Bernie's 2020 Campaign: August 2016 - At least through April, apparently

I’ve never found a fake penny.

nohero said:
 Trump and Bernie are similar in their use of resentment against the "establishment" of their respective parties, to boost themselves.  Trump succeeded because conservatives fall in line; Bernie "succeeded" because too many liberals were fooled into rejecting the Democratic nominee, leaving things wide open for Bernie in 2020.
And everybody knows that Bernie was running long before he announced.  See thread title.

 No, Trump is a fake populist. During the election, he told people what they wanted to hear and sometimes sounded like Bernie.   Bernie is a real populist who has been consistently saying the same things for 40+ years.  So, Trump sometimes copies Bernie, but they are not even remotely alike.

On the other hand, the establishment Democrats support Trump's coup in Venezuela, voted to give him larger increases in his military budget than he even asks for, support his position in Israel, voted to give him warrentless surveillance, and said his bombing of Syria made him "presidential."  That's just a sample.  They are surprisingly, at times, like two peas in a pod. 

STOP comparing the piece of garbage who lives in the White House to anyone, with the possible exception of:

Hitler 

Mussolini

Assad

Putin

Saddam Hussein

He is not like anyone with even a shred of decency.

"With great wealth comes great responsibility" Through out his life he has been tested and found wanting.

Trump University...........found to be a scam by the courts.  The thousands of tradesmen forced to  sue him to be paid for services rendered.

Since he admittedly does not read............maybe we can skip the Presidential Library.

Bernie Is Not a Wind Sock

The Sanders campaign is a political opportunity unlike any we’ve seen in our lifetimes

https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/03/25/bernie-not-wind-sock?amp&__twitter_impression=true

The Sanders campaign is a political opportunity unlike any we’ve seen in our lifetimes. With profound purpose, it raises the stakes to fit the magnitude of what is at stake; it challenges in national electoral terms the kind of destructive domination that has ruled with dispiriting and deadly results. “We’re going to have to fight Wall Street, neoliberals, those who don’t want the change to come,” Turner said.

Alone among the candidates for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, Bernie Sanders has always been part of progressive movements. The only way that the campaign can overcome corporate media, Wall Street and other power centers of the establishment will be with massive bottom-up mobilization in communities across the country. As Bernie said on Sunday, “We are going to put together an unprecedented grassroots campaign.”

A current media meme -- ignoring the importance of Bernie’s longstanding record -- assumes that he is likely to lose many votes to other candidates who’ve recently endorsed his 2016 campaign proposals.

But it matters greatly that Bernie has unique credibility as someone who has been part of progressive social movements during the last several decades -- and who hasn’t waited for opinions to become fashionable before expressing them.

“It’s hard not to be a bit wary of people who know how the wind is blowing and now are blowing with it,” I told a San Francisco Chronicle reporter who quoted me in an article that appeared hours before the rally. “Bernie is part of movements that create the wind. Bernie is not a wind sock.”

This piece sounds like a Scientologist talking about LR Hubbard.  This is exactly the type of sappy blogging that will turn many people off from Bernie.  But I can see if you're on the inside - this sort of thing would appeal to you.

I think you would do Bernie more justice by posting his actual speeches and linking to his policies then by posting opinion pieces by his followers.

jamie said:
This piece sounds like a Scientologist talking about LR Hubbard.  This is exactly the type of sappy blogging that will turn many people off from Bernie.  But I can see if you're on the inside - this sort of thing would appeal to you.
I think you would do Bernie more justice by posting his actual speeches and linking to his policies then by posting opinion pieces by his followers.

 I like this piece and I think the author makes some great points.   I usually only post stuff about policy and speeches unless I have to defend an attack.  I'm surprised you don't like the emotional content of this since you have stated that you support Beto and there is nothing to him except sappy, fake emotional appeal, bad poetry,  and flapping arms and jumping on tables and cars.  

But since you asked, here is Bernie in San Francisco speaking to a huge crowd:

I’m undecided- I think I’d lean more towards warren over Bernie at this point.

jamie said:
I’m undecided- I think I’d lean more towards warren over Bernie at this point.

 Bernie is better than Warren.  He will fight harder for real change, and is more strongly committed to Medicare for All.  Warren has waffled on that and is more likely to just put in bandaids.  I do like her idea to break up the big companies though--that is a good, bold idea.  She is a quality candidate, but I want someone who is more of a true Progressive.  I also think Sanders would be stronger going against Trump.  

nan said:
 Bernie is better than Warren.  He will fight harder for real change, and is more strongly committed to Medicare for All.  Warren has waffled on that and is more likely to just put in bandaids.  I do like her idea to break up the big companies though--that is a good, bold idea.  She is a quality candidate, but I want someone who is more of a true Progressive.  I also think Sanders would be stronger going against Trump.  

I think your opinion is based on a mischaracterization of Warren.  She seems more than willing to push for reforms, as she has done in the past.  Your definition of "True Progressive" may be too narrow, also.

Mayor Pete is starting to move up also - overall, a very exciting field.  

Here's a key thing in Warren vs Bernie: Warren was instrumental in getting the CFPB to become an actual thing - so threatening to the Republicans that it was a priority of theirs to completely shut it down, which they have, for now.

Bernie, as much as I love him, has not had one legislative victory in his career that comes close to what Warren has accomplished with CFPB. That means a lot to me.

nohero said:
I think your opinion is based on a mischaracterization of Warren.  She seems more than willing to push for reforms, as she has done in the past.  Your definition of "True Progressive" may be too narrow, also.

 She has been waffling on Medicare for All which is a big disappointment. She does not seem to be willing to fight for that.  Makes me wonder if she will do the same for a Green New Deal.  Also, she is not taking corporate funding during the primary, but said she would take them during the regular election.  Also, she has voted too much for military budgets to be a true Progressive.  She's much better than the Hillary 2.0's though.  

jamie said:
Mayor Pete is starting to move up also - overall, a very exciting field.  

 I think he will be a strong contender because he has as much appeal as Beto, but more substance (moldy bread has more substance than Beto). But he recently lost all of my respect when he made negative comments about Chealsea Manning and Edward Snowden.  He questioned Obama's pardoning of Manning and criticized whistle blowers.  Really disappointing.  He's also wishy washy on Medicare for All and other Progressive policies.  He's smart, and well spoken, but ultimately, just another centrist. So, not for me, but I expect him to be a much bigger challenge than many might realize. 

I disagree with the "purity test" where, to qualify as "progressive", only "Medicare for All" is the acceptable approach to universal coverage.

nohero said:
I disagree with the "purity test" where, to qualify as "progressive", only "Medicare for All" is the acceptable approach to universal coverage.

 as well you should.

drummerboy said:

nohero said:
I disagree with the "purity test" where, to qualify as "progressive", only "Medicare for All" is the acceptable approach to universal coverage.

 as well you should.

 You can disagree all you want, but you two are nowhere near progressive so you are part of the group that likes to claim the Progressive label for neoliberal establishment candidates.  Real Progressives are for Medicare for All and a Green New Deal and don't take corporate contributions in the primary or the general.  There may be some exceptions, but that's the gold standard.  

The term "purity tests" is only used by neoliberal establishment candidates, by the way to try to get Progressives to fall in line, while they try to screw them over.  

nan said:
 You can disagree all you want, but you two are nowhere near progressive so you are part of the group that likes to claim the Progressive label for neoliberal establishment candidates.  Real Progressives are for Medicare for All and a Green New Deal and don't take corporate contributions in the primary or the general.  There may be some exceptions, but that's the gold standard.  
The term "purity tests" is only used by neoliberal establishment candidates, by the way to try to get Progressives to fall in line, while they try to screw them over.  

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” 

https://www.bartleby.com/73/2019.html

STANV said:
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” 
https://www.bartleby.com/73/2019.html

 Except it's not me using this word--it's common usage.  Some of you need to catch up.  

It's interesting that people will complain that there is a split in the Democratic party, but deny that their establishment candidate is Progressive.  The split in the party is between the establishment corporate Dems and the Progressives.  The Progressives are Sanders and Gabbard.  The rest are basically centrists, except for Elizabeth Warren who is kind of a blend.  There is also Yang and Marianne Williamson who are unique outliers.  

The Justice Democrats are the Progressive organization that helped AOC get elected.  They will only take on candidates who support the Progressive platform which is defined as follows:

https://www.justicedemocrats.com/issues 

Interesting discussion about establishment vs. progressives views.  They focus on Beto but they expand to other candidate also.

nan said:
 You can disagree all you want, but you two are nowhere near progressive so you are part of the group that likes to claim the Progressive label for neoliberal establishment candidates.  Real Progressives are for Medicare for All and a Green New Deal and don't take corporate contributions in the primary or the general.  There may be some exceptions, but that's the gold standard.  
The term "purity tests" is only used by neoliberal establishment candidates, by the way to try to get Progressives to fall in line, while they try to screw them over.  

 "real" progressives are concerned with getting wins which move us in the right direction.

Unlike you. You are not a progressive - you're a revolutionary.

drummerboy said:
 "real" progressives are concerned with getting wins which move us in the right direction.
Unlike you. You are not a progressive - you're a revolutionary.

 The Progressive platform will move us in the right direction.  It's long overdue. I am not seeking anything radical.  I'm going after things that most other much poorer countries already have. 

Bernie is setting himself apart from the democrats - it's HIS revolution - not the Democratic party - it's very alienating to a base he needs.  But it's the type of thing he and his followers don't get. 

nan said:
 The Progressive platform will move us in the right direction.  It's long overdue. I am not seeking anything radical.  I'm going after things that most other much poorer countries already have. 

 Is this what you are talking about?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Democrats_of_America

jamie said:
Bernie is setting himself apart from the democrats - it's HIS revolution - not the Democratic party - it's very alienating to a base he needs.  But it's the type of thing he and his followers don't get. 

 Bernie is running as  a Democrat and his platform is more of a traditional Dem like FDR.  The centrist establishment Dems are more like Republicans than Democrats.  So it's good he's apart from them--and their corrupted, corporate owned ways.  They lost last time to an Psycho Orange clown and started a 2 year hoax to cover the embarrassment.  So, you are the one who is not getting it.

nan said:
 The Progressive platform will move us in the right direction.  It's long overdue. I am not seeking anything radical.  I'm going after things that most other much poorer countries already have. 

 Whether other countries have these things has absolutely nothing to do with whether such a drastic change is doable in a short time in America. That's what makes it radical.

Sure! Let's eliminate all private health insurance! Piece o' cake!

ok, so you're saying - all democrats who aren't Bernie followers are stupid republicans.  Understood.

jamie said:
ok, so you're saying - all democrats who aren't Bernie followers are stupid republicans.  Understood.

 No.  I did not say anything about intelligence. I said that the corporate establishment Democrats are more like Republicans than Democrats.  Obama for example -- 

Is there a form to fill out if we want a ruling on whether we're a progressive?  Is it a simple yes/no, or is it a sliding scale?