Nobody “mocked” Bernie Sanders. We believed, and I still do, that he couldn’t win a presidential election and wouldn’t be a an effective president if he did. It takes more, a lot more, than good ideas to succeed as president.
We need good people like Bernie and AOC and Elizabeth Warren and Chris Murphy et al in Congress. Remember Congress? That’s what the framers intended to be the seat of government power. Republicans have ceded that power to the Musk/Trump junta. Bernie Sanders is much more effective bringing his ideas, most of which I heartily agree with, directly to the voters, all of whom will be mightily motivated to get to the polls in the upcoming congressional midterm elections in 2026. Maybe then we can begin to move political power back where it belongs; in Congress.
I didn’t intend to be so long-winded. I love Bernie Sanders; now more than ever. I would never mock him.
I do hope Bernie and AOC et alii can bring out more of the voters who are becoming more and more dissatisfied with the election result, and more of the voters who thought their votes would not count. If we get enough people out in the streets, perhaps the Republicans (who have the power not just to do the job of Congress, but to impeach and convict the menace) will recognize their responsibility. But I won't bet lunch on it happening before the critical mass is reached and the war starts.
AOC is really appealing to the average Joe, using her own lived experience as a waitress and cleaner to get her through school, not to mention her struggles as a Latino woman. The turnout to these rallies is very hopeful.
Good bartenders (AOC) pay attention to patrons, and learn a lot. Poor bartenders (Schumer) ignore their patrons (constituents)) and then wonder why they aren't getting tips (votes).
One might argue that growing up in a castle with a golden spoon is not great preparation for understanding and resonating with the struggles of common folk. It does not entirely rule it out, but it seems a whole lot less likely.
“Homeless is a misnomer. It implies that someone got a little bit behind on their mortgage, and if you just gave them a job, they’d be back on their feet,” he told former Fox News personality Tucker Carlson in October. “What you actually have are violent drug zombies with dead eyes, and needles and human feces on the street.” - Elon Musk
“The more homeless there are, the more money these organizations get, so their incentive is to increase, not decrease, homelessness!” -Elon Musk
She is bright and articulate. But don't underestimate Jeffries. Remember, slow talking John Lewis? I won't comment on Schumer. But he does bring in the money. And money, as everyone is learning, is the "milk" of politics.
Money is what is destroying our country right now! Bernie and AOC are right. We need to have public funding of campaigns and the campaign season should be much shorter like they do in the UK. This constant horse race bullshit is exhausting and a waste of money. There should not be of any campaigning allowed until three months before an election And only publicly financed. All the corruption we’re seeing right now is because of that disgusting citizens united Bill that the criminals at the Supreme Court passed.
And with a shorter campaign season, they'd be forced to actually articulate policy with details, evidence and data, instead of disordered ramblings, superficial charm and displaying narcissism in moderation.
Would that be 3 months before the Primaries? I agree that we subjected to too much campaigning. Now the campaign begins immediately after the victory is confirmed. I would like to see more discussion about this idea.
Exactly, that’s right. I lived in Germany and, indeed, for a few weeks before the national elections, there were campaign signs everywhere, and then the election came and went, and it was all over. The whole Spiel was so much simpler and money and corruption were mostly kept out of the process. The way it’s done here is totally exhausting and by now pretty rife with corruption, unfortunately, it seems.
"Everybody wants to be on all the committees, so you have your staffs doing all the work, because you can't keep up. But the main culprit, the cancer on the body politic, is money: Money,money, money. When I ran 6 years ago, in 1998, I raised $8.5 million. That $8.5 million is $30,000 a week, every week, for 6 years. If you miss Christmas week, you miss New Years week, you are $100,000 in the hole and don't you think we don't know it and we start to work harder at raising money.
As a result, the Senate doesn't work on Mondays and Fridays. We have longer holidays. The policy committee is adjourned and we go over to the campaign building because you can't call for money in the office. So we go over to the building and call for money and obviously we only can give attention to that. We don't have time for each other. We don't have time for constituents, except for the givers." - Fritz Hollings
Criminal whose appointment was shepherded by those who weld enormous wealth. The constitutional grounds for buying elections and legislation alleged to be universal guarantees of free speech; the more you can pay the more free speech you get. Too bad if you can't afford it.
Hakeem Jeffries is a fine person. He is, however, ill suited for this moment. There is little fire and he has failed to pull his coalition together. Auction paddles at SOTU? Embarrassing.
Agreed, Barbara. Although I didn't watch it, I think the Dem seats in the chamber should have either been filled with a rousing chorus shouting "Lies!" at every opportunity, or left empty if they couldn't bring themselves to it. Their silence (for nearly 100% of the party) is deafening.
lauriemcf, I agree that AOC is an outstanding spokesperson for her party and is deeply motivated to be a true public servant. But I can't agree with your assessment of Jeffries. He is articulate, but does not have the "firebrand" persona. That doesn't make him a poor communicator. He appeals to a different type of audience.
More importantly, being an effective leader of legislators doesn't involve dazzling speaking skills. It requires the ability to corral and motivate a bunch of people with differing priorities and sidestep the landmines set by the opposing party. Nancy Pelosi wasn't a scintillating public speaker, but she "got shit done." Jeffries has that potential, if he ever gets the chance.
Laurie, I love AOC, hope she primaries Schumer. Her communication skills are very effective at reaching up and down the social strata. Jeffries' oratorical skills are nearly like those of a rapper minister, but I haven't heard much from him lately. Someone should do a wellness check on the Dem leadership.
lauriemcf -- IMO, AOC is indeed really bright, and she's a woman. I'm also a huge fan of Hakeem Jeffries, who I experience as [also] highly articulate and otherwise hard to characterize. Sen. Schumer is another story.
Yes Kazz. AOC worked her way through school. She graduated cum laude from Boston University in 2011 with a bachelor's degree in international relations and economics. Keep that 2nd sentence in mind when describing her. She's a hard and very smart worker.
I agree she is a great rallying point. But be careful not to delude yourself into thinking that kind of backing translates into electability across this wide diverse nation. We aren't there yet. Sad but true.
True Jon, but there are over 100,000 elections taking place in the US this year. They are all at the local or state level. Most people hate their Republican representatives at this point. So we need the agitators out there like Bernie and AOC.
And we need to chastise Trump for not doing any rallies. At this point what is he going to say. "It's working. Project 2025 is falling into place. If only we can impeach all of the anti-Trump judges it will be smooth sailing for ending elections forever in the US."
He will only have carefully stage managed events likely with a portion of his audience vetted to ensure a big, enthusiastic reception.
Consider, too, that Trump believes he no longer has to pay much attention to his MAGA fans. As long as he can show videos of alleged criminals being deported they are happy.
I just checked that AOC was born in NYC and is 35 years old, therefore eligible for presidency (unlike de facto president Musk). Whether she would be a good candidate or good president, don't know, but certainly very promising.
Yes, promising, but not now. Democrats need to focus now on winning. If that requires a moderate white male nominee for president, so be it. Unelected people don't have much power -- unless they're Elon Musk and the prez is Donald Trump.
Actually I think a more mainstream (ie white) candidate might have helped in 2024, but more importantly someone not tied to Biden. There are a lot of "if onlys" from 2024. I always thought the best candidate would have been Gretchen Whitmer but once Biden resisted getting out of the race immediately (as he should have in early 2024) the damage was probably done.
I’m starting to think this whole shit show had to play out to make much needed change. To get not only Americans, but the whole global community to wake the f**ck up to oligarchical authoritarianism and realise ‘power of the people’.
Unless and until millions of American misogynists die off, she couldn't be elected to the White House, no matter how "ready" she might be. Maybe in 50 years. Maybe.
Ain't holding my breath. If the resumes of Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris were not enough to get elected against the bloviating diaper wearer, we are a llooooonnnnnggg way off.
Spot on, Ally. My feeling as well. But as I've said many times before, I think it's going to take a worldful of hurt among our population before a majority of survivors awake from the near-fatal fever of maga-ism and begin to restore the country to the progressive path of democracy. And that's sad.
But Kazz, are they listening to that song on their way to and from work, or are they listening to right wing talk radio? (I'm referring generally to the younger males in our population.) I fear the propagation of right wing blather in workplace conversations, while fewer are talking about the policies that are now destroying their lives as well as those of the rest of us.
You’re right Doug, this is where the trade unions need to get on board. To raise awareness around job insecurity and sub-par working conditions from DEI culls and the inevitable trump recession rearing it’s head.
I love Bernie, but AOC’s charm is lost on me. I find her embarrassing. Regardless of personal reactions, surely one of the lessons we should have learned is that at least half the country is not ready for progressive policies, more if you include large numbers of Democrats. That may be lamentable, but if there is a hope of returning to sound, long-term environmental, foreign policy and social policies the Democratic party has to appeal to a wide range of voters.
I attended a talk by Jefferson Cowie this week, with my book club on his book Freedom's Dominion. He is saying that for someone to win they need to have a populist agenda. Here is a piece I wrote about it.
"Politics needs to reflect the will of the people." That's it in a nutshell. Thank you, Linda. That is what democracy is.
I especially like your last paragraph: "In order for them to trust the party, people need to hear that the Democratic party is more concerned about people having food on their table and being able to pay their bills than whether they are saying the correct things all the time. I think a piece that Cowie did not mention, but is critical, is to take on campaign finance reform. For the Democratic party to transform, Democrats need to listen to people and figure out how to address their problems. Whether or not the party heeds Cowie's advice and turns to a populist message, the party must rethink what it stands for and what it can do for people."
Anne's comment is spot on. Democrats need to focus on kitchen-table issues -- getting jobs, paying for food and buying houses, as examples. The other issues are legitimate but focus on a tiny portion of the populace. Paying for food, etc., is a critical issue for all people, straight or gay, male or female.
I have seen only slight evidence of that yet. The entire GOP in Congress is still wrapped up in the victory. There are a few chinks in the armor starting to show but I think we are in for a fairly long row to hoe before we get there.
Yesterday Heather documented that Mike Turner (R.AL) and Roger Wicker (R. MS) complained about National Security. Lots more have called Trump a liar on Putin/Ukraine. I published the letter I got from Rick Scott. Thom Tillis. Murkowski. Many more.
They are still Republicans. The main issue is National Security. Jerry Weiss has identified a number fof candidates and we have 3 Cuban American MAGATs here who have recently discovered they are DEI and many of their donors and consituents are upset. We have more Canadians here that some Canadian provinces -- most with dual citizenship.
Hoefully behind the scenes there is discussion about shared government. Only takes 3 in the House. Hakim Jeffries can offer chairmanships of key committees to Republicans.
I think that could happen someday but not yet. Politics is all about timing and while this is a terrible time for us all, I think it is premature to expect a serious turnabout even in the House. Trump needs to do something REALLY egregious (as if what he had done so far isn't enough, but I think it isn't). If he seriously capitulates on Ukraine to Russia that might be enough (how could even "little" Marco go along with that?) That might be the turning point for the staunchest be line GOP, enough to retake the House maybe even the Senate
But so far Trump has been skating a fine line. Not totally giving in to Putin but keeping Zelenskyy on guard. What he isn't reckoning with is that NATO and Europe are getting tired of the Trump nonsense and may just dump the him.
You must not know many Republicans. Anything for power. A chairmanship is mighty appetising.
Little Marco is the automoton of Norman Braman. He is also funded by CANF -- and they are having an attitude adjustment. They discovered they are DEI and reject alliance as an ally of Cuban Communism.
One of our local House MAGATS was a Dem mayor until 2020. Was an HRC supporter in 2016.
I listed those who say they want to work with Democrats below.
Journalist Cathy Young writes on The Bulwark about Ukraine. Poll numbers say that 60% of Americans distrust Putin and support Ukraine, she reports. This is a great subject to keep in the spotlight. My representatives are all Republican, and at least two of the three have publicly supported Ukraine. I call and thank them. The third - I just ask him to support Ukraine.
A year ago I visited Charleston, SC, bastion of Republicanism. Throughout the old French Quarter, there were Ukraine flags flying outside of homes and commercial buildings. I think MAGAts need reminding that Russia is the enemy, not Ukraine.
Thom Tillis is my Senator, and I call him every day at 2 offices to thank him for his public support for Ukraine. I think good self-care is the first priority and calls to our representatives is the next.
I agree, and I've said this before, but I think Bernie has always known that he can't win a presidential election. But Bernie is a smart guy, and he knows how to make himself heard. I reiterate.......no one has moved the political rhetoric more in the last 10 years than Bernie Sanders. He is brilliant, and passionate. Love the guy.
Bob, Yes, Bernie is a smart guy but he showed poor leadership after Hillary beat him in the 2016 primaries. My fellow Wisconsin Democrats have not forgotten how his followers acted at the national DEM convention and certainly haven’t forgotten how a shocking number of his followers (“Bernie Bros”) stayed home and refuse to vote for Hillary — allowing Trump to win our state in 2016.
I suppose that's true, but he's not a democrat. I'm not aware of how he, personally, acted. I've never seen anything from him that I thought was inappropriate. As for the "Bernie Bros", they are free to do whatever they like, and after all, we were all "sure" that Hillary was going to win. Not to belabor the point, but there were rumors of shenanigans from the Clinton campaign to discredit Bernie as well.
Hillary's assumption that she was entitled to be president and would of course win was a major problem. Plus, she's a lousy campaigner, the polar opposite of her husband.
What specifically is that shocking number and who recorded it?
I know that there are always some that only see the small picture, but how representative are they of a whole campaign? I was a Sanders alternate delegate and I supported and voted for Hillary Clinton once she was the nominee, despite having gripes about Sander's treatment, which I could detail. It seems to me that Sanders and so far as I know, the preponderance of his following, helps, not hurts the Democrats agendas, at least over all.
Great post Ralph. I too love Bernie and AOC but I also agree that Bernie could never be elected. He is to be fair "an old commie jew" ( as am I by the way and proud of it!) But sadly in this country that makes him virtually unelectable nationwide as a President no matter how great he might turn out.
And as I have said before AOC is simply not mature enough as a leader to be a president. I am not sure she could be elected Senator in her home state of New York. Maybe in 6-8 years, yes. But not yet.
All that said they are great legislators and advocates for our cause and I continue to support them both in their efforts to shine the light on the Trump terror emanating from DC.
I would TOO of course but it's also necessary to face the political realities in NY (and anywhere). New York is really two completely different places: NYC and New York state (and part of NYC, i.e., Staten Island doesn't really count!)
AOC could easily get elected Senator from NYC but unfortunately there is the pesky reality that NYC doesn't get their own Senator. And she is at best a 50-50 shot at getting elected Senator in NY State possibly less than that.
There are other states where getting elected to Congress in a major district would practically pave the road for you to the Senate but unfortunately NY is NOT one of those states.
Someday I think she will make it and maybe even the White House but sadly not this decade. And I want her to hold her Congressional seat and not sacrifice it like California's Katie porter did when she took on Adam Schiff for Senator. That was a tragic House loss for the Democrats. And the same problem too.
Schiff had 20 years in Congress and Porter, a bright progressive woman had only 2 terms. Anyone with any sense could see that she was heading uphill. It's one thing to go uphill against a monster but Schiff was a liberal hero.
Katie had no chance and I fear AOC needs more time to be ready to fight for av Senate seat let alone the Presidency no matter how much she could handle it. We allk know Harris would have made a terrific President but she had to win first.
I do use care. It is a common expression and MOST people understand that it is an expression of speech not to be taken literally. It means "most of us should know".
But my apologies I will try to be more careful. It is funny that you picked out almost the very last thing I wrote in a relatively long comment so can we agree that most of what I wrote is good?
Dude, get over yourself. Did you see the quote marks around the expression "old commie Jew"? It is NOT a literal statement of fact, it is a representation of what the opposition thinks of him.
THIS o them he is OLD (totally true), he is Jewish (also totally true) and a "commie" in the same way that 1950s Joe Mc Carathy supporters called ANYONE who was to the left of Attilla the Hun a "commie".
The point is that Bernie, whatever you call him, is WAY to the left of mainstream America. He never had any real serious chance of being elected President and he stillo doesn't. If we couldn't get Harris elected, Bernie isn't even on the road map.
But I LOVE the guy and I hope he keeps doing what he is doing because it is a rallying point for the people. And we need that right now.
Just don't get confused between someone who can help us win and someone who can win himself. He is the former, not the latter.
Apologies, I was reminded of when, during the 2015 primary race, my right-wing brother-in-law asked me if Bernie Sanders is the same kind of communist as Hitler. I guess I'm just sensitive to feeding the right-wing propensity to label every liberal as a communist. My experience with right-wingers is that most of them don't know the difference between a communist and a fascist. They don't realize that they are now fascists.
Well said MS. Furthermore and a thing that unfairly bias' some people is that even if he were a raging communist, we have two other branches and the constitution to tame any wayward policy leanings by only the executive branch. Congress makes all law, departments, etc., in harmony with the constitution - if not, the judiciary steps on it.
"Even if he were a raging communist, we have two other branches of government... to take any wayward policy leanings."
I am assuming this was an attempt at political humor, right? Be cause if you were serious, have you noticed how effective those other two branches are right now when we need them? The judiciary is trying but Congress is totally under the thumb of Trump.
The Democrats made a huge mistake by not allowing a chance Bernie to get on the ticket. I know he has been an independent and not a Democrat, but people were excited about him. He has ideas. I think he would be an effective leader. I mean, let’s face it, Obama, charismatic and intelligent and graceful as he is Was behind the learning curve when he took office. And look how he compromised with the Republicans immediately that was not exactly a wise strategy. So I think the Democrats really screwed up back in 2016 and here we are…
Terry: the *Dems* screwed up in 2016? No, I believe we ran the right candidate. I know it's all woulda coulda shoulda, but let's blame Comey for his public announcement that the FBI was reopening the email investigation, what, a week or 2 before the election? And let's also remember that she won the popular vote, in spite of that.
I think you have forgotten who ran in and who won the 2016 election. Sanders never ran against Obama in primaries; that was Clinton and it was 2008. It was likewise Clinton who was the nominee in 2016. Furthermore, much as Sanders has very good ideas, he’s not even an effective Senator. Of all the 421 bills he has sponsored, only 3 have become law. I don’t know how anyone could think he would be an effective president, despite his ideas, given his performance as a senator. I think he’s doing a great job as our moral compass and teaming up with AOC is wonderful. This is where he is at his most effective.
In an election between far-right (Agent Orange) and far-left (Bernie) I bet a lot of voters would swing left. The people who really hate Bernie are the billionaires on both sides of the aisle. But his message and his crowds would have defeated both Hillary (who would have made a fantastic president) and Orange.
Many democracies have more than 2 parties and some have coalition governments. A third party could be a path to an effective government. I know I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one...
I have very mixed feelings about a third party or having parties at all, at least the way we do them. Canada has more than one party and got stuck with Republican-like Stephen Harper for nine years. Dunno if it's true, but my politically plugged in Canadian son-in-law claims that the majority of Canadians disliked Harper, but because they could not come together to oppose him, he stayed a long time. I recall that Harper really loathed environmental protection.
Dream on! It's one way to attack our political nightmare, but until we eliminate money in our elections, the oligarchs will cling to the current two-party system. Money is unable to feel compassion or seek justice. "Citizens United" is really "End Democracy Now".
I think it is clear that having a hell of a lot of money in this country allows one to veto the will of a whole lot of people. I have thought of this every time the MSM says that a popular policy is blocked (with seemingly no chance of advancing) by a "powerful lobby". Musk did not invent Tesla. He took it over because he has a whole lot of money.
The kids (youth) certainly seemed to like him. They were all kinds of PO'd when it was intimated that the dem party pulled one over on him. And yet, he sticks with and votes with them. Gotta' love that.
Ralph, agreed about Bernie & AOC, however, we HAD excellent candidates in Harris/Walz whom we let slip through the cracks of a VERY suspect election with all 7 swing states showing dramatic similarities in their statistical "winning margins” all with just enough of a margin to avoid recounts and all with dramatic down-ballot “drop-off” showing only the Republican presidential candidate winning with remaining candidates for other offices from the Democrats winning.
Millions really did vote for Trump/Vance. In a nation of rational, knowledgeable citizens neither one of those two would be elected dog catcher. We live in a nation where a large plurality of voters have willingly let themselves be turned into political idiots. Turning back that tide is going to be tough, painful, and maybe bloody.
The masculinity and misogyny has turned young men into whining fools because they don’t want to work hard, can’t seem to have relationships with women so ran to vote for the rapists and his sidekick who denigrates women every chance he gets. Even Musk can’t maintain a relationship and has somehow managed to father 13+ children. How many abortions and unknown little Musks are out there.
Thank goodness my grandson learned respect at home.
Ralph, ‘twould seem “we” need to get as effective as the Republicans at using/diverting the legal process, the machinery of voting, gerrymandering and countering voter suppression. "They” have mastered these tools since at least Bush V Gore in 2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore
Jonathan, let's hope we survive the next 20 months until the 2026 election, and 2 years after that one before speculating about 2036. But if we do, and she runs, I hope I'm still around to vote for her.
Some of us weren't wild about his tolerance of misogyny either, but he did get better after 2016 -- probably thanks in large part to his female supporters like AOC.
Ralph, I agree with much that Bernie has advocated for a very long time. And i agree that he is very effective on the stump speaking to voters. I also am a pragmatic person and I know that progress in our system can be very slow which is why I have sometimes held my nose to vote for certain Ds because their R counterparts were/are much worse. I hope that somehow we can right the ship despite death star and muskrat making huge holes in it and loading it with rocks. I am truly surprised at some of the R statements around Social Security especially when they come out of the mouth of a billionaire. For the first time I wanted to know if my SS check had been deposited. We also got our federal tax return check.
One thing that I deeply appreciate about Bernie besides his guts, is that he never wavers. He is on the side he's on without reservation and hasn't changed.
And if they they hold their rallies on a slow news day, ABC, NBC, CBS, NYTimes, The WAPO, might do a two minute story buried in their newscasts/papers somewhere.
Ralph, I’m not trying to be oppositional, I’m just concerned about the integrity of the election in 2026. Please tell me I’ just overreacting to the voter suppression. Does anyone else feel the same? I really could use some hope. Can we overturn this mess? I live in deeply red and gerrymandered Florida. I don’t want to discuss SS. Like most retired Americans, I worked all my life and saved, my husband and I count on it to pay the bills.
Phyllis, I share your concerns about the legitimacy of the 2026 elections. We can hope that there are enough votes for Democratic candidates to overcome Republican shenanigans.
Many self-identified Democrats have, even blaming him for Hillary Clinton's loss. Hillary herself criticized Bernie's position on campaign spending. I don't know if Bernie could have handled the presidency of not. I don't think anyone can, and do a good job of it without enough of the public essentially on board, and at least in the primary, Sanders was puling some good numbers. His great nemesis was the "Superdelegates"; but had he succeeded in being elected could he been an effective leader? I can't say for sure either way. I'm not always on the same page with him, but I think he has some clarity. Whatever the case, I have observed the influence of the Democratic Party sliding for decades, and believed that there was more that could be done about it. If you keep losing ground you would surely be wise to examine your strategy.
The warping of society and the democratic process by very big money is a very big deal, and by now, it isn't subtle. Sen. Hollings let the cat out of the bag long ago, but that was in the news for like a day:
"But the main culprit, the cancer on the body politic, is money: Money, money, money... We don't have time for each other. We don't have time for constituents, except for the givers. Somebody ought to tell the truth about that."
Spot on JL. It's the money; it's corrupted a percentage within the dem party, without a doubt. I think that is part of the reason for so much inaction by them. I also think the gop is holding some truths above their heads, such as 'who' dipped into the SS Trust, and who approved of costly overseas wars. And more; more that is specific and personal, so their re-election would be at stake.
Bernie was sabotaged by the Dem party leadership. Bernie has given talks at conservative gatherings where he was applauded. What he speaks of are basic universal goals of ordinary people. All of his points are in use in countries today and some have been in practice in the US before.
"Bernie was sabotaged by the Dem party leadership."
You make it appear as if Sanders was a lifelong Democrat. He wasn't. He remained aloof and apart from the party until he used the Democratic Party as a useful stepping stone. The Democratic Party owed him nothing, but still they welcomed him in. Maybe if he had paid half the party dues Clinton had paid her whole career, the Dems might have been more helpful. Sanders' tepid endorsement of Clinton after she won the nomination illustrates that he was not a true Democrat; merely an opportunist and, in the end, a spoiler who helped Donald Trump get into the White House. How different the world would be now if.....
I heartily disagree that Bernie has been unelectable. That was a bullshit trope that the mainstream millionaire Democrat establishment put across to give us Hillary. People wanted change in 2016 and that is why we got Trump. Hillary represented the status quo, Bernie had substantial popular groundswell. The time of “moderates” has past. Change is on the horizon.
Mocking him about the money in politics? If there is a problem you can bet your bottom dollar money is at the root. Law firms, universities, businesses all caving to trump's demands, why? Can you say MONEY? The country has been taken over by oligarchs, what are oligarchs? Can you say MONEY? Did the SC give MONEY the protection of the 1st Amendment? Tell me how money does not = power, i.e. the power to corrupt. As in the corruption of too many politicians.
A-friggin'-men!! After living and working in Europe for nearly 20 years and moving back to the US in 2005, one of THE things that absolutely became apparent to me was how much the country had changed in the interim with regard to the obsession with money. It permeated everything, it seemed. Of course, that's not to say that mentality doesn't similarly exist in Europe—I lived in The Netherlands and they are famous for their, um, "frugality"—but returning here I was struck with the pervasiveness of this attitude, obsession even, everywhere you turned of making money at all costs. It was ALWAYS the bottom line and there was no subtlety about it. It's one of those things that one could only notice after spending a number of years away from a place—kind of like every time I'd return to the US to visit, maybe once a year, that's when I began to really notice how my parents were aging. When you're around it all the time you don't take as much notice of it. Go away for like 20 years and come back and, a la Rip van Winkle, you get a real sense of how much things can change.
The two things you mentioned—the caving in to Trump of Columbia U. and the high-powered law firm yesterday—really showed how money can seemingly compromise anyone's ethics. Everybody seems to have their price, and ruthless, predatory capitalists like Trump know exactly how to use that power. One really can't fault Columbia for failing to turn their nose up at $400 million in grants. That's a LOT of funding for very valuable research. It just sucks that jerks like Trump can be in positions where they can extort favors from people, political ones in this case, and make them fall in line all for the price of a dollar.
Everyone has a price—that’s the not-so-secret of the con.
Have you ever imagined yourself in a situation where you had to choose between taking a 'life-changing sum of money' in exchange for… *you fill in the blank*? A moment where the offer on the table could alter your future, tempting you to compromise something you once thought was non-negotiable?
In the end, it all comes down to one thing—something in dangerously short supply these days: INTEGRITY!
Agree. Columbia U would have survived without the $400 million and law firm Paul Weiss can easily provide $40 million in pro bono work -- but for Trump? Principle went out the window in both cases.
Columbia seemed to fold pretty quick. I am unaware if Columbia tried any legal appeals. A whole lot of outfits have seemed only too eager to sell out human rights responsibilities.
Money is one of the most powerful forms of power. If you pay enough money you can find someone who will do just about anything for you. Even illegal things. Even really terrible things. The more corrupt a society is the more interchangeable the power of money with political power. With enough corruption, you can add physical and other forms of violence to the mix.
The Bible claims that "the lover of money" is the "root of all evil", or some say just "many evils". That pretty much fits for me if you consider "love of money" to be obsessive. You'd sell your grandmother for financial advantage. I think Trump would.
Whereas the republicans are intent on getting every last penny they can pilfer outta the remains of the federal government in preparation to sell it for scrap.
Many Republicans want to privatize literally everything, including, explicitly, public roads, public schools, public parks, even police, firefighting, and the military, so someone can extract profit from it. They would privatize the air we breathe if they could figure out a way to fence it off. I recall the reasoning of a red state (I forget which one) that outlawed municipal public internet was it was unfair competition for profit makers. I really love free enterprise for the goods and services it is suited to providing, but some services are too vital and some powers too dangerous to be entrusted to profit-making calculations away from public supervision and control. The invading British put a tax on salt no matter how acquired. That became a key issue driving Indian independence.
"You will find that all the arguments in favor of king-craft were of this class; they always bestrode the necks of the people, not that they wanted to do it, but because the people were better off for being ridden. That is their argument, and this argument of the Judge is the same old serpent that says you work and I eat, you toil and I will enjoy the fruits of it." - Lincoln
I always laugh when I read that some candidate (especially for president) is lauded for being a good business person. Business and government are two totally different entities with polar opposite goals.
I think there may be some legitimate areas of overlap, but yes, very different missions and responsibilities. I think business interests encourage the public to conflate the two.
Overlap indeed: intelligence, collegiality, management skills and that sort of thing. But the goals and motivations, I think, are different. I've worked for both. I don't want to say one is "better" than the other, but they are different.
One thing that has held the Democratic back since the 2016 election is the incessant division over Bernie Sanders. The drum beat of resentment from Progressives concerning Bernie has simply got to stop. It has been 9 years. Let it go. We have much work to do.
While we complain about Bernie and AOC, they are the duo that started the public popular resistance against the regime. Fortunately some other leaders are following and we have to recognize them as the initiators and pay some respect by showing an United Front and stop the drum beat you are talking about Barbara.
I think we are pulling together now. I think also that the drum beat stopped already and people recognize the situation is to serious to keep playing the blame game. Hope you didn't get me wrong.
Thank you for the clarification. Even Dr. Richardson stated one month ago that we are in a coup. It greatly disturbs me when I see more ruminations on stuff that has already happened instead of actions we can take now.
One of the advantages of human consciousness is the ability to learn from the past. What if Sanders was correct about the need to focus on misuses of money? Maybe he is not. We still get to talk about it, which is crucial to functioning self-governance, and I believe, to making wise choices. It is expected that people will disagree in courts, and in the halls of Congress, so long as they do so in good faith. So long as there is a bottom line of solidarity, of common interests and mutual respect. Solidarity enables diversity and diversity is essential to liberty, along with accepting individual responsibilities. That makes democracy "messy" (but worth it).
Sanders may differ in his priorities with some other liberals, but yet he is on the team. He ran against Clinton but supported the party in the end, as have I. That said, it's not the Democratic Part I feel loyalty to (though I have been a registered Democrat my whole voting life) but to the principles they champion, as compared to the abandonment of good faith by the "GOP".
Barbara, i understand that Bern is not the answer for 2028, but i think the lesson needs to be spoken. Hillary was a democratic mistake in 2026. People wanted change, not more of the same. Change is why we got trump in a populist uprising. Bernie represented change in a progressive direction, he spoke for the people. I as well as many others believe he would have won the 2016 election. There is a lesson there that we should not forget or ignore. Just my opinion.
It's hard to completely understand all that contributed to Trump's victory. I think the most tragic mistake is the "Electoral College" since the entire nation is the constituency of the president and VP. I want to see Democrats take a stronger and more explicit stand on democratic principles, liberty and justice literally for all. I wrote to my members of Congress yesterday, and always have to select from a list of "issues" that typically oblique to my concern. I think perhaps our insistence on packaging matters as discrete "issues". Some people announced they would not vote because the felt their primary "Issue" was not honored. What about our 'values"? Even when life presents unappealing alternatives, which portends the most good and the least harm?
I hear you Barbara, i am interested in your opinions and thoughts. I want positive and intelligent discourse. I do some small part in communicating with my community and financial support of causes supporting democracy. I am rather surprised that you are throwing darts at me as response to a respectful comment that I believe. Seems uncharacteristic? I am sorry to raise your ire. Apologies.
I am not angry. I promote activism. I am desperate to promote activism in the face of a coup d'etat. We are hanging by a thread for our Democracy. You realize the Sanders discussion is 9 years old. You realize people have been hating on and analyzing trump for also 9 years. We lost the 2024 election. Let's move on. I have seen too many long, long, long discussions on forums. It worries me. I promote doing more and talking less. We must hit the streets, not sit at our keyboards.
Did you look at the link I posted?
If you really want to hear my thoughts and opinions I will be glad to send you links for marches, writing Congress and other opportunities.
Yes Barbara, i know that 2016 was 9 years ago. I am not promoting the idea of a Sanders campaign. But i am commenting on the loss of the 2024 election. Not sexism, not racism although the themes were prevalent. The loss of both of those elections were a failure of the democratic leadership to not stuff the status quo down our throats. People want change. Bernie and AOC are speaking to that change. The dems have failed to show us that path, which is why so many low information voters went for the Liar. I have voted democrat my whole life, but am currently researching how to change affiliation to independent. Democrats can’t keep people in their tent. That needs to be spoken. Otherwise we are yelling in a shrinking echo chamber.
Bernie campaigned on getting excess money out of politics first, and Democrats mocked him for it.
Nobody “mocked” Bernie Sanders. We believed, and I still do, that he couldn’t win a presidential election and wouldn’t be a an effective president if he did. It takes more, a lot more, than good ideas to succeed as president.
We need good people like Bernie and AOC and Elizabeth Warren and Chris Murphy et al in Congress. Remember Congress? That’s what the framers intended to be the seat of government power. Republicans have ceded that power to the Musk/Trump junta. Bernie Sanders is much more effective bringing his ideas, most of which I heartily agree with, directly to the voters, all of whom will be mightily motivated to get to the polls in the upcoming congressional midterm elections in 2026. Maybe then we can begin to move political power back where it belongs; in Congress.
I didn’t intend to be so long-winded. I love Bernie Sanders; now more than ever. I would never mock him.
I do hope Bernie and AOC et alii can bring out more of the voters who are becoming more and more dissatisfied with the election result, and more of the voters who thought their votes would not count. If we get enough people out in the streets, perhaps the Republicans (who have the power not just to do the job of Congress, but to impeach and convict the menace) will recognize their responsibility. But I won't bet lunch on it happening before the critical mass is reached and the war starts.
AOC is really appealing to the average Joe, using her own lived experience as a waitress and cleaner to get her through school, not to mention her struggles as a Latino woman. The turnout to these rallies is very hopeful.
She is so articulate - so clear. Compared to Jeffries and Schumer, who are dull and not good communicators, she is a very bright light.
Duh! AOC was a bartender. Some of the most educated people in the country are/were bartenders.
OAC loves helping people and cares for others......the #! most important trait in a successful..truthful, life in public service. OAC is the real deal
Many bartenders are not only well-educated, but are among the most empathetic people around!
Ellen, bartenders know how to listen even as they are busy mixing drinks.
Good bartenders (AOC) pay attention to patrons, and learn a lot. Poor bartenders (Schumer) ignore their patrons (constituents)) and then wonder why they aren't getting tips (votes).
She is also college educated.
And Smart.
https://qz.com/1481551/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-won-a-2007-isef-science-fair-prize-for-her-microbiology-research
One might argue that growing up in a castle with a golden spoon is not great preparation for understanding and resonating with the struggles of common folk. It does not entirely rule it out, but it seems a whole lot less likely.
“Homeless is a misnomer. It implies that someone got a little bit behind on their mortgage, and if you just gave them a job, they’d be back on their feet,” he told former Fox News personality Tucker Carlson in October. “What you actually have are violent drug zombies with dead eyes, and needles and human feces on the street.” - Elon Musk
“The more homeless there are, the more money these organizations get, so their incentive is to increase, not decrease, homelessness!” -Elon Musk
She is bright and articulate. But don't underestimate Jeffries. Remember, slow talking John Lewis? I won't comment on Schumer. But he does bring in the money. And money, as everyone is learning, is the "milk" of politics.
Money is what is destroying our country right now! Bernie and AOC are right. We need to have public funding of campaigns and the campaign season should be much shorter like they do in the UK. This constant horse race bullshit is exhausting and a waste of money. There should not be of any campaigning allowed until three months before an election And only publicly financed. All the corruption we’re seeing right now is because of that disgusting citizens united Bill that the criminals at the Supreme Court passed.
And with a shorter campaign season, they'd be forced to actually articulate policy with details, evidence and data, instead of disordered ramblings, superficial charm and displaying narcissism in moderation.
Would that be 3 months before the Primaries? I agree that we subjected to too much campaigning. Now the campaign begins immediately after the victory is confirmed. I would like to see more discussion about this idea.
I completely agree about much shorter campaigns. Thr current horse race is exhausting and ineffecient.
Well, people are able to run very short campaigns in other countries. We have created an onerous system and of course, fund raising is nonstop.
Agreed and all political advertising should identify who produced the advertising and list who paid for it.
Mystic, i would like the list.
Exactly, that’s right. I lived in Germany and, indeed, for a few weeks before the national elections, there were campaign signs everywhere, and then the election came and went, and it was all over. The whole Spiel was so much simpler and money and corruption were mostly kept out of the process. The way it’s done here is totally exhausting and by now pretty rife with corruption, unfortunately, it seems.
"Everybody wants to be on all the committees, so you have your staffs doing all the work, because you can't keep up. But the main culprit, the cancer on the body politic, is money: Money,money, money. When I ran 6 years ago, in 1998, I raised $8.5 million. That $8.5 million is $30,000 a week, every week, for 6 years. If you miss Christmas week, you miss New Years week, you are $100,000 in the hole and don't you think we don't know it and we start to work harder at raising money.
As a result, the Senate doesn't work on Mondays and Fridays. We have longer holidays. The policy committee is adjourned and we go over to the campaign building because you can't call for money in the office. So we go over to the building and call for money and obviously we only can give attention to that. We don't have time for each other. We don't have time for constituents, except for the givers." - Fritz Hollings
The "A" constituents. I have experienced that and at a time I and we needed them most.
Criminal whose appointment was shepherded by those who weld enormous wealth. The constitutional grounds for buying elections and legislation alleged to be universal guarantees of free speech; the more you can pay the more free speech you get. Too bad if you can't afford it.
I like Hakeem Jeffries, and I think he speaks well. I also like Chris Murphy, Jamie Raskin and several others. I am looking forward to April 5th!
Hakeem Jeffries is a fine person. He is, however, ill suited for this moment. There is little fire and he has failed to pull his coalition together. Auction paddles at SOTU? Embarrassing.
Agreed, Barbara. Although I didn't watch it, I think the Dem seats in the chamber should have either been filled with a rousing chorus shouting "Lies!" at every opportunity, or left empty if they couldn't bring themselves to it. Their silence (for nearly 100% of the party) is deafening.
I would like to add Dan Goldman of NY to the list....
Penny, I agree about Jeffries.
lauriemcf, I agree that AOC is an outstanding spokesperson for her party and is deeply motivated to be a true public servant. But I can't agree with your assessment of Jeffries. He is articulate, but does not have the "firebrand" persona. That doesn't make him a poor communicator. He appeals to a different type of audience.
More importantly, being an effective leader of legislators doesn't involve dazzling speaking skills. It requires the ability to corral and motivate a bunch of people with differing priorities and sidestep the landmines set by the opposing party. Nancy Pelosi wasn't a scintillating public speaker, but she "got shit done." Jeffries has that potential, if he ever gets the chance.
Schumer, however, is a putz.
Laurie, I love AOC, hope she primaries Schumer. Her communication skills are very effective at reaching up and down the social strata. Jeffries' oratorical skills are nearly like those of a rapper minister, but I haven't heard much from him lately. Someone should do a wellness check on the Dem leadership.
They probably won't answer the door.
lauriemcf -- IMO, AOC is indeed really bright, and she's a woman. I'm also a huge fan of Hakeem Jeffries, who I experience as [also] highly articulate and otherwise hard to characterize. Sen. Schumer is another story.
Yes Kazz. AOC worked her way through school. She graduated cum laude from Boston University in 2011 with a bachelor's degree in international relations and economics. Keep that 2nd sentence in mind when describing her. She's a hard and very smart worker.
I agree she is a great rallying point. But be careful not to delude yourself into thinking that kind of backing translates into electability across this wide diverse nation. We aren't there yet. Sad but true.
True Jon, but there are over 100,000 elections taking place in the US this year. They are all at the local or state level. Most people hate their Republican representatives at this point. So we need the agitators out there like Bernie and AOC.
And we need to chastise Trump for not doing any rallies. At this point what is he going to say. "It's working. Project 2025 is falling into place. If only we can impeach all of the anti-Trump judges it will be smooth sailing for ending elections forever in the US."
I'd like to see tRump attempt a rally in the Corn Belt...
Donable Lector would be pelted with corn cobs from the very first Depends diaper change
He will only have carefully stage managed events likely with a portion of his audience vetted to ensure a big, enthusiastic reception.
Consider, too, that Trump believes he no longer has to pay much attention to his MAGA fans. As long as he can show videos of alleged criminals being deported they are happy.
Better yet, In Toronto, Vancouver or Montreal.
We need to weaponize the truth. OK, the MAGA shields are up, but how many people figured it was not worth voting? Perhaps they can be stirred?
That is a very good bet.
I just checked that AOC was born in NYC and is 35 years old, therefore eligible for presidency (unlike de facto president Musk). Whether she would be a good candidate or good president, don't know, but certainly very promising.
Yes, promising, but not now. Democrats need to focus now on winning. If that requires a moderate white male nominee for president, so be it. Unelected people don't have much power -- unless they're Elon Musk and the prez is Donald Trump.
I agree, a charismatic male should’ve been the game plan for 2024. Unfortunately both men AND women have unconscious bias towards women generally.
Actually I think a more mainstream (ie white) candidate might have helped in 2024, but more importantly someone not tied to Biden. There are a lot of "if onlys" from 2024. I always thought the best candidate would have been Gretchen Whitmer but once Biden resisted getting out of the race immediately (as he should have in early 2024) the damage was probably done.
I’m starting to think this whole shit show had to play out to make much needed change. To get not only Americans, but the whole global community to wake the f**ck up to oligarchical authoritarianism and realise ‘power of the people’.
And it certainly IS a sh*tshow, sigh... flying in all directions.
Do you think her appeal is reaching the average *white* Joe (or Jo, for that matter)?
I like what she says but don't think she's ready to be president. Yet.
Or our misogynist country is not ready to elect her as President.
^^^^THIS^^^^
No, Alan, but I'd love to see her in Sen Schumer's seat.
Unless and until millions of American misogynists die off, she couldn't be elected to the White House, no matter how "ready" she might be. Maybe in 50 years. Maybe.
Ain't holding my breath. If the resumes of Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris were not enough to get elected against the bloviating diaper wearer, we are a llooooonnnnnggg way off.
Spot on, Ally. My feeling as well. But as I've said many times before, I think it's going to take a worldful of hurt among our population before a majority of survivors awake from the near-fatal fever of maga-ism and begin to restore the country to the progressive path of democracy. And that's sad.
I understand your point. But, "Hope springs eternal."
Alan Peterson -- I think she's on her way, in line after Pete and Gretchen.
Blue collar workers, the ones who work 12hr shifts and have no leave entitlements - she’s singing their song.
But Kazz, are they listening to that song on their way to and from work, or are they listening to right wing talk radio? (I'm referring generally to the younger males in our population.) I fear the propagation of right wing blather in workplace conversations, while fewer are talking about the policies that are now destroying their lives as well as those of the rest of us.
They almost all, to a person listen to talk radio constantly when they can't watch 'Faux News'.
You’re right Doug, this is where the trade unions need to get on board. To raise awareness around job insecurity and sub-par working conditions from DEI culls and the inevitable trump recession rearing it’s head.
I love Bernie, but AOC’s charm is lost on me. I find her embarrassing. Regardless of personal reactions, surely one of the lessons we should have learned is that at least half the country is not ready for progressive policies, more if you include large numbers of Democrats. That may be lamentable, but if there is a hope of returning to sound, long-term environmental, foreign policy and social policies the Democratic party has to appeal to a wide range of voters.
Sounds a lot like leaving BIPOC and LGBTQIA+ behind to me.
If AOC embarrasses you, you must be genuinely shallow.
What progressive policies of hers do you find so bad?
And young people
I attended a talk by Jefferson Cowie this week, with my book club on his book Freedom's Dominion. He is saying that for someone to win they need to have a populist agenda. Here is a piece I wrote about it.
https://lindaweide.substack.com/p/is-populism-the-way-to-go?r=f0qfn
"Politics needs to reflect the will of the people." That's it in a nutshell. Thank you, Linda. That is what democracy is.
I especially like your last paragraph: "In order for them to trust the party, people need to hear that the Democratic party is more concerned about people having food on their table and being able to pay their bills than whether they are saying the correct things all the time. I think a piece that Cowie did not mention, but is critical, is to take on campaign finance reform. For the Democratic party to transform, Democrats need to listen to people and figure out how to address their problems. Whether or not the party heeds Cowie's advice and turns to a populist message, the party must rethink what it stands for and what it can do for people."
Anne's comment is spot on. Democrats need to focus on kitchen-table issues -- getting jobs, paying for food and buying houses, as examples. The other issues are legitimate but focus on a tiny portion of the populace. Paying for food, etc., is a critical issue for all people, straight or gay, male or female.
How about Liberty and Justice for all? Really, for all?
What does that look like? When do we as a nation even think about it?
The fastest and most efficient way to get rid of Musk is Feathers of Hope. Surely a few Congressional Republicands refuse to join the axis if evil.
I really like Bernie's and AOC's approach of going into chicken-shit Congresscritters districts and hold rallies against Trump and Elon.
The local TV station can't help but report on the rallies. I mean, what are they going to preempt another story on bird flu or tariff's?
When almost half the town shows up for any event........that is front page news!!!
It’s probably the only thing to do in a lot of these towns. The movie theater closed decades ago.
Everyone I know who owns a Tesla is selling them. All of the progressives bought them. Now driving a Tesla is like wearing a MAGA hat....
They need to read Feathers of Hope.
I have seen only slight evidence of that yet. The entire GOP in Congress is still wrapped up in the victory. There are a few chinks in the armor starting to show but I think we are in for a fairly long row to hoe before we get there.
Yesterday Heather documented that Mike Turner (R.AL) and Roger Wicker (R. MS) complained about National Security. Lots more have called Trump a liar on Putin/Ukraine. I published the letter I got from Rick Scott. Thom Tillis. Murkowski. Many more.
They are still Republicans. The main issue is National Security. Jerry Weiss has identified a number fof candidates and we have 3 Cuban American MAGATs here who have recently discovered they are DEI and many of their donors and consituents are upset. We have more Canadians here that some Canadian provinces -- most with dual citizenship.
Hoefully behind the scenes there is discussion about shared government. Only takes 3 in the House. Hakim Jeffries can offer chairmanships of key committees to Republicans.
I think that could happen someday but not yet. Politics is all about timing and while this is a terrible time for us all, I think it is premature to expect a serious turnabout even in the House. Trump needs to do something REALLY egregious (as if what he had done so far isn't enough, but I think it isn't). If he seriously capitulates on Ukraine to Russia that might be enough (how could even "little" Marco go along with that?) That might be the turning point for the staunchest be line GOP, enough to retake the House maybe even the Senate
But so far Trump has been skating a fine line. Not totally giving in to Putin but keeping Zelenskyy on guard. What he isn't reckoning with is that NATO and Europe are getting tired of the Trump nonsense and may just dump the him.
That might be the bridge too far.
And i truly detest the fact that sooo many lives are affected by this deranged old white man. And he doesnt give a shit about anyone but himself.
It is the whole right-wing not only trump!
You must not know many Republicans. Anything for power. A chairmanship is mighty appetising.
Little Marco is the automoton of Norman Braman. He is also funded by CANF -- and they are having an attitude adjustment. They discovered they are DEI and reject alliance as an ally of Cuban Communism.
One of our local House MAGATS was a Dem mayor until 2020. Was an HRC supporter in 2016.
I listed those who say they want to work with Democrats below.
Journalist Cathy Young writes on The Bulwark about Ukraine. Poll numbers say that 60% of Americans distrust Putin and support Ukraine, she reports. This is a great subject to keep in the spotlight. My representatives are all Republican, and at least two of the three have publicly supported Ukraine. I call and thank them. The third - I just ask him to support Ukraine.
A year ago I visited Charleston, SC, bastion of Republicanism. Throughout the old French Quarter, there were Ukraine flags flying outside of homes and commercial buildings. I think MAGAts need reminding that Russia is the enemy, not Ukraine.
Right-wing Congress people are most likely salivating at the thought of the power they can wield when they and trump achieve their totalitarian dream.
These right-wingers are too cowardly to preserve and protect the Constitution as they pledged to do when they took their oath to office.
Worse than cowards, they are traitors.
Thom Tillis is my Senator, and I call him every day at 2 offices to thank him for his public support for Ukraine. I think good self-care is the first priority and calls to our representatives is the next.
“Hope is a thing with feathers.”
Dream on!
There are no right-wing heroes.
Read the materials. Never up never in. We don't need them to become Deomocrats.
I'm also hoping that a few Congressional Republicans who are lawyers will stand for the rule of law.
Can you pass on a link Daniel ? Thanks...
https://jerryweiss.substack.com/
Thank you Linda!
Excellent writing, Linda!
When polls and more show a real shift in voter preferences, you'll see Republicans in competitive districts begin to shift a few gears.
I agree, and I've said this before, but I think Bernie has always known that he can't win a presidential election. But Bernie is a smart guy, and he knows how to make himself heard. I reiterate.......no one has moved the political rhetoric more in the last 10 years than Bernie Sanders. He is brilliant, and passionate. Love the guy.
Before 2016 everyone knew there was no way trump could ever in the Presidency.
Alas, excellent point.
Bob, Yes, Bernie is a smart guy but he showed poor leadership after Hillary beat him in the 2016 primaries. My fellow Wisconsin Democrats have not forgotten how his followers acted at the national DEM convention and certainly haven’t forgotten how a shocking number of his followers (“Bernie Bros”) stayed home and refuse to vote for Hillary — allowing Trump to win our state in 2016.
I suppose that's true, but he's not a democrat. I'm not aware of how he, personally, acted. I've never seen anything from him that I thought was inappropriate. As for the "Bernie Bros", they are free to do whatever they like, and after all, we were all "sure" that Hillary was going to win. Not to belabor the point, but there were rumors of shenanigans from the Clinton campaign to discredit Bernie as well.
Hillary's assumption that she was entitled to be president and would of course win was a major problem. Plus, she's a lousy campaigner, the polar opposite of her husband.
What specifically is that shocking number and who recorded it?
I know that there are always some that only see the small picture, but how representative are they of a whole campaign? I was a Sanders alternate delegate and I supported and voted for Hillary Clinton once she was the nominee, despite having gripes about Sander's treatment, which I could detail. It seems to me that Sanders and so far as I know, the preponderance of his following, helps, not hurts the Democrats agendas, at least over all.
Great post Ralph. I too love Bernie and AOC but I also agree that Bernie could never be elected. He is to be fair "an old commie jew" ( as am I by the way and proud of it!) But sadly in this country that makes him virtually unelectable nationwide as a President no matter how great he might turn out.
And as I have said before AOC is simply not mature enough as a leader to be a president. I am not sure she could be elected Senator in her home state of New York. Maybe in 6-8 years, yes. But not yet.
All that said they are great legislators and advocates for our cause and I continue to support them both in their efforts to shine the light on the Trump terror emanating from DC.
While I agree that neither of them could be elected President - I would definitely vote for AOC if she ran for Senator in NY.
I would TOO of course but it's also necessary to face the political realities in NY (and anywhere). New York is really two completely different places: NYC and New York state (and part of NYC, i.e., Staten Island doesn't really count!)
AOC could easily get elected Senator from NYC but unfortunately there is the pesky reality that NYC doesn't get their own Senator. And she is at best a 50-50 shot at getting elected Senator in NY State possibly less than that.
There are other states where getting elected to Congress in a major district would practically pave the road for you to the Senate but unfortunately NY is NOT one of those states.
Someday I think she will make it and maybe even the White House but sadly not this decade. And I want her to hold her Congressional seat and not sacrifice it like California's Katie porter did when she took on Adam Schiff for Senator. That was a tragic House loss for the Democrats. And the same problem too.
Schiff had 20 years in Congress and Porter, a bright progressive woman had only 2 terms. Anyone with any sense could see that she was heading uphill. It's one thing to go uphill against a monster but Schiff was a liberal hero.
Katie had no chance and I fear AOC needs more time to be ready to fight for av Senate seat let alone the Presidency no matter how much she could handle it. We allk know Harris would have made a terrific President but she had to win first.
Jon Rosen -- Use care when using the phrase "we all know" before stating your own opinion.
I do use care. It is a common expression and MOST people understand that it is an expression of speech not to be taken literally. It means "most of us should know".
But my apologies I will try to be more careful. It is funny that you picked out almost the very last thing I wrote in a relatively long comment so can we agree that most of what I wrote is good?
Thanks!
I agree with you about politics, Jon. You have to win.
Winning has to be he first priority for Democrats, regardless of what it takes (assuming that "what it takes" is ethical).
I agree. She may be ready someday but not yet. Upstate is another world.
I doubt Lincoln would make it to the presidency today, or at least there would be widely expresed opinion that he wouldn't.
Not with that beard!
He is not communist he is a democratic socialist.
He has never advocated nationalizing business it must be embarrassing to be so ignorant unless you're to ignorant to realize it.
Dude, get over yourself. Did you see the quote marks around the expression "old commie Jew"? It is NOT a literal statement of fact, it is a representation of what the opposition thinks of him.
THIS o them he is OLD (totally true), he is Jewish (also totally true) and a "commie" in the same way that 1950s Joe Mc Carathy supporters called ANYONE who was to the left of Attilla the Hun a "commie".
The point is that Bernie, whatever you call him, is WAY to the left of mainstream America. He never had any real serious chance of being elected President and he stillo doesn't. If we couldn't get Harris elected, Bernie isn't even on the road map.
But I LOVE the guy and I hope he keeps doing what he is doing because it is a rallying point for the people. And we need that right now.
Just don't get confused between someone who can help us win and someone who can win himself. He is the former, not the latter.
Apologies, I was reminded of when, during the 2015 primary race, my right-wing brother-in-law asked me if Bernie Sanders is the same kind of communist as Hitler. I guess I'm just sensitive to feeding the right-wing propensity to label every liberal as a communist. My experience with right-wingers is that most of them don't know the difference between a communist and a fascist. They don't realize that they are now fascists.
Well said MS. Furthermore and a thing that unfairly bias' some people is that even if he were a raging communist, we have two other branches and the constitution to tame any wayward policy leanings by only the executive branch. Congress makes all law, departments, etc., in harmony with the constitution - if not, the judiciary steps on it.
"Even if he were a raging communist, we have two other branches of government... to take any wayward policy leanings."
I am assuming this was an attempt at political humor, right? Be cause if you were serious, have you noticed how effective those other two branches are right now when we need them? The judiciary is trying but Congress is totally under the thumb of Trump.
Just saying...
The Democrats made a huge mistake by not allowing a chance Bernie to get on the ticket. I know he has been an independent and not a Democrat, but people were excited about him. He has ideas. I think he would be an effective leader. I mean, let’s face it, Obama, charismatic and intelligent and graceful as he is Was behind the learning curve when he took office. And look how he compromised with the Republicans immediately that was not exactly a wise strategy. So I think the Democrats really screwed up back in 2016 and here we are…
Terry: the *Dems* screwed up in 2016? No, I believe we ran the right candidate. I know it's all woulda coulda shoulda, but let's blame Comey for his public announcement that the FBI was reopening the email investigation, what, a week or 2 before the election? And let's also remember that she won the popular vote, in spite of that.
Unfortunately the popular vote doesn’t matter in this country when politicians can buy a gerrymandered district. The electoral college has to go.
Yes, Valerie. A thousand times YES.
I think you have forgotten who ran in and who won the 2016 election. Sanders never ran against Obama in primaries; that was Clinton and it was 2008. It was likewise Clinton who was the nominee in 2016. Furthermore, much as Sanders has very good ideas, he’s not even an effective Senator. Of all the 421 bills he has sponsored, only 3 have become law. I don’t know how anyone could think he would be an effective president, despite his ideas, given his performance as a senator. I think he’s doing a great job as our moral compass and teaming up with AOC is wonderful. This is where he is at his most effective.
In an election between far-right (Agent Orange) and far-left (Bernie) I bet a lot of voters would swing left. The people who really hate Bernie are the billionaires on both sides of the aisle. But his message and his crowds would have defeated both Hillary (who would have made a fantastic president) and Orange.
Many democracies have more than 2 parties and some have coalition governments. A third party could be a path to an effective government. I know I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one...
I have very mixed feelings about a third party or having parties at all, at least the way we do them. Canada has more than one party and got stuck with Republican-like Stephen Harper for nine years. Dunno if it's true, but my politically plugged in Canadian son-in-law claims that the majority of Canadians disliked Harper, but because they could not come together to oppose him, he stayed a long time. I recall that Harper really loathed environmental protection.
I wonder if 'ranked choice' voting helps that 3rd party conundrum ?
Dream on! It's one way to attack our political nightmare, but until we eliminate money in our elections, the oligarchs will cling to the current two-party system. Money is unable to feel compassion or seek justice. "Citizens United" is really "End Democracy Now".
I think it is clear that having a hell of a lot of money in this country allows one to veto the will of a whole lot of people. I have thought of this every time the MSM says that a popular policy is blocked (with seemingly no chance of advancing) by a "powerful lobby". Musk did not invent Tesla. He took it over because he has a whole lot of money.
Tax the rich!
The kids (youth) certainly seemed to like him. They were all kinds of PO'd when it was intimated that the dem party pulled one over on him. And yet, he sticks with and votes with them. Gotta' love that.
Bernie was in the Dem primaries so he was allowed on the ticket. I think he made a mistake when he said he wouldn’t play well with Dems or R’s.
Ralph, agreed about Bernie & AOC, however, we HAD excellent candidates in Harris/Walz whom we let slip through the cracks of a VERY suspect election with all 7 swing states showing dramatic similarities in their statistical "winning margins” all with just enough of a margin to avoid recounts and all with dramatic down-ballot “drop-off” showing only the Republican presidential candidate winning with remaining candidates for other offices from the Democrats winning.
I cannot forget Trump‘s reference to musk and the magic he worked with computers in Pennsylvania. Wink wink.
Yeah, that one bothers me. The trouble is that almost nothing Trump says is true.
“….whom we let slip through the cracks….”
“We”? How did “we” do that?
Millions really did vote for Trump/Vance. In a nation of rational, knowledgeable citizens neither one of those two would be elected dog catcher. We live in a nation where a large plurality of voters have willingly let themselves be turned into political idiots. Turning back that tide is going to be tough, painful, and maybe bloody.
Can't like, do agree.
Likewise read and agree.
That's the problem with "liking" comments.
The masculinity and misogyny has turned young men into whining fools because they don’t want to work hard, can’t seem to have relationships with women so ran to vote for the rapists and his sidekick who denigrates women every chance he gets. Even Musk can’t maintain a relationship and has somehow managed to father 13+ children. How many abortions and unknown little Musks are out there.
Thank goodness my grandson learned respect at home.
Ralph, ‘twould seem “we” need to get as effective as the Republicans at using/diverting the legal process, the machinery of voting, gerrymandering and countering voter suppression. "They” have mastered these tools since at least Bush V Gore in 2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_v._Gore
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see AOC make a credible run for the White House in the next dozen years.
Jonathan, let's hope we survive the next 20 months until the 2026 election, and 2 years after that one before speculating about 2036. But if we do, and she runs, I hope I'm still around to vote for her.
Jonathan Adler -- after Pete Buttigieg and Gretchen Whitmer.
What ever happened with NY mayor Adams? I haven’t heard a word
He complied and stayed out of prison.
Complied to be a cfg stooge. Cfg's DOJ holds the threat of retrying him over his head.
Pay off.
He has several challengers, including the former governor of NY, Cuomo.
Some of us weren't wild about his tolerance of misogyny either, but he did get better after 2016 -- probably thanks in large part to his female supporters like AOC.
Ralph, I agree with much that Bernie has advocated for a very long time. And i agree that he is very effective on the stump speaking to voters. I also am a pragmatic person and I know that progress in our system can be very slow which is why I have sometimes held my nose to vote for certain Ds because their R counterparts were/are much worse. I hope that somehow we can right the ship despite death star and muskrat making huge holes in it and loading it with rocks. I am truly surprised at some of the R statements around Social Security especially when they come out of the mouth of a billionaire. For the first time I wanted to know if my SS check had been deposited. We also got our federal tax return check.
One thing that I deeply appreciate about Bernie besides his guts, is that he never wavers. He is on the side he's on without reservation and hasn't changed.
But lots of corporate type democrats did mock Bernie and some continue to do so. Ralph, you need to get out more.
And if they they hold their rallies on a slow news day, ABC, NBC, CBS, NYTimes, The WAPO, might do a two minute story buried in their newscasts/papers somewhere.
Ralph, I’m not trying to be oppositional, I’m just concerned about the integrity of the election in 2026. Please tell me I’ just overreacting to the voter suppression. Does anyone else feel the same? I really could use some hope. Can we overturn this mess? I live in deeply red and gerrymandered Florida. I don’t want to discuss SS. Like most retired Americans, I worked all my life and saved, my husband and I count on it to pay the bills.
Phyllis, I share your concerns about the legitimacy of the 2026 elections. We can hope that there are enough votes for Democratic candidates to overcome Republican shenanigans.
Many self-identified Democrats have, even blaming him for Hillary Clinton's loss. Hillary herself criticized Bernie's position on campaign spending. I don't know if Bernie could have handled the presidency of not. I don't think anyone can, and do a good job of it without enough of the public essentially on board, and at least in the primary, Sanders was puling some good numbers. His great nemesis was the "Superdelegates"; but had he succeeded in being elected could he been an effective leader? I can't say for sure either way. I'm not always on the same page with him, but I think he has some clarity. Whatever the case, I have observed the influence of the Democratic Party sliding for decades, and believed that there was more that could be done about it. If you keep losing ground you would surely be wise to examine your strategy.
The warping of society and the democratic process by very big money is a very big deal, and by now, it isn't subtle. Sen. Hollings let the cat out of the bag long ago, but that was in the news for like a day:
"But the main culprit, the cancer on the body politic, is money: Money, money, money... We don't have time for each other. We don't have time for constituents, except for the givers. Somebody ought to tell the truth about that."
Thank you for your very thoughtful response to my comment.
JL is a great read when he wants to.
Spot on JL. It's the money; it's corrupted a percentage within the dem party, without a doubt. I think that is part of the reason for so much inaction by them. I also think the gop is holding some truths above their heads, such as 'who' dipped into the SS Trust, and who approved of costly overseas wars. And more; more that is specific and personal, so their re-election would be at stake.
Amen to everything you said!!!!
Bernie was sabotaged by the Dem party leadership. Bernie has given talks at conservative gatherings where he was applauded. What he speaks of are basic universal goals of ordinary people. All of his points are in use in countries today and some have been in practice in the US before.
"Bernie was sabotaged by the Dem party leadership."
You make it appear as if Sanders was a lifelong Democrat. He wasn't. He remained aloof and apart from the party until he used the Democratic Party as a useful stepping stone. The Democratic Party owed him nothing, but still they welcomed him in. Maybe if he had paid half the party dues Clinton had paid her whole career, the Dems might have been more helpful. Sanders' tepid endorsement of Clinton after she won the nomination illustrates that he was not a true Democrat; merely an opportunist and, in the end, a spoiler who helped Donald Trump get into the White House. How different the world would be now if.....
I heartily disagree that Bernie has been unelectable. That was a bullshit trope that the mainstream millionaire Democrat establishment put across to give us Hillary. People wanted change in 2016 and that is why we got Trump. Hillary represented the status quo, Bernie had substantial popular groundswell. The time of “moderates” has past. Change is on the horizon.
Mocking him about the money in politics? If there is a problem you can bet your bottom dollar money is at the root. Law firms, universities, businesses all caving to trump's demands, why? Can you say MONEY? The country has been taken over by oligarchs, what are oligarchs? Can you say MONEY? Did the SC give MONEY the protection of the 1st Amendment? Tell me how money does not = power, i.e. the power to corrupt. As in the corruption of too many politicians.
A-friggin'-men!! After living and working in Europe for nearly 20 years and moving back to the US in 2005, one of THE things that absolutely became apparent to me was how much the country had changed in the interim with regard to the obsession with money. It permeated everything, it seemed. Of course, that's not to say that mentality doesn't similarly exist in Europe—I lived in The Netherlands and they are famous for their, um, "frugality"—but returning here I was struck with the pervasiveness of this attitude, obsession even, everywhere you turned of making money at all costs. It was ALWAYS the bottom line and there was no subtlety about it. It's one of those things that one could only notice after spending a number of years away from a place—kind of like every time I'd return to the US to visit, maybe once a year, that's when I began to really notice how my parents were aging. When you're around it all the time you don't take as much notice of it. Go away for like 20 years and come back and, a la Rip van Winkle, you get a real sense of how much things can change.
The two things you mentioned—the caving in to Trump of Columbia U. and the high-powered law firm yesterday—really showed how money can seemingly compromise anyone's ethics. Everybody seems to have their price, and ruthless, predatory capitalists like Trump know exactly how to use that power. One really can't fault Columbia for failing to turn their nose up at $400 million in grants. That's a LOT of funding for very valuable research. It just sucks that jerks like Trump can be in positions where they can extort favors from people, political ones in this case, and make them fall in line all for the price of a dollar.
Everyone has a price—that’s the not-so-secret of the con.
Have you ever imagined yourself in a situation where you had to choose between taking a 'life-changing sum of money' in exchange for… *you fill in the blank*? A moment where the offer on the table could alter your future, tempting you to compromise something you once thought was non-negotiable?
In the end, it all comes down to one thing—something in dangerously short supply these days: INTEGRITY!
Agree. Columbia U would have survived without the $400 million and law firm Paul Weiss can easily provide $40 million in pro bono work -- but for Trump? Principle went out the window in both cases.
Columbia seemed to fold pretty quick. I am unaware if Columbia tried any legal appeals. A whole lot of outfits have seemed only too eager to sell out human rights responsibilities.
Money is one of the most powerful forms of power. If you pay enough money you can find someone who will do just about anything for you. Even illegal things. Even really terrible things. The more corrupt a society is the more interchangeable the power of money with political power. With enough corruption, you can add physical and other forms of violence to the mix.
The Bible claims that "the lover of money" is the "root of all evil", or some say just "many evils". That pretty much fits for me if you consider "love of money" to be obsessive. You'd sell your grandmother for financial advantage. I think Trump would.
Whereas the republicans are intent on getting every last penny they can pilfer outta the remains of the federal government in preparation to sell it for scrap.
Many Republicans want to privatize literally everything, including, explicitly, public roads, public schools, public parks, even police, firefighting, and the military, so someone can extract profit from it. They would privatize the air we breathe if they could figure out a way to fence it off. I recall the reasoning of a red state (I forget which one) that outlawed municipal public internet was it was unfair competition for profit makers. I really love free enterprise for the goods and services it is suited to providing, but some services are too vital and some powers too dangerous to be entrusted to profit-making calculations away from public supervision and control. The invading British put a tax on salt no matter how acquired. That became a key issue driving Indian independence.
"You will find that all the arguments in favor of king-craft were of this class; they always bestrode the necks of the people, not that they wanted to do it, but because the people were better off for being ridden. That is their argument, and this argument of the Judge is the same old serpent that says you work and I eat, you toil and I will enjoy the fruits of it." - Lincoln
I always laugh when I read that some candidate (especially for president) is lauded for being a good business person. Business and government are two totally different entities with polar opposite goals.
I think there may be some legitimate areas of overlap, but yes, very different missions and responsibilities. I think business interests encourage the public to conflate the two.
Nah. Business writ large wants us to believe that government is an inherently evil destructive force producing human suffering on the epic scale.
Not interested in conflation – only elimination.
Overlap indeed: intelligence, collegiality, management skills and that sort of thing. But the goals and motivations, I think, are different. I've worked for both. I don't want to say one is "better" than the other, but they are different.
One thing that has held the Democratic back since the 2016 election is the incessant division over Bernie Sanders. The drum beat of resentment from Progressives concerning Bernie has simply got to stop. It has been 9 years. Let it go. We have much work to do.
While we complain about Bernie and AOC, they are the duo that started the public popular resistance against the regime. Fortunately some other leaders are following and we have to recognize them as the initiators and pay some respect by showing an United Front and stop the drum beat you are talking about Barbara.
Again. Demanding respect? How is this a unifying statement?
We have GOT to pull together.
I think we are pulling together now. I think also that the drum beat stopped already and people recognize the situation is to serious to keep playing the blame game. Hope you didn't get me wrong.
Thank you for the clarification. Even Dr. Richardson stated one month ago that we are in a coup. It greatly disturbs me when I see more ruminations on stuff that has already happened instead of actions we can take now.
Take Care. I always enjoy your feedback sir.
We must prevail.
Thanks Barbara, I'm taking care of myself by having a light lunch overlooking Porto Vecchio in southern Corsica 😋
How lovely. Now put down your phone and soak up the moment completely :))
🤩
One of the advantages of human consciousness is the ability to learn from the past. What if Sanders was correct about the need to focus on misuses of money? Maybe he is not. We still get to talk about it, which is crucial to functioning self-governance, and I believe, to making wise choices. It is expected that people will disagree in courts, and in the halls of Congress, so long as they do so in good faith. So long as there is a bottom line of solidarity, of common interests and mutual respect. Solidarity enables diversity and diversity is essential to liberty, along with accepting individual responsibilities. That makes democracy "messy" (but worth it).
Sanders may differ in his priorities with some other liberals, but yet he is on the team. He ran against Clinton but supported the party in the end, as have I. That said, it's not the Democratic Part I feel loyalty to (though I have been a registered Democrat my whole voting life) but to the principles they champion, as compared to the abandonment of good faith by the "GOP".
What protest are you scheduled to attend? Town hall maybe?
Barbara, i understand that Bern is not the answer for 2028, but i think the lesson needs to be spoken. Hillary was a democratic mistake in 2026. People wanted change, not more of the same. Change is why we got trump in a populist uprising. Bernie represented change in a progressive direction, he spoke for the people. I as well as many others believe he would have won the 2016 election. There is a lesson there that we should not forget or ignore. Just my opinion.
It's hard to completely understand all that contributed to Trump's victory. I think the most tragic mistake is the "Electoral College" since the entire nation is the constituency of the president and VP. I want to see Democrats take a stronger and more explicit stand on democratic principles, liberty and justice literally for all. I wrote to my members of Congress yesterday, and always have to select from a list of "issues" that typically oblique to my concern. I think perhaps our insistence on packaging matters as discrete "issues". Some people announced they would not vote because the felt their primary "Issue" was not honored. What about our 'values"? Even when life presents unappealing alternatives, which portends the most good and the least harm?
https://contrarian.substack.com/p/15-ways-you-can-fight-for-democracy#:~:text=15%20Ways%20You%20Can%20Fight%20for%20Democracy
https://contrarian.substack.com/p/15-ways-you-can-fight-for-democracy#:~:text=15%20Ways%20You%20Can%20Fight%20for%20Democracy
Sanders is out there working. What activism are you engaged in? I am going to a protest in my town on April 8. What are your plans?
I hear you Barbara, i am interested in your opinions and thoughts. I want positive and intelligent discourse. I do some small part in communicating with my community and financial support of causes supporting democracy. I am rather surprised that you are throwing darts at me as response to a respectful comment that I believe. Seems uncharacteristic? I am sorry to raise your ire. Apologies.
I am not angry. I promote activism. I am desperate to promote activism in the face of a coup d'etat. We are hanging by a thread for our Democracy. You realize the Sanders discussion is 9 years old. You realize people have been hating on and analyzing trump for also 9 years. We lost the 2024 election. Let's move on. I have seen too many long, long, long discussions on forums. It worries me. I promote doing more and talking less. We must hit the streets, not sit at our keyboards.
Did you look at the link I posted?
If you really want to hear my thoughts and opinions I will be glad to send you links for marches, writing Congress and other opportunities.
Yes Barbara, i know that 2016 was 9 years ago. I am not promoting the idea of a Sanders campaign. But i am commenting on the loss of the 2024 election. Not sexism, not racism although the themes were prevalent. The loss of both of those elections were a failure of the democratic leadership to not stuff the status quo down our throats. People want change. Bernie and AOC are speaking to that change. The dems have failed to show us that path, which is why so many low information voters went for the Liar. I have voted democrat my whole life, but am currently researching how to change affiliation to independent. Democrats can’t keep people in their tent. That needs to be spoken. Otherwise we are yelling in a shrinking echo chamber.
Yes, Hillary was a very bad mistake, but Bernie was not the correct answer. Democrats need to do better.
Politely disagree, but that is what we do as free people. 😉
Granted and happy that as free people we can still vote. Hope that continues.
https://contrarian.substack.com/p/15-ways-you-can-fight-for-democracy#:~:text=15%20Ways%20You%20Can%20Fight%20for%20Democracy
2016
Yup!
🤨👍