves as a performative exercise where you can masturbate to your own moral purity.  I guess if there was a mass write-in/NOTA movement that would be large enough that politicians would take notice, it would be kind of okay, but it would have to be weighed against the necessity to protect America by selecting the lesser of two evils.

Perhaps an exception to write-ins would be in an unopposed race where a write in could be a useful form of social protest.

To be an adult, you have to both accept that unfortunately you are often going to have to choose between the lesser of two evils and that simultaneously you can't so cynical that you don't do your part to improve the lesser of two evils choice before the next election by voting in primaries, petitioning, protesting.

As 2000 proved, there's often simply too much at stake to reject a lesser of two evils choice for an identity affirming feel good third party choice.  And I say this as someone who lives in a safe R state that plans on voting for a major third party candidate.

Apologize for the poorly organized post.

[Virginiá]

So you expect progressives to just suck it up and vote for Clinton when there wasn't any reason to vote for  her previously?

It *can* be argued that neither Trump nor Hillary would make a very good President. Why ask voters to give up their morals voting for a candidate they don't believe is fit to run the country properly?

I acknowledge that she wouldn't actually win, but shouldn't we be wanting to break away from the two-party system and give viable third parties their chance? Or are you a fan of politics as usual?

I'd like things to change, but Stein would have no idea what to do when she got into office, would not compromise on her ideals despite having to in order to have a functioning government. She has no experience in government. Say what you will about Clinton, but she does have a lot of experience and would be able to execute the duties of president better than most, if not all the people who ran this cycle, on both sides of the aisle.

That being said, sure, I'd like change from the status quo, but Stein? Come on. If Stein had a chance, the polls would show it. If by October she was still polling single digits, she will not win. There is not going to be some massive double-digit polling error/upset for her. If your 3rd party candidate of choice was polling so well that they actually had a real shot at winning, then sure, go vote for them, otherwise it's a blatant waste of a vote. Go out and knock on doors for her, spread the word, and hope she can catch up by October. If she can't, you are just wasting a vote. That's the reality of this.

As for our system in general, it's not set up really for more than 2 parties. If we had 4 candidates all running top notch campaigns, there is a good chance no one would get 270 EVs and the House would choose the winner, and at that point it would go to a major party nominee. If we want to have many competitive parties, we need to a different system. Popular vote, for instance.

Lastly, I'm not against third parties... As long as they run competent, qualified candidates who are willing to compromise. Stein is neither qualified nor likely willing to compromise in the ways she will have to as president. She would be POTUS of all Americans, not just liberals/Green Party supporters.

[ag]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Bernard, if you want real change and if you are sick of the establishment, then endorse MISTER DONALD J. TRUMP and not Madame Establishment.

Jairmany calling. Jairmany calling.

[skoods]

Any Sanders supporter who would rather throw their vote away with Jill Stein than prevent the greatest threat to Democracy from turning America into his personal playground should not be on this site because it's clear you don't take your vote or politics seriously enough to be on it.

[fhtagn]

Any Sanders supporter who would rather throw their vote away with Jill Stein than prevent the greatest threat to Democracy from turning America into his personal playground should not be on this site because it's clear you don't take your vote or politics seriously enough to be on it.

That's some pretty big words since Hillary supports some sketchy stuff to be a threat to Democracy as well. But I guess you like war hawks as long as they belong to the political party you like.

There's plenty of educated folks with legitimate reasons to support a third party candidate, even if they know their candidate won't win.

You'll catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Good luck convincing people to vote blue with that kind of attitude.

[Hermit For Peace]

I'll like Bernie better once he goes back to being Senator Bernie who is an advocate for change, but who has learned that change comes from within, slowly.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Any Sanders supporter who would rather throw their vote away with Jill Stein than prevent the greatest threat to Democracy from turning America into his personal playground should not be on this site because it's clear you don't take your vote or politics seriously enough to be on it.

OBEY! HILLBOTS MUST ASSIMILATE!

[RaphaelDLG]

I'll like Bernie better once he goes back to being Senator Bernie who is an advocate for change, but who has learned that change comes from within, slowly.

I'm a big fan of slow change.  For me, there's really no hurry. 

The 45,000 people a year that die in America due to lack of health coverage?  Screw'em. 

The current system works just fine.  The banks that are larger than they were when they were too big to fail and could explode at any time, wiping out people's livelihoods and again resulting in thousands of deaths?  No biggie. 

The global temperature that has already risen by two degrees and the climate change taking place that may be irreversible?  Whatevs.

These youngsters just need to take a chill pill and get with the program.  The experts in Washington, DC will continue to handle these problems just fine, just vote for HRC in November and then go take a nap for a couple years.

[Hermit For Peace]

I'll like Bernie better once he goes back to being Senator Bernie who is an advocate for change, but who has learned that change comes from within, slowly.

I'm a big fan of slow change.  For me, there's really no hurry. 

The 45,000 people a year that die in America due to lack of health coverage?  Screw'em. 

The current system works just fine.  The banks that are larger than they were when they were too big to fail and could explode at any time, wiping out people's livelihoods and again resulting in thousands of deaths?  No biggie. 

The global temperature that has already risen by two degrees and the climate change taking place that may be irreversible?  Whatevs.

These youngsters just need to take a chill pill and get with the program.  The experts in Washington, DC will continue to handle these problems just fine, just vote for HRC in November and then go take a nap for a couple years.

Obama started the ball rolling with health care. They have been working on it. In fact, Obama wanted Universal Health care but he had to compromise in order to get something started. He did something that no president before him could do, even though it's just the beginning. And long before Obama tried to do something about health care, Hillary back in the 90's was pushing for it, but that went nowhere. You don't give her any credit for all the work she put into trying to change the health care system, but she and Bill were great advocates for it when he was in office.

Banks big days are over. They will come under increasing control as the years pass; it's a given.

Global warming is debatable. The weather patterns go through cycles. It's always been that way...always. But I won't go into that argument here.

The youngsters need to realize that Bernie LOST. He does not control the Democratic system. More people want to go Hillary's route than Bernie's route. So yes, take a chill pill and wait your turn.

[RaphaelDLG]

I'll like Bernie better once he goes back to being Senator Bernie who is an advocate for change, but who has learned that change comes from within, slowly.

I'm a big fan of slow change.  For me, there's really no hurry. 

The 45,000 people a year that die in America due to lack of health coverage?  Screw'em. 

The current system works just fine.  The banks that are larger than they were when they were too big to fail and could explode at any time, wiping out people's livelihoods and again resulting in thousands of deaths?  No biggie. 

The global temperature that has already risen by two degrees and the climate change taking place that may be irreversible?  Whatevs.

These youngsters just need to take a chill pill and get with the program.  The experts in Washington, DC will continue to handle these problems just fine, just vote for HRC in November and then go take a nap for a couple years.

Obama started the ball rolling with health care. They have been working on it. In fact, Obama wanted Universal Health care but he had to compromise in order to get something started. He did something that no president before him could do, even though it's just the beginning. And long before Obama tried to do something about health care, Hillary back in the 90's was pushing for it, but that went nowhere. You don't give her any credit for all the work she put into trying to change the health care system, but she and Bill were great advocates for it when he was in office.

Banks big days are over. They will come under increasing control as the years pass; it's a given.

Global warming is debatable. The weather patterns go through cycles. It's always been that way...always. But I won't go into that argument here.

The youngsters need to realize that Bernie LOST. He does not control the Democratic system. More people want to go Hillary's route than Bernie's route. So yes, take a chill pill and wait your turn.

Except Hillary was very recently saying that Obamacare is great as it is, until she had to pander during the democratic primary to make sure she won, does not favor breaking up the banks, and was for keystone until she was against it.  She doesn't have a lot of credibility on those issues and needs to have her feet held to the fire.

Which is exactly what Bernie is doing right now, and what people need to do for the next two years after Hillary hopefully wins.  You can support the Democratic party without worshiping its figures as these mythical paragons of virtue that can do no wrong.  I know that's a mindblowing idea for a lot of people on this forum.

Of course Bernie doesn't control the democratic system.  Who gives a damn about Bernie; he's just one guy.  But his ideas absolutely need to be fought for, no matter how much arm-twisting it takes, and your idea that the Democratic Party and its assorted band of celebrities will just magically take care of us without any outside pressure is woefully ignorant of history.

[Hermit For Peace]

Except Hillary was very recently saying that Obamacare is great as it is, until she had to pander during the democratic primary to make sure she won, does not favor breaking up the banks, and was for keystone until she was against it.  She doesn't have a lot of credibility on those issues and needs to have her feet held to the fire.

Which is exactly what Bernie is doing right now, and what people need to do for the next two years after Hillary hopefully wins.  You can support the Democratic party without worshiping its figures as these mythical paragons of virtue that can do no wrong.  I know that's a mindblowing idea for a lot of people on this forum.

Of course Bernie doesn't control the democratic system.  Who gives a damn about Bernie; he's just one guy.  But his ideas absolutely need to be fought for, no matter how much arm-twisting it takes, and your idea that the Democratic Party and its assorted band of celebrities will just magically take care of us without any outside pressure is woefully ignorant of history.

I've never heard Hillary say Obamacare was great as it is. She wanted a better plan from the beginning. But that's here nor there. And she has been for regulating Wall Street ever since her Senate days. And at least Hillary is open to changing her mind about things, and not in a mentally unbalanced way like Trump, but after she gets enough facts to make a better informed decision. I find that a good thing.

More than you realize, we don't idolize paragons of virtue. It's not a mind-blowing idea you are expressing. You think you are, but it's not.

And no one is telling you not to fight to change the system. But what we are saying is that change doesn't happen over night. You have to fight for what you believe in, but realize that sometimes you LOSE temporarily. But you don't stop fighting, you just readjust your method of attack and try again.