Sanders supporters have a point

[Risky Thicket]

Why stick with Bernie to the end? We continue to hear the question as the California vote is only a week away now. Let's be honest, it's a fair question. For those of us who support Sanders the answer may be more obvious than it is to others. The following quote is an excerpt from the best response, by far, to the question. I would add that the author's suggested implementation of the conditions for Sanders to support Hillary are bang on.

This is a piece well worth reading.

Indeed, whatever might be the problem? The problem is that she is a DINO (Democrat in Name Only). The problem is that she, along with her husband, trashed the core values of the Democratic Party in the 1990s and threw the American workers under the proverbial bus. They essentially became more Republican than Republicans. Perhaps it was a slip of the tongue while campaigning in Kentucky, but she offered up her husband as the person who would carry the flag on the economy once she is in office. Really?



An example is in order. We know she decided that she was against the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) after she was for it. Is her plan to turn the issue over to the godfather of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)? Is there any question in anyone's mind that a candidate who has wrapped herself in the cloak of the incumbent president (whose team negotiated the TPP), will not, upon victory, become "pragmatic"? It's unlikely she will continue to oppose what Sanders has described as "part of a global race to the bottom to boost the profits of large corporations and Wall Street by outsourcing jobs; undercutting worker rights; dismantling labor, environmental, health, food safety and financial laws; and allowing corporations to challenge our laws in international tribunals rather than our own court system."

Wow! When it finally gets down to nut cutting this ^^^ is, at the moment, the most likely scenario if Hillary wins. That, and as you'll see in the article, is why I'm with Bernie to the end and beyond.

 

[Redress]

Why stick with Bernie to the end? We continue to hear the question as the California vote is only a week away now. Let's be honest, it's a fair question. For those of us who support Sanders the answer may be more obvious than it is to others. The following quote is an excerpt from the best response, by far, to the question. I would add that the author's suggested implementation of the conditions for Sanders to support Hillary are bang on.

This is a piece well worth reading.



Wow! When it finally gets down to nut cutting this ^^^ is, at the moment, the most likely scenario if Hillary wins. That, and as you'll see in the article, is why I'm with Bernie to the end and beyond.

OK, and retarded opinion piece that calls Clinton a DINO deserves to be mocked and shamed for extreme retardation. That is such a painfully stupid comment that I am shocked and ashamed that some one actually pays him to write for them. It really reflects badly that some people actually agree with him...

 

[Skeptic Bob]

I don't know. I always thought the terms DINO and RINO should be worn as badges of honor. I mean, by definition Bernie is a DINO.

Maybe Hillary wouldn't be considered a Democrat a few decades ago, but she definitely is the embodiment of them today.

 

[Ikari]

Why stick with Bernie to the end? We continue to hear the question as the California vote is only a week away now. Let's be honest, it's a fair question. For those of us who support Sanders the answer may be more obvious than it is to others. The following quote is an excerpt from the best response, by far, to the question. I would add that the author's suggested implementation of the conditions for Sanders to support Hillary are bang on.

This is a piece well worth reading.



Wow! When it finally gets down to nut cutting this ^^^ is, at the moment, the most likely scenario if Hillary wins. That, and as you'll see in the article, is why I'm with Bernie to the end and beyond.

In the end, she's a bought-and-paid-for Corporate Politician. And that's why some Sander's supporters will back him to the bigger end. I do think a good number will swallow their pride and the party line, backing Hillary when she grabs the nomination.

Some won't though because I think that fundamentally Sander's supporters are anti-establishment and Hillary represents the Establishment.

 

[Surrealistik]

OK, and retarded opinion piece that calls Clinton a DINO deserves to be mocked and shamed for extreme retardation. That is such a painfully stupid comment that I am shocked and ashamed that some one actually pays him to write for them. It really reflects badly that some people actually agree with him...

She may not be a DINO per the present political frame of reference/context, but she definitely would be not long ago, effectively representing a moderate Republican that happens to be more liberal on social issues.

Progressive in name only is perhaps more accurate, as she is a consummate neoliberal.

 

[American]

Why stick with Bernie to the end? We continue to hear the question as the California vote is only a week away now. Let's be honest, it's a fair question. For those of us who support Sanders the answer may be more obvious than it is to others. The following quote is an excerpt from the best response, by far, to the question. I would add that the author's suggested implementation of the conditions for Sanders to support Hillary are bang on.

This is a piece well worth reading.



Wow! When it finally gets down to nut cutting this ^^^ is, at the moment, the most likely scenario if Hillary wins. That, and as you'll see in the article, is why I'm with Bernie to the end and beyond.

Plus MASSIVE gun control.

 

[Ikari]

I don't know. I always thought the terms DINO and RINO should be worn as badges of honor. I mean, by definition Bernie is a DINO.

Maybe Hillary wouldn't be considered a Democrat a few decades ago, but she definitely is the embodiment of them today.

The whole RINO, DINO thing is just deflection. The real fundamental is that the Republocrat party is the Corporate, status-quo party of big brother, big war policies. Hillary is certainly of this ilk. I wouldn't say she was a DINO, id say she is the exact embodiment of Party Politician.

 

[Risky Thicket]

In the end, she's a bought-and-paid-for Corporate Politician. And that's why some Sander's supporters will back him to the bigger end. I do think a good number will swallow their pride and the party line, backing Hillary when she grabs the nomination.

Some won't though because I think that fundamentally Sander's supporters are anti-establishment and Hillary represents the Establishment.

:2wave: Me, for one.

 

[TheGoverness]

:2wave: Me, for one.

Me too!

 

[Redress]

She may not be a DINO per the present political frame of reference/context, but she definitely would be not long ago, effectively representing a moderate Republican that happens to be more liberal on social issues.

Progressive in name only is perhaps more accurate, as she is a consummate neoliberal.

Most democrats seem to think she better represents their views than Sanders. And calling her a "neoliberal" is retarded. She is nothing at all like a neoliberal.

 

[Ikari]

Most democrats seem to think she better represents their views than Sanders. And calling her a "neoliberal" is retarded. She is nothing at all like a neoliberal.

What is exactly meant by the definition of neo-liberal? From what I can find it seems centered on free-market or even laissez-faire economics. Hillary is a Corporatist, and corporatists are not Free Market folk.

 

[Crovax]

Why stick with Bernie to the end? We continue to hear the question as the California vote is only a week away now. Let's be honest, it's a fair question. For those of us who support Sanders the answer may be more obvious than it is to others. The following quote is an excerpt from the best response, by far, to the question. I would add that the author's suggested implementation of the conditions for Sanders to support Hillary are bang on.

This is a piece well worth reading.



Wow! When it finally gets down to nut cutting this ^^^ is, at the moment, the most likely scenario if Hillary wins. That, and as you'll see in the article, is why I'm with Bernie to the end and beyond.

What should really worry you is the bat **** crazy ideas that Bernie is proposing and the democrats are eating up and forcing Hillary into. Pretty much anyone of merit on any side of the isle agrees NAFTA and some form of a TPP are good for the country, the workforce as a whole and the economy.

 

[Surrealistik]

Most democrats seem to think she better represents their views than Sanders. And calling her a "neoliberal" is retarded. She is nothing at all like a neoliberal.

She is absolutely a neoliberal; there is absolutely a great deal of overlap between this ideology and Bill Clinton's treacherous notion of the 'third way democrat' which she is an adherent of; enough for that label to be appropriate: the fact that the contrast principle makes her look much more economically progressive than her Republican rivals does not in any way change this. Further, Democrats haven't been living in a vacuum. When your entire political environment and frame of reference, its discourse and Overton window, constantly shift to the right (largely as a consequence of money in politics since Buckley v Valeo in the 70s), chances are the populace will shift to some degree with it.

 

[Ntharotep]

The fact that people get so caught up in being a "true Republican" or "true Democrat" is a major sign of what is wrong with this country. What about just being a "true civil servant to America"?

As for crazy, I don't find the idea of my daughter not paying out of pocket expenses for college very crazy compared to the idea of building a wall and asking a country that can't pay for walls in their homes to pay for it...the first idea is pretty far from the crazy train station in comparison.

 

[Risky Thicket]

The whole RINO, DINO thing is just deflection. The real fundamental is that the Republocrat party is the Corporate, status-quo party of big brother, big war policies. Hillary is certainly of this ilk. I wouldn't say she was a DINO, id say she is the exact embodiment of Party Politician.

Right. What indeed is a Republican these days? What is a Democrat? They are not what they once were. Many people feel the designations no longer have real meaning. Thus RINO and DINO are ironically the majority of partisans from their respective parties.

The Democratic and Republican Parties are in truth closely related factions carrying the water for the oligarchy. I like the term "Corpgov", though I cannot take credit for it. IMHO voting for mainstream party picked Republican and/or Democratic candidates is nothing more than voting for Corpgov. No way Corpgov is going to allow power and wealth transfer in any appreciable amount to the People.

 

[iguanaman]

In the end, she's a bought-and-paid-for Corporate Politician. And that's why some Sander's supporters will back him to the bigger end. I do think a good number will swallow their pride and the party line, backing Hillary when she grabs the nomination.

Some won't though because I think that fundamentally Sander's supporters are anti-establishment and Hillary represents the Establishment.

And Sanders is poised to be another spoiler like Nader that sets back the progressive movement another generation. When will you guys learn to stop acting like Republicans and take things too far. The American people are not ready to elect a Socialist and your foolishness better not cost the Dems this election or Sanders movement will be done just like Naders was. The "establishment" is how things get done here, Sanders has no chance of getting anything he is asking for even if he was President. Naming Post offices is not getting things done.

 

[Ikari]

Right. What indeed is a Republican these days? What is a Democrat? They are not what they once were. Many people feel the designations no longer have real meaning. Thus RINO and DINO are ironically the majority of partisans from their respective parties.

The Democratic and Republican Parties are in truth closely related factions carrying the water for the oligarchy. I like the term "Corpgov", though I cannot take credit for it. IMHO voting for mainstream party picked Republican and/or Democratic candidates is nothing more than voting for Corpgov. No way Corpgov is going to allow power and wealth in any appreciable amount to the People.

It's why I call them the Republocrats. They are the same party now, they try to maintain a facade of being separate, they have all the talking points, they've strongly polarized the political field, etc. But push comes to shove, they are neigh identical on all the major issues. The Corporate elite, the new aristocracy. It's so blatent what they are doing, but it's easier for people to believe it's the "other side's" fault than it is to fix the problem.

 

[Surrealistik]

And Sanders is poised to be another spoiler like Nader that sets back the progressive movement another generation. When will you guys learn to stop acting like Republicans and take things too far. The American people are not ready to elect a Socialist and your foolishness better not cost the Dems this election or Sanders movement will be done just like Naders was.

We've been going ever further right since the days of Reagan, and this is happening in spite of true progressives, not because of them. Campaign finance is the fundamental problem, not us, and we will not be intimidated by you treacherous neoliberal red Democrats any longer. Enough is enough.

 

[Lovebug]

Calling Hillary a DINO is a bit silly. She doesn't even know what she is or will be at any given moment. She'll be whatever is convenient to achieve her goal.
Sanders, God love him, he is the most sincere of the bunch and I hope he isn't selling out. But he is no Dem, not even a DINO.

 

[Ikari]

And Sanders is poised to be another spoiler like Nader that sets back the progressive movement another generation. When will you guys learn to stop acting like Republicans and take things too far. The American people are not ready to elect a Socialist and your foolishness better not cost the Dems this election or Sanders movement will be done just like Naders was.

So Hillary loses....so what? DNC shouldn't have rigged it to get her through. They want votes, they can out up a candidate more people can support. Why should anyone support someone they dont actually agree on?

 

[Abbazorkzog]

OK, and retarded opinion piece that calls Clinton a DINO deserves to be mocked and shamed for extreme retardation. That is such a painfully stupid comment that I am shocked and ashamed that some one actually pays him to write for them. It really reflects badly that some people actually agree with him...

You and certain other Hillary supporters' continued indigence, disrespect and condescending attitude toward criticisms of Clinton merely reinforce the zeal of Sanders' supporters and the piece this OP links to.

:coffeepap

 

[cabse5]

Right. What indeed is a Republican these days? What is a Democrat? They are not what they once were. Many people feel the designations no longer have real meaning. Thus RINO and DINO are ironically the majority of partisans from their respective parties.

The Democratic and Republican Parties are in truth closely related factions carrying the water for the oligarchy. I like the term "Corpgov", though I cannot take credit for it. IMHO voting for mainstream party picked Republican and/or Democratic candidates is nothing more than voting for Corpgov. No way Corpgov is going to allow power and wealth transfer in any appreciable amount to the People.

DINO...RINO these are terms used by pundits and politicians to force someone into their way of philosophical thinking. Conservatives mistakenly thought they were the base of the GOP hence the RINO decree (the RINO decree was actually an accusation against a CINO - Conservative in name only). Are there DINOs where the name caller, the one attempting to change political philosophy and behavior, is actually a SINO? Socialist in name only? Is that Hillary?

When the name callers, the ones attempting to force political philosophy to their advantage, see there ploys aren't working, they often become that which they rail against. The DINO or the RINO.

 

[Surrealistik]

What is exactly meant by the definition of neo-liberal? From what I can find it seems centered on free-market or even laissez-faire economics. Hillary is a Corporatist, and corporatists are not Free Market folk.

The precise definition of neoliberalism is actually somewhat disputed.

Typically an academic definition of it tends to involve policies of minimal regulation and deregulation, privatization of state enterprise (and other state endeavours), trade liberalization (NAFTA, TPP, etc), taxation minimization/reduction, and traditionally conservative economic policy in general, while socially it trends towards liberalism; right libertarian probably cleaves closest as an analogue. Though corporatism can be at odds with this, there certainly tends to be quite a bit of overlap between the two.

I feel it fits Clinton fairly well as she's economically conservative (in reality) and socially liberal in the mold of Bill Clinton's third way/New Democrats: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council

 

[VanceMack]

Hillary isnt a democrat. She isnt a DINO. She is a politician (the bad kind).

 

[iguanaman]

We've been going ever further right since the days of Reagan, and this is happening in spite of true progressives, not because of them. Campaign finance is the fundamental problem, not us, and we will not be intimidated by you treacherous neoliberal red Democrats any longer. Enough is enough.

Where where those "true Progressives" in 2010 and 2014 when Congress moved further and further right? Why do you think Dems have moved right too? Because they want to get elected. Your dreams are dangerous to the progressive movement and the fact that you can't see it makes it all the more so. If you truly cared about progressive causes you would want them to be enacted and not make them "poison pills" that Democrats are forced to eat at their peril. Keep it up and Trump will show you how bad Govt. can be, just like GW Bush did. Is that you true goal? Because it seems that way to me.