Forum Thread

Why Bernie should not drop out

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 65 1 2 3 4 5 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The Democratic establishment and the Clinton campaign are starting to urge Bernie to drop out. They say it is because Bernie can't win, but there are other, much more important reasons why they want him to drop out and why he shouldn't.

    Bernie's campaign is pushing Hillary's campaign further to the left, where she does not want to be. She is not a true progressive and it makes her campaign nervous when progressives push her beyond her comfort zone.

    Another reason they want Bernie to drop out is because his campaign reveals some very serious problems with the Democratic Party and its system of nominating candidates. If you take away the superdelegates, Bernie would be in the lead. The longer Bernie stays in the race, the more people will see how corrupt and undemocratic the superdelegate system is. The Democratic Party and the Hillary campaign don't want people to question that system more than they already have. Superdelegates will decide who the nominee is and that makes the Hillary campaign look less legitimate.

    Another reason why Bernie needs to stay in the race is to spread his message to more people.

    And polls still show that Bernie can beat Trump and Hillary can't. That could change over time, or maybe not.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    AugustSpies Wrote: Another reason they want Bernie to drop out is because his campaign reveals some very serious problems with the Democratic Party and its system of nominating candidates. If you take away the superdelegates, Bernie would be in the lead.

    I hate to break it to you, but that's not true. Secretary Clinton has 1,223 pledged delegates and Senator Sanders has 920. The total delegate count is Clinton 1,690 to Sanders 946.

    AugustSpies Wrote: The longer Bernie stays in the race, the more people will see how corrupt and undemocratic the superdelegate system is. The Democratic Party and the Hillary campaign don't want people to question that system more than they already have. Superdelegates will decide who the nominee is and that makes the Hillary campaign look less legitimate.

    Another reason why Bernie needs to stay in the race is to spread his message to more people.

    And polls still show that Bernie can beat Trump and Hillary can't. That could change over time, or maybe not.

    The super delegate system in the Democratic Party came about after the catastrophic 1968 convention. It may not be the best system in the world, but it's better than old white men sitting in a room and determining who a nominee will be.

    Super delegates will not decide who the nominee is this year. You could have argued that back in 2008 when then Senator Obama actually lost the popular vote in the primaries, but was able to win the nomination because of super delegates. You can't argue that this year though.

    And I don't want to come across as anti-Bernie. I'm a huge Bernie fan, but I'm a bigger fan of letting the people speak. I will vote for Bernie in the Oregon primary, but I will sure as shit vote for Hillary over staying home in November.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    The super delegate system in the Democratic Party came about after the catastrophic 1968 convention. It may not be the best system in the world, but it's better than old white men sitting in a room and determining who a nominee will be.

    Not exactly. "Democratic Party leaders say new rules adopted for this year's convention have fulfilled their purpose and created a more stable and predictable nominating process that favors mainstream candidates and policies." -- NYT July 1984.

    [ The Superdelegate system was implemented in 1982. ]

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Good post August Spies. I think Bernie Sanders is a wise man and has a basically altruistic impulse to leave something to the younger generations -- who don't even remember what a Democrat actually looked like before 1985. If HRC wins the nom I will not vote for her. I was going to, but I've decided at my ripe old age, I will no longer vote for the lesser of 2 evils.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    AugustSpies Wrote:

    The Democratic establishment and the Clinton campaign are starting to urge Bernie to drop out. They say it is because Bernie can't win, but there are other, much more important reasons why they want him to drop out and why he shouldn't.

    Bernie's campaign is pushing Hillary's campaign further to the left, where she does not want to be. She is not a true progressive and it makes her campaign nervous when progressives push her beyond her comfort zone.

    Another reason they want Bernie to drop out is because his campaign reveals some very serious problems with the Democratic Party and its system of nominating candidates. If you take away the superdelegates, Bernie would be in the lead. The longer Bernie stays in the race, the more people will see how corrupt and undemocratic the superdelegate system is. The Democratic Party and the Hillary campaign don't want people to question that system more than they already have. Superdelegates will decide who the nominee is and that makes the Hillary campaign look less legitimate.

    Another reason why Bernie needs to stay in the race is to spread his message to more people.

    And polls still show that Bernie can beat Trump and Hillary can't. That could change over time, or maybe not.

    The lesser of two evils. Is Trump. Hillary will be in perfect step with conservative ideological goals. The Trump will be stonewalled but Hillary will have a free pass. She will make no effort to force the stock market back to capitalism. She will continue the build and crash pattern market that with each crash turns more over to the top .001 ! At least Trump is selling nationalism.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    interesting comments Chet, inclined to agree
  • Liberal
    Independent
    Durham, NH
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Mcsweet Wrote: interesting comments Chet, inclined to agree
    Oh please! As bad as Hillary is, and that's pretty bad, she is still miles ahead of any Republican! I do agree that Trumpy is the best of the Republican candidates as he has no real interest in anything but himself. He doesn't care one bit about foreign affairs, immigration, trade, lgbt issues, or religion. He will (and does) say anything he feels will get him attention from his low information base of mabe voters. It's a game with him - nothing more, nothing less. "Look at me, I have the biggest fingers in the country."
  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Mcsweet Wrote:
    jaredsxtn Wrote:
    The super delegate system in the Democratic Party came about after the catastrophic 1968 convention. It may not be the best system in the world, but it's better than old white men sitting in a room and determining who a nominee will be.

    Not exactly. "Democratic Party leaders say new rules adopted for this year's convention have fulfilled their purpose and created a more stable and predictable nominating process that favors mainstream candidates and policies." -- NYT July 1984.

    [ The Superdelegate system was implemented in 1982. ]

    Yes I said so too; indeed it is a dishonest system; at least in Europe only the votes count; no delegates!! Here it is just Russian roulette and of course corrupt; Bernie should be nominated, not Hillary with the big money PAC's. It is time the people decide, not "delegates" . Right now it is the same as the "wheel of Fortune" who wins gets more and more; the runner-up's less and less. No, elections here are pure dishonest. In a lot of States the winner gets all the delegates, so you may as well not have voted for the runner up who gets nothing. You may as well appoint Bernie Maddov to run the show.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Mcsweet Wrote: Good post August Spies. I think Bernie Sanders is a wise man and has a basically altruistic impulse to leave something to the younger generations -- who don't even remember what a Democrat actually looked like before 1985. If HRC wins the nom I will not vote for her. I was going to, but I've decided at my ripe old age, I will no longer vote for the lesser of 2 evils.

    I have often been told that if I don't vote for a candidate who can win, then I am wasting my vote. A lot of people vote that way, and it is one of many reasons why we don't have real democracy in the US. Like you, I am also done voting for the lesser of two evils. When people vote for the lesser of two evils, they aren't really voting for a candidate at all; they are only voting against one. I think most of the many social and economic problems we have today are because for decades our country was run by the lesser of two evil instead of being run by someone who is competent enough to do the job. It seems like most Americans vote out of fear.

    Not voting for Hillary is the best way to express yourself politically this year (if you are a Bernie supporter). Some Bernie supporters will be voting Jill Stein with the Green party. It is not a waste of a vote; it is a political statement that will be heard loud and clear. In the general election, Hillary will be aware of the fact that many of Bernie's supporters do not think she is progressive enough. That will do two things: 1) push her further in a progressive direction, and 2) make her feel comfortable enough to implement progressive policies without fear that she is alienating too many voters.

    You can give Hillary permission to be the progressive president that she ought to be by not voting for her this year. She will win either way, but she will also have 2020 on her mind, and her approval rating, and Congressional midterm elections, etc. Your ballot is your chance to let her know where you want her to stand on the political spectrum for the next four years.

    Progressives generally do not have personality types that compete well in politics, and they need to learn how to be the squeaky wheel.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Well said Augustspies.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Today's conditions are the results of thirty years of voting for the lesser of two evils. The right has succeeded in coloring anything that a society should be in a negative. Worrying about facing the wrath of the right has developed career politicians that win by preaching compromise and concession. Everything good has been attacked from the right to the point that entitlements and rights are being diminished. Was Clinton's reform of the we'd are system a Democratic Victory. Bernie has to overcome as many democrats as republicans.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote: Yes I said so too; indeed it is a dishonest system; at least in Europe only the votes count; no delegates!!

    Europe is also a different continent that consists of 51 separate countries and 28 countries that make up the European Union.

    I would hardly say that Russia is an honest system and I would hardly say that Kazakhstan is either.

    There are seven monarchies currently in the EU and the vast majority of governments have a different official as their head of state.

    The United States is different because we have three different types of government--local, state, and federal. The vast majority of governing is done at the local and state level.

    Dutch Wrote:Here it is just Russian roulette and of course corrupt; Bernie should be nominated, not Hillary with the big money PAC's. It is time the people decide, not "delegates" . Right now it is the same as the "wheel of Fortune" who wins gets more and more; the runner-up's less and less. No, elections here are pure dishonest. In a lot of States the winner gets all the delegates, so you may as well not have voted for the runner up who gets nothing. You may as well appoint Bernie Maddov to run the show.

    The people are deciding. They show up to the caucuses and primaries, vote, and go home. Then whoever wins gets the delegates. It's as simple as that.

    The Republicans and Democrats have different rules. Republicans have "winner take all" primaries, but Democrats do not.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote:

    The people are deciding. They show up to the caucuses and primaries, vote, and go home. Then whoever wins gets the delegates. It's as simple as that.

    The Republicans and Democrats have different rules. Republicans have "winner take all" primaries, but Democrats do not.

    Jaredsxtn, you sound like an intelligent fellow but are you serious at this point in thinking there's no interference in elections? Voter suppression, computer hacking? Seriously? I really believe that at this point in time, elections are flipped the way the powerful choose. There's ample evidence of this over the last 16 years...not to mention historic elections like JFK's.
  • Center Left
    Independent
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Bernie Sanders candidacy has and will continue to make people question our Democracy. Whether he wins or loses he is making America think in a positive way and that is a victory in itself. I have given money to Bernie's campaign even though I have never donated money to a candidate before, because I believe we need a leader who is not scared of trying to reform our elections. We don't need the Electoral College anymore. How can we forget that we got one of the worst Presidents in the history of the United States because of them in 2000? Political Parties are not suppose to decide who runs or who does not. That is suppose to be the decision of the people alone. Nothing will get done in the next four years if we don't get campaign reform. The gridlock will continue no matter what party dominates the House and Senate. Nobody is willing to negotiate because they are too worried about what their big donors will think. I believe that our Democracy is at an important crossroads. If we don't take advantage of having a Presidential candidate who truly wants to help average Americans, things are going to get worse. The two main political parties will make certain that another Bernie Sanders can ever muster strong political support again. Both political parties are vulnerable right now. It's time to take America back with our votes and our voices.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Freedom Fighter - excellent post - agree with you. At this point though I want Sanders to win, I really feel he is teaching us or reminding us of things that are more important than simply "winning" to win. By his presence, and without ever making accusations, things are simply becoming more and more apparent - like "winning" to win is not only HRC's territory but the parties themselves. Win at any cost. The parties are clearly showing themselves -- through their respective "leadership" -- to be empty shells of either rhetoric, spin or hate speech.