Forum Thread

Why Bernie should not drop out

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 16 - 30 of 65 Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The whole primary process in this country is a joke. It's always been rigged but those already in power. There is no reason at all the parties should make any decisions on how primary elections should be financed or run. The federal government should control all aspects of presidential and congressional elections, including financing, voting qualifications, and eligibility of both candidates and voters.

    Our government and constitution needs to be thoroughly modernized and constantly updated to reflect the reality of life today.

    Personaly, I'm a supporter of a strong central government and against the foolishness of so called states rights. The state should only exist to carry out the laws and regulations of every citizen, not a bunch of self serving state legislator and pols only interested in feathering their own nests. It's insane that something can be a crime or illegal in one state and totally acceptable in another. Of course this totally goes against much of what allowed the states to become a country but we need to be a country first, state second and political party last.

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

    The whole primary process in this country is a joke. It's always been rigged but those already in power. There is no reason at all the parties should make any decisions on how primary elections should be financed or run. The federal government should control all aspects of presidential and congressional elections, including financing, voting qualifications, and eligibility of both candidates and voters.

    Our government and constitution needs to be thoroughly modernized and constantly updated to reflect the reality of life today.

    Personaly, I'm a supporter of a strong central government and against the foolishness of so called states rights. The state should only exist to carry out the laws and regulations of every citizen, not a bunch of self serving state legislator and pols only interested in feat hering their own nests. It's insane that something can be a crime or illegal in one state and totally acceptable in another. Of course this totally goes against much of what allowed the states to become a country but we need to be a country first, state second and political party last.

    No truer words spoken. And "foolishness of states rights" identifies the biggest handicap. The Senatorial representation shows how important "United We Stand" is to a society. States rights should be the authority to carry out the law of the land. The opposite of individualism is working together. The government should be the law that regulates competition to the betterment of the country not the individual.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Mcsweet Wrote:
    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.
    McSweet/Freedom Fighter; I'm glad you joined the discussion; until now I was attacked from all sides. You guys got the right idea. This country has been way too long playing the same game over the backs of people. at least finally we've got an candidate who speaks up and does not follow the same old doctrine. It is time this country enters the 21st century and stops catering to the rich as well stops their "policeman" role in the world by throwing bombs everywhere if we don't like something, like Bernie said. Lets fix things at home first and have "honest" elections for a change as a starting point.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I agree that elections in the US are interfered with so much that we would be lying if we used the word democracy to describe it. Today, Aljazeera ran an article about it titled What's Happening To American Democracy and the comments are exactly the same, people insisting that holding an election at all makes it a democratic society. China holds elections. North Korea holds elections. But that doesn't make them democracies. The American people are not well informed by their biased media sources. We have voter id laws that are designed to prevent certain groups of people from voting. We have two political parties whose candidates have the option of starting their campaigns with millions of dollars in publicly funded money, which is why third parties are nearly non-existent in the US. We have convoluted systems that gives reigning Democrats approximately 25% of the total number of delegates. The excuse they give for this is that they were elected in a previous election and therefore they should have the power to override the will of voters. They try to obscure that fact with legal rhetoric and political nonsense, but the simple fact is that this is not democracy, or anything similar to democracy. When Hillary gets a head start of at least 600 delegates, Bernie's campaign looks less legitimate before the campaign even begins. So he gets fewer donations and fewer votes. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy that he will lose, and it is all because of our delegate system, and it is horribly corrupt. Any American who thinks we have a more fair electoral system than China is ignoring a lot of facts in order to hold that opinion. I will never vote for another Democrat until they allow real democracy to take place in their corrupt party.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch Wrote:
    McSweet/Freedom Fighter; I'm glad you joined the discussion; until now I was attacked from all sides. You guys got the right idea. This country has been way too long playing the same game over the backs of people. at least finally we've got an candidate who speaks up and does not follow the same old doctrine. It is time this country enters the 21st century and stops catering to the rich as well stops their "policeman" role in the world by throwing bombs everywhere if we don't like something, like Bernie said. Lets fix things at home first and have "honest" elections for a change as a starting point.
    Hey Dutch -- got your back. Not voting for the lesser of 2 evils anymore: not even buying that. I'm no longer humoring ppl who *can't see* the nation's elections being stolen (in broad daylight) while they call me the "conspiracy theorist". That meme is so done. Thanks for being here brother.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I agree with you guys in spirit but please tell me how letting Trump, Cruz, or any other sleaseball Republican become president and be able to change the makeup of the Supremes, because Hillary is Republican lite, is going to move this country forward. Hillary sucks, for sure, but like it or not unless Bernie gets the nod, which is highly unlikely, she will have to do for the near future - let's get real here!
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    pr Wrote: I agree with you guys in spirit but please tell me how letting Trump, Cruz, or any other sleaseball Republican become president and be able to change the makeup of the Supremes, because Hillary is Republican lite, is going to move this country forward. Hillary sucks, for sure, but like it or not unless Bernie gets the nod, which is highly unlikely, she will have to do for the near future - let's get real here!
    What is the worst case scenario of Pres Trump vs Pres Hillary. The first Clinton is tied closely to the 2008 crash. Hillary isn't contradicting anything that set up the crash. Trump is WWIII. I would prefer Hillary with a caveat. I think the convention may provide it. Fact is that Bernie isn't creating a candidacy. He is representative of what is real but everybody is afraid to admit. There is nothing false about Bernie or his solution. Bernie is the first real Democratic candidate in a long time. The problem is people are afraid to challenge the years of right wing propaganda. The right wing has taught that abuse of the welfare system is reason to abolish welfare not make it a system that works. It could easily and profitably be a system that turns the left behind into contributing members of society. Bernie is too valuable and probably irreplaceable to be abandoned. 4 more years of abandoning the embarrassment won't make it go away. 4 more years of an unproductive but income producing stock market will bankrupt the country.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:
    pr Wrote: I agree with you guys in spirit but please tell me how letting Trump, Cruz, or any other sleaseball Republican become president and be able to change the makeup of the Supremes, because Hillary is Republican lite, is going to move this country forward. Hillary sucks, for sure, but like it or not unless Bernie gets the nod, which is highly unlikely, she will have to do for the near future - let's get real here!
    What is the worst case scenario of Pres Trump vs Pres Hillary. The first Clinton is tied closely to the 2008 crash. Hillary isn't contradicting anything that set up the crash. Trump is WWIII. I would prefer Hillary with a caveat. I think the convention may provide it. Fact is that Bernie isn't creating a candidacy. He is representative of what is real but everybody is afraid to admit. There is nothing false about Bernie or his solution. Bernie is the first real Democratic candidate in a long time. The problem is people are afraid to challenge the years of right wing propaganda. The right wing has taught that abuse of the welfare system is reason to abolish welfare not make it a system that works. It could easily and profitably be a system that turns the left behind into contributing members of society. Bernie is too valuable and probably irreplaceable to be abandoned. 4 more years of abandoning the embarrassment won't make it go away. 4 more years of an unproductive but income producing stock market will bankrupt the country.
    All you guys well said; but what is the solution? I guess it is way too late to turn the tide; Either Trump or Hillary, it will not improve this country. So we have to suffer another 4 years at least. But even then I wonder because "brains" are in short supply and the deficit will only grow the more wars we fight.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    In several of these posts, we seem to be ranting about how the party system is not representative of the voters. Just to be clear, the political parties can set whatever rules they want and run whatever candidates they want, or a candidate can run as an independent. We have 36 political parties that a person can join and run for office based on the values and policies that that party embraces. You can join the Libertarian Party or the Green Party or the Constitution Party or the Reform Party or the Communist Party or the Socialist Workers Party to name just a few. Whether you are a member of one of these minor parties or a member of the Democratic Party or Republican Party, it is the party members that set the rules for how they select candidates for elected offices. The federal government, the state and local governments do not interfere in that process of how the nominees are selected...they only set the rules for how the elections are run.

    Because the minor parties have such a poor chance of getting elected to national offices, many people choose to associate themselves with one of the major parties. However, in joining that party, an individual is agreeing to abide by the rules of that party and to support the party's platform. So who sets the rules and who writes the platform? The party members. As a former Democratic Party precinct chair, we gathered and voted on resolutions at our neighborhood precinct meetings. Those resolutions were then passed upwards to the county assembly. As a delegate to the county assembly I then voted on some 100 proposed resolutions submitted by other precincts. A Platform Committee elected by the members attending that assembly then takes all those votes on the resolutions and consolidates them into a proposed Party Platform at the state level. Further consolidation and final voting takes place at the State Convention. The state party platforms are consolidated into the national party platform. You can read the Colorado Democratic Party Platform online. It is what we stand for. I contributed to it and I endorse it. Other states will have variations of it with different emphasis.

    Does every party member agree to every policy statement in my party platform? Probably not, but anyone running for office under the banner of the party's name cannot disassociate himself or herself from that platform. It's basis is as grass roots as you can get...neighborhood precincts. Similarly, the Rules Committee starts with electing members from the delegates attending the county assemblies. It is member driven...not back room party boss driven. There is a reason that the Democratic Party has Super Delegates. It's because the members decided to allocate a portion of the delegates to Super Delegates after the fiasco of the 1968 Convention . The purpose was "to make the composition of the convention less subject to control by party leaders and more responsive to the votes cast during the campaign for the nomination."

    Both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have different factions or special interests within the party. You can read about them at these links. The Democratic Party, for example, has a liberal wing, a progressive wing, a centrist wing, a conservative wing, and a libertarian wing. In addition, the party's voter base has several groupings of minorities that choose to associate themselves with the party. But by being a party member, they have all agreed to support the party platform.

    Now the Bernie Sanders supporters are crying foul. They don't like the concept of Super Delegates, or rather they don't like the fact that the vast majority have chosen to support Hillary Clinton rather than Bernie Sanders. Hillary Clinton's proposals are much closer to the grass roots driven Party Platform that she embraces. As a member of the Democratic Party since 1968, no doubt she contributed to the writing of the platform and its evolution over time. Bernie Sanders on the other hand, was never been a member of the Democratic Party until 2015. In his early years in Vermont he ran as a true socialist on one of their socialist party platforms, but later just run for office as an independent. While he caucuses with the Democrats in Congress, he has maintained his "independence" and has been highly critical of Democrats and President Obama. I listened to him on the Ed Schultz radio show time and again criticize President Obama on a whole host of issues. When callers would call in and push back on him, he invoked the "I am an independent" so I can speak my mind. He was not beholden to the Democratic Party Platform.

    Now Bernie Sanders supporters are positioned to do to the Democratic Party what the Tea Party did to the Republican Party in 2010. They participated in the 2016 caucuses at the grass roots level and elected their members to the county assemblies. From those venues, they can elect their members to the various rules committees and therefore rewrite the party rules. If those newly elected members choose to change the rules and do away with Super Delegates, then that is their right. We would expect to see that change following the 2016 Democratic Party Convention in Cleveland, but they cannot change the rules in the middle of he game. That's the way democracy works in the Democratic Party. I cannot speak for the Republican Party.

    But let me make a final point. The platform that Bernie Sanders is running on is far left of the official grass roots Democratic Party platform. It is even to the left of the factional Congressional Progressive Caucus platform within the Democratic Party. His "political revolution" thus far is a one person "Democratic Socialist" platform not endorsed by any mainstream party members. He may well be successful in changing the Democratic Party Platform and the Rules of the party, but there is a process for that. Having his supporters holding up signs denouncing the party's rules is not the way it works.

    If Sanders doesn't like the rules of the party that he agreed to, then he should have run as an independent. Bad mouthing the party of which he chose to join does not get him the votes of the party's Super Delegates. It doesn't work that way in real life...only in Bernie's socialist mind.

    So all those members here who are bitching about the "undemocratic processes" of the Democratic Party, do what I did and become a part of the solution rather than a part of the problem. Participate in your party's functions and volunteer at the precinct level like I do. Canvass neighborhoods to support your candidate. Get off your asses and do something other than standing on the sidelines and catcall those who are busting their asses to make our democracy more fair. If you do not have time to participate in our democracy, I don't give a shit about your bitching about my party. It's not Bernie's party yet. He hasn't earned it. If you want to make it Bernie's party, then it requires hard work, not sitting at your computer and bitching.

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

    In several of these posts, we seem to be ranting about how the party system is not representative of the voters. Just to be clear, the political parties can set whatever rules they want and run whatever candidates they want, or a candidate can run as an independent. We have 36 political parties that a person can join and run for office based on the values and policies that that party embraces. You can join the Libertarian Party or the Green Party or the Constitution Party or the Reform Party or the Communist Party or the Socialist Workers Party to name just a few. Whether you are a member of one of these minor parties or a member of the Democratic Party or Republican Party, it is the party members that set the rules for how they select candidates for elected offices. The federal government, the state and local governments do not interfere in that process of how the nominees are selected...they only set the rules for how the elections are run.

    Because the minor parties have such a poor chance of getting elected to national offices, many people choose to associate themselves with one of the major parties. However, in joining that party, an individual is agreeing to abide by the rules of that party and to support the party's platform. So who sets the rules and who writes the platform? The party members. As a former Democratic Party precinct chair, we gathered and voted on resolutions at our neighborhood precinct meetings. Those resolutions were then passed upwards to the county assembly. As a delegate to the county assembly I then voted on some 100 proposed resolutions submitted by other precincts. A Platform Committee elected by the members attending that assembly then takes all those votes on the resolutions and consolidates them into a proposed Party Platform at the state level. Further consolidation and final voting takes place at the State Convention. The state party platforms are consolidated into the national party platform. You can read the Colorado Democratic Party Platform online. It is what we stand for. I contributed to it and I endorse it. Other states will have variations of it with different emphasis.

    Does every party member agree to every policy statement in my party platform? Probably not, but anyone running for office under the banner of the party's name cannot disassociate himself or herself from that platform. It's basis is as grass roots as you can get...neighborhood precincts. Similarly, the Rules Committee starts with electing members from the delegates attending the county assemblies. It is member driven...not back room party boss driven. There is a reason that the Democratic Party has Super Delegates. It's because the members decided to allocate a portion of the delegates to Super Delegates after the fiasco of the 1968 Convention . The purpose was "to make the composition of the convention less subject to control by party leaders and more responsive to the votes cast during the campaign for the nomination."

    Both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have different factions or special interests within the party. You can read about them at these links. The Democratic Party, for example, has a liberal wing, a progressive wing, a centrist wing, a conservative wing, and a libertarian wing. In addition, the party's voter base has several groupings of minorities that choose to associate themselves with the party. But by being a party member, they have all agreed to support the party platform.

    Now the Bernie Sanders supporters are crying foul. They don't like the concept of Super Delegates, or rather they don't like the fact that the vast majority have chosen to support Hillary Clinton rather than Bernie Sanders. Hillary Clinton's proposals are much closer to the grass roots driven Party Platform that she embraces. As a member of the Democratic Party since 1968, no doubt she contributed to the writing of the platform and its evolution over time. Bernie Sanders on the other hand, was never been a member of the Democratic Party until 2015. In his early years in Vermont he ran as a true socialist on one of their socialist party platforms, but later just run for office as an independent. While he caucuses with the Democrats in Congress, he has maintained his "independence" and has been highly critical of Democrats and President Obama. I listened to him on the Ed Schultz radio show time and again criticize President Obama on a whole host of issues. When callers would call in and push back on him, he invoked the "I am an independent" so I can speak my mind. He was not beholden to the Democratic Party Platform.

    Now Bernie Sanders supporters are positioned to do to the Democratic Party what the Tea Party did to the Republican Party in 2010. They participated in the 2016 caucuses at the grass roots level and elected their members to the county assemblies. From those venues, they can elect their members to the various rules committees and therefore rewrite the party rules. If those newly elected members choose to change the rules and do away with Super Delegates, then that is their right. We would expect to see that change following the 2016 Democratic Party Convention in Cleveland, but they cannot change the rules in the middle of he game. That's the way democracy works in the Democratic Party. I cannot speak for the Republican Party.

    But let me make a final point. The platform that Bernie Sanders is running on is far left of the official grass roots Democratic Party platform. It is even to the left of the factional Congressional Progressive Caucus platform within the Democratic Party. His "political revolution" thus far is a one person "Democratic Socialist" platform not endorsed by any mainstream party members. He may well be successful in changing the Democratic Party Platform and the Rules of the party, but there is a process for that. Having his supporters holding up signs denouncing the party's rules is not the way it works.

    If Sanders doesn't like the rules of the party that he agreed to, then he should have run as an independent. Bad mouthing the party of which he chose to join does not get him the votes of the party's Super Delegates. It doesn't work that way in real life...only in Bernie's socialist mind.

    So all those members here who are bitching about the "undemocratic processes" of the Democratic Party, do what I did and become a part of the solution rather than a part of the problem. Participate in your party's functions and volunteer at the precinct level like I do. Canvass neighborhoods to support your candidate. Get off your asses and do something other than standing on the sidelines and catcall those who are busting their asses to make our democracy more fair. If you do not have time to participate in our democracy, I don't give a shit about your bitching about my party. It's not Bernie's party yet. He hasn't earned it. If you want to make it Bernie's party, then it requires hard work, not sitting at your computer and bitching.

    Schmidt; what you describe is a "process", I don't care about an "process". A leader of this country should never be a "process" oriented person. That is not on how the world works. It should be an individual who's got "brains" and be educated about the world and everything what makes it work and livable. As I said to Jared, "book" knowledge or "island" mentality is not enough to be a leader, who has plenty of people around him, to advise him on the "rules"; more lawyers than churches here. So a person in that position should have the qualities to be able to maneuver through all these "rules" and make the best of it. Regardless of what you state; the election "process" here is corrupt; only votes should count, not delegates.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dutch -- What is wrong with having a process of party rules? How do the various parties in the Dutch or British or Canadian parties choose they candidates to represent their party in the elections? You can't tell me that they don't have process rules in how or who they select their party. What I described is the Democratic Party process, which is what people on this website are complaining about. I would guess that if I were to look at the various parties that comprise the Dutch government I would find similar processes that have been agreed to by the party members. The Parliamentary system is no better than the American party system in that regard. Where our system has failed us is that not enough people participate in our government. It is the people that don't vote that I have the most contempt for. It is the citizens of this great country that don't educate themselves on how our government and democracy work and don't vote, or vote stupidly, that undermine our system of government. We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    SUPERDELEGATES DID NOT come about as a result of the 1968 convention. They were established in the early 80s after the slaughter of Carter and Mondale.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    Now the Bernie Sanders supporters are crying foul. They don't like the concept of Super Delegates, or rather they don't like the fact that the vast majority have chosen to support Hillary Clinton rather than Bernie Sanders.

    You're painting his supporters with a very broad brush here. I've encountered younger supporters who don't understand how the Democratic party functions with regard to putting your time in stumping for candidates, raising money, and generally playing ball. I've patiently explained to them that Bernie switched parties to run in the race and so in many ways his crusade is symbolic and there to raise awareness: you don't magically become a Democrat to run for President. Once they are better informed about how the party works, they often still balk at the idea of superdelegates, and that's their perogative -- they're free to join another party. That said, what many of us including myself (a lifelong Dem like my parents before me, until Bill Clinton came along...) object to is the voter suppression that's going on -- Arizona only being the most visible, to the vacuous prescence of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and HRC's innocuously "Scripted" presentation (ie: A real plan to dismantle ISIS being the latest). I'm sorry Sanders is shaking things up with his generally more authentic approach, but I've not seen him even so much as request a recount in MO, which was certainly more than warranted and most ppl would have jumped on. He's a decent fellow.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The big problem is we really only have two parties and they both suck. I always vote for the Democrats because the Republicans are simply nuts but the Democrats are nothing to brag about either. I'm registered as " unenrolled" in NH and I certainly don't consider myself a Democrat. There is NO party out there that fits my beliefs but Bernie comes pretty close!
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Mcsweet Wrote: SUPERDELEGATES DID NOT come about as a result of the 1968 convention. They were established in the early 80s after the slaughter of Carter and Mondale.
    Mcsweet -- I stand corrected. You are right. After the 1968 Convention the McGovern-Fraser Commission made several recommendations that were implemented but were later found to have problems. The later Hunt Commission in 1982 was responsible for the implementation of Super Delegates. The 1984 election was the first to use Super Delegates. Today the super delegates make up about 20 percent of the delegates and include distinguished party leaders and all Democratic members of the House and Senate and sitting Democratic governors.