If Sanders had been the nominee, I would've voted for him. However, on online comment fora like this, "Bernie Bros" hawk, harass and otherwise demean those who support Hillary (despite that Sanders claimed publicly he wanted a clean campaign focusing on the issues). Sanders has few women in senior positions on his campaign. He may talk the talk, but he does not walk it and his "shush" moment during the debate made me see red. On foreign policy he is one big zero in my opinion -- this is my particular professional field -- and despite recent efforts to paint his political career as a success (he is NOT an outsider, he is a career politician, one who did not belong to the Democratic party), he has accomplished very little. Making a "political statement" about Wall Street (Wall Street, Wall Street) is not enough. This is an article for Bernie supporters. Go for it. Be upset. Understand, however, that Hillary supporters are out there, we are who we are because we chose her above Sanders, and that your "leftist" principles (in my view) now should be put into action to defeat all unacceptable candidates from the right. Hold your nose when you vote if you have to, and if saying that makes you feel better, fine. For me, Sanders staying in the fight does not make one hill of beans difference. Hillary needs to appeal to the popular electorate, not just to the left. She knows it just like she knew to keep her eye on the delegate counts vice minor setbacks. Onward.
58
Hmm, did the Times almost just write a laudatory piece on Sanders? It's a shame what this paper has become.
11
I scroll through the comments and realize that never once in my support of HRC have I ever felt it necessary to bash Bernie Sanders. I've never called him a communist or a liar or too old or foolish or anything.
I have to wonder why the supporters of Sen Sanders are not as courteous of HRC. Is it possible they have nothing substantive to use in their arguments?
There seems to be a lot of vitriol streaming toward a candidate in the same party. And dare I point out a strangely large percentage seems to be coming from men...
I have to wonder why the supporters of Sen Sanders are not as courteous of HRC. Is it possible they have nothing substantive to use in their arguments?
There seems to be a lot of vitriol streaming toward a candidate in the same party. And dare I point out a strangely large percentage seems to be coming from men...
80
Why are all of the New York Times "picks" so negative about Mrs. Clinton?
Does nobody intelligent have anything nice to say about the Democratic nominee?
I have a lot more in common with Mr. Sanders than with Hillary, but I'm also a realist. Anyone who has witnessed the Republican obstructionism of the past seven years can possibly expect that Congress would allow any of Bernie's ideas to see light of day.
Does nobody intelligent have anything nice to say about the Democratic nominee?
I have a lot more in common with Mr. Sanders than with Hillary, but I'm also a realist. Anyone who has witnessed the Republican obstructionism of the past seven years can possibly expect that Congress would allow any of Bernie's ideas to see light of day.
51
"Because of Sanders, the word “socialist” is no longer toxic in the United States".
All due respect Mr. Egan but I disagree. This may be true among a fringe group of millennials and other very small, specific demographic groups. But the socialist label has no appeal beyond these isolated groups in this country. Republicans would have crushed Sanders hitting him again and again with it. He has certainly fought the good fight and his message is important. Hillary Clinton is far from the ideal candidate. But a "74-year old socialist-lite" (soon to be 75) had no chance in a general election against the GOP.
All due respect Mr. Egan but I disagree. This may be true among a fringe group of millennials and other very small, specific demographic groups. But the socialist label has no appeal beyond these isolated groups in this country. Republicans would have crushed Sanders hitting him again and again with it. He has certainly fought the good fight and his message is important. Hillary Clinton is far from the ideal candidate. But a "74-year old socialist-lite" (soon to be 75) had no chance in a general election against the GOP.
33
It is already difficult to face the ignorance expressed on the far right and (less otfen these days) on the far left.
But to see a regular columnist of the New York Times try to equate "socialism" with Sanders (and many senators, including republican ones) social democracy plans is demoralizing. I can only hope it is on purpose, though I cannot see the reason? Well if it's not, here's a tip: Scandinavian countries, Germany, are social democracies. Cuba is not.
But to see a regular columnist of the New York Times try to equate "socialism" with Sanders (and many senators, including republican ones) social democracy plans is demoralizing. I can only hope it is on purpose, though I cannot see the reason? Well if it's not, here's a tip: Scandinavian countries, Germany, are social democracies. Cuba is not.
15
Rampant capitalism MUST be counted by strong social programs. Business must be made to pitch in. Hence, the vey successful social democracies in Scandinavia and Europe. We have no checks on rampant capitalism in the US, which we all know is due to the systematic destruction by the republicans.
15
This is capitalism? Not for me. I don’t see any free-market principles at work when I look at a hospital bill … no transparency there, just an incoherent jumble of charges, most of which are settled for a small fraction of the original charge by my insurance. I don’t see capitalism in the law that makes it illegal for me to hop across the border into Canada to buy my prescription drugs. Seems more like I’m in a neo-feudalistic society where I pay homage to the royalty of the pharmaceutical industry by paying their non-competitive prices. I don’t see free access to the financial markets for those who have student loans … no way to refinance so they can take advantage of low interest rates. I don’t see capitalism when our “well regulated” markets are regulated by those who are supposed to be regulated because they purchased our lawmakers. I don’t see capitalism when my tax dollars support corporate welfare. What capitalism? This is neo-feudalism and it’s getting worse.
If the so-called capitalists really don’t want us substituting socialism for their neo-feudalistic market system, maybe they should let us enjoy the fruits of actual capitalism with true free-market principles – and then live by those same principles themselves. Fact is, capitalism has been dead in America for some time, along with free market principles.
If the so-called capitalists really don’t want us substituting socialism for their neo-feudalistic market system, maybe they should let us enjoy the fruits of actual capitalism with true free-market principles – and then live by those same principles themselves. Fact is, capitalism has been dead in America for some time, along with free market principles.
39
Mr. Egan this story is far from over. We all know that the NYT has been behind Hilary. The American public has been better at talking about socialist ideas than the democrats leadership and finally we have a spokes person. But way more important Sanders is an example of a world leader.
19
Sanders may call himself a socialist but he is not. Nothing he has proposed advocates government ownership of the means of production. He has said Medicare for all, he has not said VA care for all. He has said free college not the government will own the colleges.
21
The moment we started hearing hype about the "New Economy," income inequality began to increase, and the industrial middle class began to disappear. The vision turned out to be a fraud.
Bernie's supporters aren't trying to bring back the smokestacks; we're about tossing out the shrinkwrap agreement. Hillary IS the shrinkwrap agreement.
That's what's truly scary: even with Sanders' support, it doesn't bode well for the general election. Egan; it's later than you think!
Bernie's supporters aren't trying to bring back the smokestacks; we're about tossing out the shrinkwrap agreement. Hillary IS the shrinkwrap agreement.
That's what's truly scary: even with Sanders' support, it doesn't bode well for the general election. Egan; it's later than you think!
11
Clinton is a better candidate because of him? PLEASE! She is still a back-room politician who thinks she deserves the nomination (and general election) because she is a woman, yet still has to trot out her tired, old husband to help prop her up. I agree that she might have more foreign policy experience than Sanders, but our problems are here at home, not abroad. Besides, after the NYT blistering piece on her involvement in Libya I wouldn't want her conducting our foreign policy.
24
Mr. Egan writes, "Not-quite-as-Super Tuesday was an unqualified triumph for Clinton, who outperformed polls and expectations across much of the map." Let's compare Nate Silver's forecasted margins with the outcomes in the five states. Silver predicted Hillary would win all five, so I'm taking the predicted Hillary vote percentage minus the Sanders vote percentage:
State Predicted Observed
Florida 32.8% 31.2%
No.Car. 24.6% 13.8%
Ohio 11.0% 13.8%
Illinois 7.7% 1.8%
Missouri 0.8% 0.2%
Thus, Sanders outperformed polls and expectations in 4 of the 5 states. The exception was Ohio where former Ohio Governor John Kasich seems to have drawn independent voters to vote in the Republican race which cost Sanders some independent votes. Maybe Egan has some other source for "polls and expectations," but he didn't name one.
It is especially stunning that Sanders came very close in Illinois, Clinton's home state.
My sources:
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/flori...
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results
State Predicted Observed
Florida 32.8% 31.2%
No.Car. 24.6% 13.8%
Ohio 11.0% 13.8%
Illinois 7.7% 1.8%
Missouri 0.8% 0.2%
Thus, Sanders outperformed polls and expectations in 4 of the 5 states. The exception was Ohio where former Ohio Governor John Kasich seems to have drawn independent voters to vote in the Republican race which cost Sanders some independent votes. Maybe Egan has some other source for "polls and expectations," but he didn't name one.
It is especially stunning that Sanders came very close in Illinois, Clinton's home state.
My sources:
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/flori...
http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results
22
A Hillary - Bernie ticket would be a combining 2 sides of the same coin into w whole balance. Together, they would sweep the country to winning a truly amazing revolution taking Obama's work to an even higher level. This is my wish for our country.
43
Mark my words, there is every reason to believe that the Times take on this election is wrong headed and could end up permanently damaging our country and it will be because of political cowardice. Talk about shape shifters, Egan turned into a frightened moderate.
9
Tim, have you heard that Sanders is a democratic socialist? Do you know that 3 top democratic socialist nations, Denmark, Norway and Sweden are on the Forbes top 5 countries for business, as well as beating the USA on many benchmarks for living standards? What is this "socialism is largely a failure" idea you are pushing? Ever read a book?
51
What troubles me about Sanders and his supporters is, not the theory of their positions, but their arrogant disregard for the validity of anyone who hasn't joined the "Revolution." While they claim to represent the "People," as do the Tea Party and the protesters who recently took over the national wildlife preserve in Oregon, they dismiss the overwhelming support Clinton has received among African Americans and Latinos in every contest so far. So just who are the People whose views must be respected? Are the millions of Clinton supporters, many of whom are your mothers, just a bunch of liberal neocons or just too ignorant to "feel the Bern?" Just as it's right for the Democratic Party to listen to the views of young, white people and college-educated whites and disaffected working class white men, it might also be a good idea for those groups to listen to the views of Clinton supporters, who, it appears from exit polls in swing states like Florida and Ohio, come from across-the-board demographics. It's a big country out there folks, not just what happens on campus or in small enclaves of "progressives." To believe that a socialist Sanders could appeal to disaffected republican and independent voters in a general election, especially after the press FINALLY starts focusing on the taxes paid by middle class families in Canada and social democratic European countries, is a false dream. It's not just Wall St. "millionaires and billionaires" who'd fund his programs.
45
I won't vote for Trump, I won't vote for the Clintons, and I will write in Bernie Sanders on my ballots in the June Primary and November Elections.
Cruz is not going to happen and another Clinton Administration will complete
Bill's sellout of the middle-class to Wall Street Bankers
Cruz is not going to happen and another Clinton Administration will complete
Bill's sellout of the middle-class to Wall Street Bankers
20
[I didn't mean to submit that then.] ....the social democracies of north-west Europe such as Denmark and Sweden. The US would still be a "capitalist" nation if it did. But it would be a fairer, less violent and more stable "capitalist" nation. It would have no need for someone with Bernie policies and be less likely to produce someone with ones like Donald's.
7
Mr. Egan, you left out the most important quality Senator Sanders brought to this election cycle---he is a decent human being in an arena filled people who even my very Republican Dad would find despicable.
20
It ain't over till the fat lady sings, the media keeps discounting Bernie and he makes a come back. The lesson here besides not trusting the establishment party is don't trust the corporate media either! When you stand back and look at the whole rigged picture, it is very disheartening: super delegates, party hacks, inside insiders and the Clintons quest for relevance and power. If she gets the nomination I'm still voting for Bernie in the general because he is the only real choice I have ..... A vote for Clinton is a vote for corporatism, elitism, the haves and don't worry the have nots will get swept out with the next tide.
15
Feeling the Bern yet? More like Bernt toast.....Time to drop out, this is over for Sanders and the granolas......
12
This election cycle is morel about Hillary Clinton than Bernie Sanders. He should just be happy for the students up to their ears in student loan debt and the ones who want to get a free college education from the get-go.
If it wasn't for the Millennials and especially those who knowingly ran up their college tuition costs, Sanders would still be back in Maple Syrup Country protecting his recreational gun toting populace from legislation that would grant lengthy waiting periods.
Hillary climbed onto the world stage twenty five years ago, didn't perform as she was expected to, like past First Lady's, serving Teas for visiting dignitaries and their wives, picking out the drapes and china, just being the ho-hum woman the Republican Party expected her to be. No way did they want some woman strutting around showing she had the kind of brain that just may add some fuel to that Women's Lib nonsense.
And she's had a target on her back ever since. Twenty five years she's been the butt of jokes, asides as someone to mock, but most of all, someone to degrade. A woman to get back into the kitchen and keep barefoot and pregnant.
And here we go again. The boys just can't handle a woman like her. They keep on portraying her as a shrill, cold, harsh, conniving, and you fill in the blank with whatever you want. There's plenty of things she's been called over the years. None of them true either. And now you can add Bernie Sanders to the list, just another guy pushing a woman around.
If it wasn't for the Millennials and especially those who knowingly ran up their college tuition costs, Sanders would still be back in Maple Syrup Country protecting his recreational gun toting populace from legislation that would grant lengthy waiting periods.
Hillary climbed onto the world stage twenty five years ago, didn't perform as she was expected to, like past First Lady's, serving Teas for visiting dignitaries and their wives, picking out the drapes and china, just being the ho-hum woman the Republican Party expected her to be. No way did they want some woman strutting around showing she had the kind of brain that just may add some fuel to that Women's Lib nonsense.
And she's had a target on her back ever since. Twenty five years she's been the butt of jokes, asides as someone to mock, but most of all, someone to degrade. A woman to get back into the kitchen and keep barefoot and pregnant.
And here we go again. The boys just can't handle a woman like her. They keep on portraying her as a shrill, cold, harsh, conniving, and you fill in the blank with whatever you want. There's plenty of things she's been called over the years. None of them true either. And now you can add Bernie Sanders to the list, just another guy pushing a woman around.
23
Have you ever looked at Sweden or Denmark? Social democracies that work well where people are very happy with their lives. Don't just say socialism doesn't work. It does and the result is a ver content populace, something we haven't had in this country for a long time.
27
Though I appreciate how Sanders has influenced Hillary for the better, I still believe the word "socialist" is too toxic to risk emphasizing all the way to Niovember. It's also unnecessarily inaccurate, so why take the risk? Bernie doesn't believe--or does he??--that the Federales should OWN the means of production. That's proven not to work as well as a decently (=for decency's sake) regulated free market. What do Republican voters dislike, for example, about SOCIAL Security? Nothing! Except for fearing they might lose it!
4
It would be great for Bernie to stay in the race as long as he can to keep pushing Hilary to the left.
I do wonder about the next generation of Democratic leaders. Bernie Sanders is near the end of his career and Hilary is not too far behind. This election cycle has increased national name recognition of the Republican Party's so-called "rising stars"--Paul Ryan, Rubio, Cruz and Nikki Haley. Crickets on the Democratic side, so far.
I do wonder about the next generation of Democratic leaders. Bernie Sanders is near the end of his career and Hilary is not too far behind. This election cycle has increased national name recognition of the Republican Party's so-called "rising stars"--Paul Ryan, Rubio, Cruz and Nikki Haley. Crickets on the Democratic side, so far.
4
"I have many problems with socialism, not the least of which is that it’s generally been a failure wherever it’s been broadly applied."
And I have a problem with statements like this, which purport to say something meaningful but only muddy the waters with vague generalities. Talk about "broadly applied."
And I have a problem with statements like this, which purport to say something meaningful but only muddy the waters with vague generalities. Talk about "broadly applied."
12
If Hillary Clinton does nothing else as president, she needs to overturn "Citizens United". If she does not pull out all the stops to get that odious and destructive ruling reversed, American democracy will forever be lost. It will never be done if it is not done in the first term of her election.
7
I've heard quite often from hard-core Bernie people who say they're not going to vote if Clinton is the nominee....they'd rather see the country go to pot with Trump at the lead...so 4 years later we could have real change rather than luke-warm business as usual a la Clinton. The Bernie excitement might be energizing Clinton, pushing her to the left, but Clinton is not energizing Bernie supporters, in the least!
7
If Sanders is earning left handed compliments from the NYT, which has thus far functioned as mouthpiece for the Hillary Clinton Campaign, they at least, must certainly think that he is dead in the water.
Has Hillary really shifted her position on TPP because of Bernie? I doubt it. Unless a bit of tortured equivocation is counted as a shift.
Her Husband Bill gave us NAFTA, and not a Republican, although NAFTA was a key element in the Gingrich "Contract With America," which Bill delivered on in full to include "Welfare Reform," with the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act as the cherry on top.
Somehow I think that Hillary will continue her husband's tradition of delivering for Corporations and the very rich, while seizing upon women's issues as the lever for a bait and switch on TPP.
Maddeningly it has been the actions of Democrats which had torn down the depression era banking regulation, which was the cornerstone of the New Deal, and bequeathed us the crash of 2008.
Consequently, with Hillary on deck, and Bernie now relegated to: Sort of a nice job Bern! Hang in there...left handed him by a relieved NYT, I suspect that the very rich will get very much richer, while the rest of us founder in the ebb of Bernie's wake.
We all know that on Foreign Policy Hillary is a neocon. So the war for democratic revolution will continue unabated, and we shall have a perfect symmetry of continuity with HRC in the drivers seat. Nothing will change.
Has Hillary really shifted her position on TPP because of Bernie? I doubt it. Unless a bit of tortured equivocation is counted as a shift.
Her Husband Bill gave us NAFTA, and not a Republican, although NAFTA was a key element in the Gingrich "Contract With America," which Bill delivered on in full to include "Welfare Reform," with the repeal of the Glass Steagall Act as the cherry on top.
Somehow I think that Hillary will continue her husband's tradition of delivering for Corporations and the very rich, while seizing upon women's issues as the lever for a bait and switch on TPP.
Maddeningly it has been the actions of Democrats which had torn down the depression era banking regulation, which was the cornerstone of the New Deal, and bequeathed us the crash of 2008.
Consequently, with Hillary on deck, and Bernie now relegated to: Sort of a nice job Bern! Hang in there...left handed him by a relieved NYT, I suspect that the very rich will get very much richer, while the rest of us founder in the ebb of Bernie's wake.
We all know that on Foreign Policy Hillary is a neocon. So the war for democratic revolution will continue unabated, and we shall have a perfect symmetry of continuity with HRC in the drivers seat. Nothing will change.
18
It is all true but the most important thing Senator Sanders has done is show us how to campaign honestly and honorably in a Government by the people. He has shewn us that which many had forgotten and most never knew, the way that political campaigns WORK for the people when done right. The articles many attributions to the Senator from Vermont show us how it WORKS.
Senator Sanders has also passively made clear to all the harm done this nation by the demagoguery of the Karl Rove’s and Grover Norquit’s of this world in pursuit of power and money at the expense of the people they claim to love and serve at the behest of the GOP.
Let us not forget that even with Trumps apparent lock on the nod, Cruz is the most dangerous to the USA candidate still in the race.
Senator Sanders has also passively made clear to all the harm done this nation by the demagoguery of the Karl Rove’s and Grover Norquit’s of this world in pursuit of power and money at the expense of the people they claim to love and serve at the behest of the GOP.
Let us not forget that even with Trumps apparent lock on the nod, Cruz is the most dangerous to the USA candidate still in the race.
5
What's needed now is balance, or rather a re-balance, between capitalism and socialism, the goal being the greatest good for the greatest number, to improve the lives of all Americans, as was achieved to some extent under FDR.
The Repubs have sought to tear down so much that was good, with their mantra of privatize-&-exploit-for-profit (both human & natural resources), which is what brought us to this neo-Golden Age – golden for the 1%-ers, considerably less so for the bottom 99%.
It is imperative to vote Dem all the way down ticket in November. It is beyond mind-boggling that millions of mid- and lo-income voters believe a Repub president, &/or congress, would do anything to make their lives better.
[and while we're at it, we need to restore the USPS to its former self – another thing nearly ruined by the Repubs.]
The Repubs have sought to tear down so much that was good, with their mantra of privatize-&-exploit-for-profit (both human & natural resources), which is what brought us to this neo-Golden Age – golden for the 1%-ers, considerably less so for the bottom 99%.
It is imperative to vote Dem all the way down ticket in November. It is beyond mind-boggling that millions of mid- and lo-income voters believe a Repub president, &/or congress, would do anything to make their lives better.
[and while we're at it, we need to restore the USPS to its former self – another thing nearly ruined by the Repubs.]
8
"socialism...generally been a failure wherever it's been broadly applied"
Except of course Scandinavia, Western Europe,Austrialia, New Zealand, Japan and Canada...
Clinton supporters who call Sanders a full-on "socialist" (and I've seen many online) are either a.) uninformed and haven't properly researched each candidate, or b.) purposefully being deceitful.
Neither seem to be a good thing to me....
Except of course Scandinavia, Western Europe,Austrialia, New Zealand, Japan and Canada...
Clinton supporters who call Sanders a full-on "socialist" (and I've seen many online) are either a.) uninformed and haven't properly researched each candidate, or b.) purposefully being deceitful.
Neither seem to be a good thing to me....
8
Bernie Sander's should plan on an aggressive run as an Independent in the Presidential election in order to discipline the Democratic Party that they will have to do better that the unsavory Hillary Clinton in order to live up to the promise of that party.
Merely because the GOP has canndidates of distinctly inferior quality does not mean that the Democrats should do likewise particularly one that lacks the trust of even those that support her.
She is a disgrace to good government, a disgrace to the meaning of the Democratic Party and if Sander's can cause her defeat in the long run the Democrat's will be better for it.
Merely because the GOP has canndidates of distinctly inferior quality does not mean that the Democrats should do likewise particularly one that lacks the trust of even those that support her.
She is a disgrace to good government, a disgrace to the meaning of the Democratic Party and if Sander's can cause her defeat in the long run the Democrat's will be better for it.
9
"Yes, it’s inevitable. Try to shrug off that Clinton fatigue. Hold your nose, if you have to. The only thing standing between a thuggish narcissist and the White House is the almost-certain Democratic nominee — Hillary Clinton."
Egan's sentiment bring to mind the following quote of John Kenneth Galbraith: "Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable."
Egan's sentiment bring to mind the following quote of John Kenneth Galbraith: "Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable."
7
It is time for Bernie to start getting his supporters to coalesce around Hillary. It is important she wins the Presidency now and that democrats take over as many Congressional and legislative positions at all levels of government. Go Hillary and Bernie!!
10
If Hillary Clinton can't read the public mood and make a better candidate of herself, there's no hope for her, and she'll be an abysmal president. And if that proves the case, the Democratic party will (rightfully) end up on the ropes itself.
7
I hope Sanders does what Obama did not do after his election: effectively transform his millions of supporters into an organization. "Bernie Democrats," "New Deal Democrats," "Social Democrats"- call it what you will but a political revolution needs organized troops for the long haul, not just an inspired leader. What a shame if this army of eager activists is squandered by being told their only remaining duty is to hold their nose and vote in November.
23
Ah, you're wearing your naivety on your sleeve now, Tim lad.
As many commenters have noted, you're completely misunderstanding the mode of socialism that Bernie Sanders is promoting and the extent of its "failure" around the world. This can't be all your fault, as your formative years were during the Cold War. An ideological residue remains in all of us, like the radiation from so many above-ground tests, so we have to be alert to its effects, even so long after the collapse of Reagan's "Evil Empire."
But it's your optimism about the Sanders effect on future Clinton policies that worries me most. I'm afraid it'll be Frank and Claire Underwood back in the White House, only this time Claire gets to occupy the Oval Office. If only the MSM would give us just one of those 4th-wall breaking asides to let us know what she's really thinking . . . Just one . . .
As many commenters have noted, you're completely misunderstanding the mode of socialism that Bernie Sanders is promoting and the extent of its "failure" around the world. This can't be all your fault, as your formative years were during the Cold War. An ideological residue remains in all of us, like the radiation from so many above-ground tests, so we have to be alert to its effects, even so long after the collapse of Reagan's "Evil Empire."
But it's your optimism about the Sanders effect on future Clinton policies that worries me most. I'm afraid it'll be Frank and Claire Underwood back in the White House, only this time Claire gets to occupy the Oval Office. If only the MSM would give us just one of those 4th-wall breaking asides to let us know what she's really thinking . . . Just one . . .
5
Sanders has to stay in. The Dems need somebody to run when she is indicted or some other scandal from her family hits. The "Foundation" will be her downfall.
11
Bernie needs to get us all, including Hillary, to read Gar Alperovitz' book: "What then must be done". Social Democracy is not socialism in the sense thought of by most of us. Alperovitz gives us a clear picture of how Bernie's ideas could be effected. We need to understand them and then decide.
8
Sanders has kept the ISSUES that inform Democrats front and center, allowing Dems to showcase civility, thoughtfulness, respect and inclusion during their very genteel TV town halls (in stark contrast to whatever you want to call what their opponents have been slinging at one another). If and when Senator Sanders does drop out, Hillary will find herself without this TV forum to display these traits to the nation. She will need to re-calibrate herself and pivot to her less savory ring opponent. Most importantly, she will need to win over those who have been 'Berned' and who might also feel burned. That will need to be Sanders' next stand, a role I trust he will play with the same aplomb he brought to his campaign, keeping his message alive and strengthening the Democratic ticket .
6
Yes, but Bernie needs to play a key role in this election, perhaps as the vice presidential candidate. This year, the Democratic party convention comes after the Republican convention, so Democrats have a chance to see, first who the Republicans pick.
I support Hillary for president, but I would also support Bernie for vice president.
I suggest that Clinton push the idea of a woman president with a symbol. She could form a "W" by showing "V" signs with both hands, together. Then, she could invert it to form an "M" for man.
Yes, I think it would be incredible to have our first woman president. I think she could inspire women and men (and minorities) who are oppressed to rise up. I think a woman in the White House would bring hope to our stagnant economy:
One step for (W)oman. One giant leap for (H)umankind
--------------------------------------------------------------------
W W W W W W W W W -------- M M M M M M M M M
I support Hillary for president, but I would also support Bernie for vice president.
I suggest that Clinton push the idea of a woman president with a symbol. She could form a "W" by showing "V" signs with both hands, together. Then, she could invert it to form an "M" for man.
Yes, I think it would be incredible to have our first woman president. I think she could inspire women and men (and minorities) who are oppressed to rise up. I think a woman in the White House would bring hope to our stagnant economy:
One step for (W)oman. One giant leap for (H)umankind
--------------------------------------------------------------------
W W W W W W W W W -------- M M M M M M M M M
5
"The next president has to listen less to the corporations that drive these deals, and more to the people who are their victims." Really? You think? The damage is done and Hillary was and remains an integral part of creating those victims you refer too. So Hillary, the destroyer of American jobs, will morph into the great savior and creator of American jobs. Hillary has already started that tack. Hillary, the concurrent destroyer and savior of jobs. Just how disingenuous and unlikable is that?
6
"[T]he Democratic Party is paying attention to the angry millions in the margins...".
No, sir, it isn't. It isn't at all. Neither is the Republican Party. Looks like
Trumpolini vs Hill the Goldman Sachs Shill in November.
No, sir, it isn't. It isn't at all. Neither is the Republican Party. Looks like
Trumpolini vs Hill the Goldman Sachs Shill in November.
7
I'm totally behind Bernie Sanders...I will not vote for either despicable liar Clinton or Trump. There is still a hope.......
19
Clinton has hedged only rhetorically - as the head of the Chamber of Commerce noted, she is only doing that because of Sanders; once she gets in, she'll work with us. Considering how shape-shifting she has been, why would you believe her? And why wouldn't she be ahead, with the entire bought-and-paid-for party leadership and scores of primary votes from states that vote Republican? All this does is to convince new voters that their votes don't count and the fix is in.
11
It's highly unlikely that Sanders will endorse Clinton. He ran fundamentally because he found her to be part of the established elite that has deserted average Americans. I suspect if it's at all possible, he'll run as an independent if he cannot make the numbers work in the Democratic primary.
8
It's fine if he stays in as long as he focuses on actual issues.
But if he's going to prattle on about the transcripts and the donations 80% of the time, he should just pack it in.
Notice how his campaign stalled the minute he started going negative. Maybe Trump's crowd wants that kind of candidate, but Democrats do not.
The same goes for Hillary - stick to the issues.
But if he's going to prattle on about the transcripts and the donations 80% of the time, he should just pack it in.
Notice how his campaign stalled the minute he started going negative. Maybe Trump's crowd wants that kind of candidate, but Democrats do not.
The same goes for Hillary - stick to the issues.
8
Sanders purpose in the race is to provide Democrats with press coverage. Without him, the cable channels would increase their Trump time from 80% to 100%.
And Sanders is a useful stalking horse for various policies that Hillary can use in the general election.
And Sanders is a useful stalking horse for various policies that Hillary can use in the general election.
2
Hillary has not become a better candidate. She's just become a better liar. Watch the SNL skit. That's Hillary.
12
Please note that the negative HRC postings come overwhelmingly from men. This is the world we live in, ladies. Vote accordingly.
9
To those who state that they will write in Sander's name in November if he's not the nominee, you will be voting for Trump by doing so. Good luck.
2
I detect an undercurrent of resentment/sour grapes in many of the comments today. Any Democrat who refuses to go to the voting booth & vote the ticket top to bottom, holding their nose or not, is doing a disfavor to themselves & their fellow citizens. Now is not the time to be self righteous; I truly expect that if Bernie is not nominated he will take the high road & ask, or demand, that his supporters vote for Clinton.
5
A Sanders supporter here. I will vote for Clinton in the election. We are together against Trump and the other Republicans.
Before these wins I hoped Clinton would release her Goldman Sachs speeches. Now I don't. They would be an embarrassment to her and the Party.
Before these wins I hoped Clinton would release her Goldman Sachs speeches. Now I don't. They would be an embarrassment to her and the Party.
2
Yes, but. Hillary has started to talk the Sanders talk, and obviously it's working. But at the same time, she's hitting the go-to Big Bank, Big Business community for campaign money, and that's working for her too. She says she wants to "talk" about changing NAFTA, which her husband Bill campaigned for on the promise that it would create new and better paying jobs for middle class workers. It didn't happen. Opening up trade with China never worked either; it became a high speed one-way ticket to flooding US consumers with cheaply made Chinese goods. It's pretty safe to say that the Trans-Pacific trade deal is on life support. If elected to her dream job, will Hillary kill these trade deals or just talk more about them?
3
Ever notice how many times this paper and others talk about how Bernie has "made Hillary a better candidate?"
I take that as an admission that she wasn't a great candidate to begin with. She still isn't. She can't even face a wrongly-accused man and promise that she will take a stance against the death penalty. And she will reverse course on her seemingly-progressive agenda, which she changes by the hour to keep up with Bernie's original thinking.
Once again, I will take some time to publicly shame the Times for being irresponsible in its reporting of all viable candidates early on. In your maddening efforts to anoint Hillary the prez, you've denied your readers the opportunity to understand the nuances, ideas and successes of Bernie Sanders. You even turned around on the ONE positive piece you printed on him a day or so ago--making some serious editorial changes to change the narrative to a negative one about Bernie--mere hours before the primaries. Even Robert Reich and Rolling Stone magazine are calling you out over that one.
I feel sorry for the young people in America, who from jump are being fed the notion that to aim for big ideas and big changes is a lost cost--because even the very papers there to report on those causes will mock them.
I'm still in for Bernie--it's a marathon, not a sprint. There are plenty of truly forward-thinking states left to vote. Until HE decides he's out of the race, I'm still behind him to the end.
I take that as an admission that she wasn't a great candidate to begin with. She still isn't. She can't even face a wrongly-accused man and promise that she will take a stance against the death penalty. And she will reverse course on her seemingly-progressive agenda, which she changes by the hour to keep up with Bernie's original thinking.
Once again, I will take some time to publicly shame the Times for being irresponsible in its reporting of all viable candidates early on. In your maddening efforts to anoint Hillary the prez, you've denied your readers the opportunity to understand the nuances, ideas and successes of Bernie Sanders. You even turned around on the ONE positive piece you printed on him a day or so ago--making some serious editorial changes to change the narrative to a negative one about Bernie--mere hours before the primaries. Even Robert Reich and Rolling Stone magazine are calling you out over that one.
I feel sorry for the young people in America, who from jump are being fed the notion that to aim for big ideas and big changes is a lost cost--because even the very papers there to report on those causes will mock them.
I'm still in for Bernie--it's a marathon, not a sprint. There are plenty of truly forward-thinking states left to vote. Until HE decides he's out of the race, I'm still behind him to the end.
20
What about retirees who have seen their IRAs go into the toilet? Soc Sec may be in danger, but no one can live on it anyway. What did Bernie say: raise the taxes on the rich? How about those of us who planned for our last years and are fearful we cannot afford it? Does anyone care? Why are they taxing my social security (hint: Ronnie's idea!). Why can't I with my meager savings and retirement income benefit like the billionaires do with their tax breaks. Goodby Bernie and good riddance to you and your nonsensical ideas. Your progressive ideas, idealized by Vermonters drove us from the not-so-green state and would have driven us from America. KEEP IN MIND, I am a lifelong democrat and not a ersatz republican or socialist.
1
Do I detect a note of condescension in this column? Or is it more akin to dripping with condescension?
How typical of Americans to ace out their one thoughtful candidate. It's rare that Americans are blessed with a decent and competent candidate, and when they are, what do they do?
Trash him like garbage. Way to go America!
How typical of Americans to ace out their one thoughtful candidate. It's rare that Americans are blessed with a decent and competent candidate, and when they are, what do they do?
Trash him like garbage. Way to go America!
19
Timothy Egan's been a voice of reason on the NYT op-ed pages for so long that it's easy to take him for granted. But here, again, he's right on the money: my two daughters, who are mid-20s Sanders supporters, would agree with almost every word in this entry; there isn't a doubt in the world that Bernie Sanders has improved Hillary Clinton's campaign and brought her into much better touch with the feelings and desires of Americans young and old.
2
Bernie will stay in the race until the end because he is loyal to his supporters and will not disappoint those who have not had a chance to vote in their state's primary. And yes, he will continue because he has the funds, for his supporters are as loyal to him as he is to them.
As for Clinton, I can't believe that Democrats are voting for a candidate being investigated by the FBI. How Nixonian.
As for Clinton, I can't believe that Democrats are voting for a candidate being investigated by the FBI. How Nixonian.
12
Hillary is playing a shell-and-pea game of duplicitous dishonesty in her public pronouncements on all issues to gain the votes of Americans.
Hillary would NOT be a winning Presidential candidate or President because she has the capacity more to repel people (read voters) than to lead unity on important issues. She would be divisive as President in being unable to pull consensus together (read Congress), to generate new ideas (read policy building) and to build a just America (read Blacks). Hillary was a failure as Secretary of State because she never produced solutions to significant issues nor did she undo knots of problems.
An important passage in Charles Blow’s recent assessment of Hilary is that her “proclivity toward expedient alteration is precisely what fuels some people’s sense of her in particular as disingenuous and even dishonest.”
In a more recent article Charles Blow also stated that Hilary “is a hawkish political shape shifter, too cozy with big money … and who most Americans don’t trust.”
Bernie holds the moral compass and resonates with Americans on the issues. His public policy proposals would support the disadvantaged, the poor, the middle class and correct the injustices and wrongs in America that have hurt too many Americans for too long. The Black community identifies with Bernie’s objectives and would be better served by Bernie as President than Hilary who is an opportunistic chameleon “shape shifter” and who is “disingenuous and even dishonest.”
Hillary would NOT be a winning Presidential candidate or President because she has the capacity more to repel people (read voters) than to lead unity on important issues. She would be divisive as President in being unable to pull consensus together (read Congress), to generate new ideas (read policy building) and to build a just America (read Blacks). Hillary was a failure as Secretary of State because she never produced solutions to significant issues nor did she undo knots of problems.
An important passage in Charles Blow’s recent assessment of Hilary is that her “proclivity toward expedient alteration is precisely what fuels some people’s sense of her in particular as disingenuous and even dishonest.”
In a more recent article Charles Blow also stated that Hilary “is a hawkish political shape shifter, too cozy with big money … and who most Americans don’t trust.”
Bernie holds the moral compass and resonates with Americans on the issues. His public policy proposals would support the disadvantaged, the poor, the middle class and correct the injustices and wrongs in America that have hurt too many Americans for too long. The Black community identifies with Bernie’s objectives and would be better served by Bernie as President than Hilary who is an opportunistic chameleon “shape shifter” and who is “disingenuous and even dishonest.”
12
It's entirely possible that a trade deal could be in our country's overall best interests, while simultaneously do grave harm to particular groups. Why not do the deal but make those who are made to suffer whole again. Is this really beyond our imagining?
6
Eventually, Sanders will drop out, Clinton will resume her muddled message, millenials will twitter away, and the rest of the sheeples will fall in line behind the Trumpeter.
4
You don't have to worry about whether Bernie Sanders will continue. HIs huge ego will carry him even when votes won't.
3
If Deng Xiaoping could meld communism and capitalism so successfully in China c. 1980, there must be a way to combine socialism and capitalism in the United States in 2016.
3
I'm a HRC supporter.
Yes, Sen. Sanders should stay in. I'm still hoping today he "might" win Missouri. I want him in the race. I want him shouting loud and proud. We need him because even though I don't consider him the better candidate, I consider what he's saying crucial.
Soldier on Mr. Sanders. You are doing the country a great service.
Yes, Sen. Sanders should stay in. I'm still hoping today he "might" win Missouri. I want him in the race. I want him shouting loud and proud. We need him because even though I don't consider him the better candidate, I consider what he's saying crucial.
Soldier on Mr. Sanders. You are doing the country a great service.
6
This country spent 3.5 TRILLION dollars on the Iraq war. That money could have been used to fix our infrastructure and pave the way for health care for EVERYONE. Bernie Sanders is not a war-mongering pandering politician. I truly believe he cares about this country and its people as opposed to the rest of them. I will vote for Bernie Sanders. I hope he doesn't drop out. It's not too late.
16
I hope the powers-that-be at your NYT read what you have to say about Sanders being good for Clinton, the Democratic Party and the nation.
You cannot name one politician aside from Sanders who has been so impeccably honest, candid and principled not only during his campaign but during his entire career.
For me he embodies what a politician SHOULD be like, regardless of what policies are espoused. Sanders has never been bought. Sanders is in it for YOU, the little guy, not for himself or anybody else. He walks the talk and is consistent, there is no flip-flopping.
And he has been warning our country that we are not a democracy anymore, we are an oligarchy. Certainly I hope Trump falls on his face, but I hope the next President Clinton realizes that every time she makes one of these 'tough choices' she talks about when justifying her shape-shifting stances she slices off a little bit more of what Sanders values more highly and has managed for decades to retain intact: principled character.
You cannot name one politician aside from Sanders who has been so impeccably honest, candid and principled not only during his campaign but during his entire career.
For me he embodies what a politician SHOULD be like, regardless of what policies are espoused. Sanders has never been bought. Sanders is in it for YOU, the little guy, not for himself or anybody else. He walks the talk and is consistent, there is no flip-flopping.
And he has been warning our country that we are not a democracy anymore, we are an oligarchy. Certainly I hope Trump falls on his face, but I hope the next President Clinton realizes that every time she makes one of these 'tough choices' she talks about when justifying her shape-shifting stances she slices off a little bit more of what Sanders values more highly and has managed for decades to retain intact: principled character.
12
By putting the campaign in Hillary's hands because she is considered - as we have been told repeatedly by the NYT - electable, voters have chosen yesterday's mashed potatoes. She doesn't inspire; she doesn't appeal to those younger than her cohort; she isn't even really trusted by the people who voted for her.
Every poll for months and months tells us that Bernie is a stronger choice. He beats Trump by double digits.
If Trump mops the floor with her, don't be surprised. It won't be because of Bernie. It will be because she isn't liked or trusted, and she just isn't very good at campaigning. I fear voters will have buyer's remorse come November - either way. She just is what she is: damaged and untrustworthy.
Every poll for months and months tells us that Bernie is a stronger choice. He beats Trump by double digits.
If Trump mops the floor with her, don't be surprised. It won't be because of Bernie. It will be because she isn't liked or trusted, and she just isn't very good at campaigning. I fear voters will have buyer's remorse come November - either way. She just is what she is: damaged and untrustworthy.
20
HRC's Twitter yesterday was saying something about bringing America together. It reminded me of Obama's campaign. How did that 'coming together" work out? The Democratic establishment, Hillary included, don't get the real threat facing this country, and it's not a bunch of thugs on the other side of the world. Maybe because she has schmoozed with Trump over the years she doesn't take the Trump threat seriously, but it is the people supporting him she should be watching, that group of people damaged by trade deals and outsourcing, low wages and declining security. An angry mob in search of a demagogue has found their muse. Bernie understands this, Hillary-talk about bringing us together means she clearly doesn't.
11
Socialist "failure"=Greece circa 2010, population 6 million.
Capitalist "failure"=the USA circa 2008, population 320 million.
Capitalist "failure"=the USA circa 2008, population 320 million.
4
Oh dear. I appreciate your views so much, usually, but am sorry to hear you among voices who see Bernie's value as the catalyst to push Clinton to the left. Hey,if she has to be pushed , why should we trust her? She says what she thinks will be the winning thing to say at the time. Always has. I voted 2x for bill as president, 2x fir Hillary as senator. But I have grown sick of them, and wish Obama would have packed her off into oblivion in 2008. She -- an amalgamation of Eva Peron and Lady Macbeth -- are drama magnets who never accept accountability. Enough of them already. Dynasties are unamerican.
17
The democrats know who the candidate will be. Sanders is just someone who can make it look like Clinton has some competition so it looks interesting.
As much as I don't want to I have to agree with the outcome. Looking back about a year ago when I sat in a church and listened to Bernie Sanders wrestle with running for Prez. He mused that he didn't want to run, run badly and have the message he brought be ridiculed as "see, it wasn't a problem after all" by the establishment shills. And that includes H Clinton. Face it, had Sanders not suck a finger in the eye of the establishment mavens like H Clinton she would still be out there pitching the "neoliberal" claptrap about flat worlds and open markets. So here we are. Resignation of defeat for a good man and some great causes. Will Prez Clinton deliver the goods? Probably not, but at least she isn't a Cruz or Trump. So hold your noses people and get ready for 4/8 more years of pain while being ignored.
6
Everything Egan says about Sanders and the Democratic Party sounds great but can Clinton beat the narcissistic thug? I don't think so. I think Bernie could, though and that's the grievous sad realization of where Democrat voters find themselves today.
6
Not sure I understand-- you're not saying Sanders should actually run (as a third-party candidate???) but that he should hang in there to keep making Hillary look good/better? That would be nice of him, I guess. But I can't hold my nose and vote for Clinton, regardless of how Sanders is making her react now. Because that all she's got-- reaction. I trust Trump more than I trust Hillary. There, I said it! She is not real and has no belief system. Maybe she did at one time but by now she is 100% politician. And I'm kinda old, by the way.
9
Hillary won't listen. Once she's in office she'll conveniently forget about income inequality and kow-tow to her masters on Wall Street.
17
Outperforming polls by 1% is outperforming polls? Forty to forty nine percent of Dem voters don't like HRC and Republicans hate her. While HRC was making a quarter of a million dollars for one speech, my salary as a school principal was completely stagnant for eight years. She didn't show she cared at all about her fellow Dems stagnant wages. Only Bernie stepped up to represent me. It's a sad day in the Dem Party. It's too bad Dems don't seem to be risk takers like Rs.
16
For the first time in our history, Americans have the chance to rise above politics and cast their vote for the second coming. It's right in front of our eyes, yet many once again cannot see it. Is the second coming going to appear as a democratic socialist Jew, a crony capitalist or a hate filled pseudo-evengelical. Will he feed and care for the masses, or build a wall to keep out the stranger, abuse the strangers already in our midst and take away health care from the poor. You decide. Climate change, the rise of the billionaire and corporate class, the war on terror, Russian troops in the Middle East. There is a historic opportunity for us not only to take back our democracy but to change the world. But I fear the moment will be lost for another generation and I don't see either side listening very well to the yearnings of the masses. Imagine the Savior standing on the Mount, or in our case a podium, would he really say "I can't feed these people, it will destroy their incentive to better themselves." WWJD.
3
Hillary now claims to be against the "gold standard" TPP, but also promises to continue Obama's term which is fighting hard for the TPP. Is she really going to ruin Obama's legacy and the hopes and dreams of every wealthy corporate donor by opposing it? No way!
She's talking out of both sides of her mouth to win. As Obama warned us back in 2008, Hillary will say anything to get elected. She'll fight for TPP once elected. BANK on it.
She's talking out of both sides of her mouth to win. As Obama warned us back in 2008, Hillary will say anything to get elected. She'll fight for TPP once elected. BANK on it.
13
I don't disagree as long as he does bow out, endorse her and hopefully even campaign for her. If he stays in so long he damages her, he damages our country. This election is shaping up to be the most important of our lifetimes, and we will need all hands on deck to avoid President Trump.
6
Anyone who is truly enthused by Bernie Sanders must be, by definition, absolutely disgusted by Hillary Clinton. The only way I would ever consider voting for her would be if she releases her Goldman Sachs transcripts and announces her cabinet choices before the election. She's been planning this for the last 8 years; she already knows the lineup.
12
I understand that Bernie Sanders are disappointed. In 1968, I supported Gene McCarthy and also preferred Bobby Kennedy to the Democratic nominee, Hubert Humphrey.
In 1976, I voted for and supported Mo Udall for the Democratic nomination but also preferred Jerry Brown and Frank Church to the Democratic nominee, Jimmy Carter.
In 1980, I voted for Ted Kennedy in the New York primary; he lost the nomination to President Carter.
In 1984, I voted for Gary Hart in the Florida primary; he lost the nomination to Fritz Mondale
In 1992, I supported Paul Tsongas, not nominee Bill Clinton.
In 2000, I supported Bill Bradley, not nominee Al Gore.
In 2004, I supported Howard Dean, not nominee John Kerry.
So I understand that it hurts when your preferred candidate loses.
But eventually you have to get over it and support your party and your principles. Instead of buying right-wing talking points about Hillary Clinton and mindlessly spouting them on comment boards, take some time and think about what you want for America. If you would prefer a Republican president to Clinton, maybe you really shouldn't be in the Democratic party. Maybe you should try to convince Bernie Sanders to quit the primary race and run as an independent now, while it's possible for him -- with your contributions -- to run outside the Democratic party, as he did in every election before this.
The only way you can vote for Bernie Sanders in November is if he is running on an independent socialist ticket.
In 1976, I voted for and supported Mo Udall for the Democratic nomination but also preferred Jerry Brown and Frank Church to the Democratic nominee, Jimmy Carter.
In 1980, I voted for Ted Kennedy in the New York primary; he lost the nomination to President Carter.
In 1984, I voted for Gary Hart in the Florida primary; he lost the nomination to Fritz Mondale
In 1992, I supported Paul Tsongas, not nominee Bill Clinton.
In 2000, I supported Bill Bradley, not nominee Al Gore.
In 2004, I supported Howard Dean, not nominee John Kerry.
So I understand that it hurts when your preferred candidate loses.
But eventually you have to get over it and support your party and your principles. Instead of buying right-wing talking points about Hillary Clinton and mindlessly spouting them on comment boards, take some time and think about what you want for America. If you would prefer a Republican president to Clinton, maybe you really shouldn't be in the Democratic party. Maybe you should try to convince Bernie Sanders to quit the primary race and run as an independent now, while it's possible for him -- with your contributions -- to run outside the Democratic party, as he did in every election before this.
The only way you can vote for Bernie Sanders in November is if he is running on an independent socialist ticket.
4
Those of us who have watched Hillary all these many years just feel nauseous at the thought of Hillary and Bill back in the white house. It's not that their vision for America is wrong, it's that they're both just so sleazy. And their devil's bargain of a marriage is off-putting as well.
Adding Bernie as VP is the perfect antidote. Sanders reeks of integrity and will provide the emotional ballast and authenticity that Hillary couldn't conjure up on her best day.
All you Hillary advisers out there. Don't over-think this one. Just do it!
Adding Bernie as VP is the perfect antidote. Sanders reeks of integrity and will provide the emotional ballast and authenticity that Hillary couldn't conjure up on her best day.
All you Hillary advisers out there. Don't over-think this one. Just do it!
5
This is nonsense. As soon as the election is over, Clinton will pursue the same policies and programs she has for the last 30 years.
15
Sanders has done the Democrats no favors. By proposing pie in the sky ideas, he has set up his idealist followers for a huge let down, which of course they will blame Hillary for.
All this might enable a GOP president in 2017.
All this might enable a GOP president in 2017.
8
I found myself nodding in agreement at many of Mr. Egan's points.
But conventional wisdom - even in 2016 - still holds some truth.
Bernie HAS also weakened Hillary - it's the other side of the same coin! No, he has not savaged her - as he might ... and as any Republican will - over things like her arrogance, hypocrisy, poor judgment ... and the policy differences between them have now been highlighted to an extent that she's likely to lose many millions of votes either on the left or of "independents" (basically Republicans if that party hadn't morphed as it has) - maybe millions of each.
As a Times editorial put it today - and so many "smart people" would agree with it that I wonder if we're missing something - the Republican party looks like lemmings approaching a cliff they somehow can't see or don't comprehend. THAT is the only thing that MIGHT keep this bruising Dem. primary season from having inflicted fatal wounds.
Bernie has convinced even a majority of Democrats that Hillary has no real intellectual/policy clothes. She'll say and do whatever she thinks will help HER the most. That African-Americans - face it, a scary number of young males in that group will NEVER work, in no small part because of Clinton-sponsored welfare reform and NAFTA - are the only group she can count on says it all. Imagine if a few million of THEM delayedly "feel the Bern!" - i.e., see the light.
That wouldn't have been a danger had Bernie not had 6 months to audition for "Don Quixote."
But conventional wisdom - even in 2016 - still holds some truth.
Bernie HAS also weakened Hillary - it's the other side of the same coin! No, he has not savaged her - as he might ... and as any Republican will - over things like her arrogance, hypocrisy, poor judgment ... and the policy differences between them have now been highlighted to an extent that she's likely to lose many millions of votes either on the left or of "independents" (basically Republicans if that party hadn't morphed as it has) - maybe millions of each.
As a Times editorial put it today - and so many "smart people" would agree with it that I wonder if we're missing something - the Republican party looks like lemmings approaching a cliff they somehow can't see or don't comprehend. THAT is the only thing that MIGHT keep this bruising Dem. primary season from having inflicted fatal wounds.
Bernie has convinced even a majority of Democrats that Hillary has no real intellectual/policy clothes. She'll say and do whatever she thinks will help HER the most. That African-Americans - face it, a scary number of young males in that group will NEVER work, in no small part because of Clinton-sponsored welfare reform and NAFTA - are the only group she can count on says it all. Imagine if a few million of THEM delayedly "feel the Bern!" - i.e., see the light.
That wouldn't have been a danger had Bernie not had 6 months to audition for "Don Quixote."
1
I'm sorry, but do you know what democratic socialism is? Based on your assessment of its "failures" in rich democratic Europe, my guess is that you don't. Please do your research, check your biases and then write. Wrong information is not what we need in this moment.
PS - Sorry Bernie lost. He is the most uncompromised candidate in the race. He should keep going. And going... and going...because Hilary has got some big problems coming her way.
PS - Sorry Bernie lost. He is the most uncompromised candidate in the race. He should keep going. And going... and going...because Hilary has got some big problems coming her way.
9
So the NY Times is telling us to abandon all hope. A Clinton nomination is enviable and if we don't want Trump, we'd better just hold our noses, if we have to, and go along. This is the candidate your paper endorsed? While the one "full of integrity" was thrown under the bus?
16
If Hillary wins the Presidency, a big "if", she will ignore the Sanders voters & their concerns. Her connections to corporations & especially Wall Street will protect her because she will protect them & their profits. There will be zero improvement in the financial lives of the middle-class.
13
Yes Hillary made speeches at Wall Street (paid speeches, oh my god!). And Donny owns Wall Street and also, it appears, the Republican Party. Common people would be suicidal not going to vote for Hillary because she is not perfect. The other side is dismal. Building walls, punching the opposition, bankrupting four companies, bringing in alien workers...While all the while looking as American as the hot dog, and sanctimonious, if so needed. Sometimes even young idealistic, whatever idealistic means, should grow up and go for the second worst. She is not Mother Theresa, granted. She is not Berlusconi and does not admire Putin, either......
7
Running a Corporate Democrat in the general against a demagogic billionaire with intimate knowledge of how easily such politicians are bought? I'm getting that sinking feeling...
10
"Clinton is a far better candidate because of him."
How does this help us?? Being a better candidate just means being a better bloviator. It doesn't mean being a better nominee or a better president. It doesn't mean she's actually absorbed Bernie's ideals. It means she's learned how to lie with more finesse. Her positions haven't changed; her rhetoric has changed. And millions of credulous cocktail-party liberals have bought it hook, line, and sinker.
How does this help us?? Being a better candidate just means being a better bloviator. It doesn't mean being a better nominee or a better president. It doesn't mean she's actually absorbed Bernie's ideals. It means she's learned how to lie with more finesse. Her positions haven't changed; her rhetoric has changed. And millions of credulous cocktail-party liberals have bought it hook, line, and sinker.
12
Sanders is my first choice.
Trump will get my vote in November.
I will never vote for Clinton.
Trump will get my vote in November.
I will never vote for Clinton.
7
Timothy, I hear you but there is a good deal of money going to be spent so Bernie can stay in the race. Money that could be better spent on healthcare or college tuition. Bernie should drop out and donate his funds to one of those causes. The millions he will spend in the following states is so anti-socialist.
1
For those who want to write-in Bernie on the ballot or for him to run as a third-party candidate, you should of course vote according to your conscience. But consider what Bernie himself said about the subject.
“If it happens that I do not win that process, would I run outside of the system?" Sanders said in the interview broadcast by C-SPAN. "No, I made the promise that I would not and I will keep that promise. And the reason for that is I do not want to be responsible for electing some right-wing Republican to be president of the United States.”
Bernie is no fool. When all is said and done, the man knows what is at stake.
“If it happens that I do not win that process, would I run outside of the system?" Sanders said in the interview broadcast by C-SPAN. "No, I made the promise that I would not and I will keep that promise. And the reason for that is I do not want to be responsible for electing some right-wing Republican to be president of the United States.”
Bernie is no fool. When all is said and done, the man knows what is at stake.
8
Maybe something else happened last night. Perhaps the prospect of a potentially disastrous Trump nomination and a stronger, but further left-of-center Hillary will move the current Republication leadership toward reviewing and approving a moderate Obama Supreme Court pick. The devil you know...
Short answer:
We stay in to keep the right we have earned to shape the party platform.
We may have lost the big prize on our first try, but we will be heard if we don't crawl away.
We will no longer be dismissed as long as we remain standing participants.
We stay in to keep the right we have earned to shape the party platform.
We may have lost the big prize on our first try, but we will be heard if we don't crawl away.
We will no longer be dismissed as long as we remain standing participants.
5
Hillary didn't exactly "clean Sanders' clock" in Illinois, arguably her home state, nor did she in Missouri where it is still too close to call. Bernie Sanders and his supporters can still take heart from the support he is getting in all but traditionally conservative states. This in spite of almost a blackout on anything approaching objective reporting of what has occurred in the Democratic Party or any real acknowledgement of Sanders' achievement in cutting through the unrelenting campaign against socialist ideology in this country. Sanders' accomplishments have been a pleasant surprise for what they say about a large sector of the American electorate's independence of thought in spite of mainstream media's and the establishment's best efforts to neutralize what they constantly portray as "un-American" ideas.
9
Bernie should stay in because he is my favored candidate for President of the United States from New York. He needs to push Hillary the complacent compliant stooge of money, fame and power.
I can not stomach the loathsome lying warmongering corporate plutocrat amoral wicked welfare queen Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton. And I despise the immoral degenerate serial adulterer cowardly draft dodging spoiled little rich boy bully brat plutocrat welfare king Donald John Trump. Cruz is a Canadian viper. Kasich is a loser.
The White House would be soiled by the return of Bill Clinton or the arrival of Trump's foreign born super model bimbo wife. Last Dude? Last Lady?
I can not stomach the loathsome lying warmongering corporate plutocrat amoral wicked welfare queen Mrs. William Jefferson Clinton. And I despise the immoral degenerate serial adulterer cowardly draft dodging spoiled little rich boy bully brat plutocrat welfare king Donald John Trump. Cruz is a Canadian viper. Kasich is a loser.
The White House would be soiled by the return of Bill Clinton or the arrival of Trump's foreign born super model bimbo wife. Last Dude? Last Lady?
8
When an adult is angry, right or wrong, you do not tell them to stop being a baby and do what you say is obviously best.
You listen and understand.
You show compassion and respect.
You wait calmly instead of manipulating the situation.
You refrain from provoking resentment.
You sincerely ask, what next, after the loss has been accepted?
This is what a mature response to justifiable adult anger looks like.
If you can't do that, you are part of the problem, not the solution.
You listen and understand.
You show compassion and respect.
You wait calmly instead of manipulating the situation.
You refrain from provoking resentment.
You sincerely ask, what next, after the loss has been accepted?
This is what a mature response to justifiable adult anger looks like.
If you can't do that, you are part of the problem, not the solution.
1
First, thank you Mr. Egan for your thoughtful columns.
But today perhaps you are being too optimistic in saying " Sanders has pulled Clinton to the left" - yes, Ms Clinton has changed her discourse recently, but the record of her past actions remains unchanged - and also unchanged is her desire to be elected.
Hillary Clinton's apparent adoption of the policies (and sometimes even the words) of Bernie Sanders is expedient. There is no proof at all that her convictions and loyalties. e.g., Goldman Sachs et al, have changed.
An insincere imitation isn't good enough - we need the real thing - Bernie Sanders.
PS some cheerful news for Sanders supporters - the latest results from the Democrats Abroad primaries in foreign cities show Sanders the victor in 43 out of 44 cities, with 69% of the votes.
Tthe desire of Hillary Clinton to be elected is also unchanged
But today perhaps you are being too optimistic in saying " Sanders has pulled Clinton to the left" - yes, Ms Clinton has changed her discourse recently, but the record of her past actions remains unchanged - and also unchanged is her desire to be elected.
Hillary Clinton's apparent adoption of the policies (and sometimes even the words) of Bernie Sanders is expedient. There is no proof at all that her convictions and loyalties. e.g., Goldman Sachs et al, have changed.
An insincere imitation isn't good enough - we need the real thing - Bernie Sanders.
PS some cheerful news for Sanders supporters - the latest results from the Democrats Abroad primaries in foreign cities show Sanders the victor in 43 out of 44 cities, with 69% of the votes.
Tthe desire of Hillary Clinton to be elected is also unchanged
10
I dunno, Tim. The vitriol coming from too many Sanders supporters is pretty destructive. They're doing the Republicans' work in hammering Hillary.
7
You're CORRECT in asserting that Sanders has made Clinton and the Democratic party stronger. The way the media has portrayed the primary season as some sort of killer boxing match is entirely wrong. Clinton and Sanders represent what a REAL American political primary should be all about. They are both sensible and viable candidates and that is why the votes in some places have been very close. Hillary didn't lose the states that Sanders prevailed but rather Sanders won them because he presented reasonable policy initiatives that voters responded to. Hillary embraces MANY of these and once she is elected I do not believe that those who supported Sanders will be disappointed by her Administration. He pulled her a little to the left, as a lifelong Clinton admirer, that is perfectly fine with me. I've always liked her and now I like her even more.
2
Is this really what passes for "op-ed" now at the New York Times? Condensing essays telling us how Sanders' has made Clinton a better "candidate" . . . but no where is there a promise any of this will make Clinton the president we so desperately need. If Clinton is so incredibly smart, why oh why did it take her so long to understand what was happening in the country? And why do we need to tell her? She can't see how the neo-liberal policies of her husband and Barack Obama (with a toxic dose of Bush in between) are destroying people, animals, the planet?
Give us a break. The New York Times lost me some time ago. I'm only here responding to this because someone shared it on social network, which is a far more reliable place to get information from ALL sides.
Give us a break. The New York Times lost me some time ago. I'm only here responding to this because someone shared it on social network, which is a far more reliable place to get information from ALL sides.
4
All this makes sense until you look at the dangerous GOP and those canandates. The world needs to coalesce behind Sec. Clinton will full faith and force. Sen. Sanders knows this and therefor I conclude he's an idiot. On a lighter note, Senator Sanders is an ego driven lightweight coming from Walden's Pond with his musket and dreamworld isolationist mindset. He needs to go back to the Vermont woods and write his book on politics and social psychology of ill-conceived promises.
4
The ongoing digital revolution and its machine-convergent efficiencies*, and the time-consuming imposition of the “endless political campaign” ought to wake Namurricans up to the fact that their own “democratic” process has grown more onerous than taxes. That is true in terms of the flagrant waste of perfectly good money that endless political campaigns cost, pushing philistine points of view promulgated by near-sighted businessmen who confuse their own interests with “the greatest good for the the greatest number”. And it is true too, in terms of Namurricans having their “applied human time” so constantly perverted by attention “redirects”, to the “endless political campaign”.
Had any robo calls, lately?
I’ll tell you what’s too bad. It’s too bad that in the electronic communications age we can’t do away with the Electoral College on the one hand, and the Primaries and Precint Caucuses on the other. Campaigning could be held to one month before the parties’ conventions, then one month before the election. Expenditures could be cut to the bone, with matching funds—from taxes! That would concentrate the candidates wonderfully, their fortunes depending on what they said, not on what they spent. And it would take a chain from round the leg of the Namurrican attention span, too—also good for concentration.
As for Mr. Sanders, Ms. Warren and a few others pulling the Democrats to the Left? “Variety is the spice of life!” --Old Dick Tumm
*TBD (it's written) later.
Had any robo calls, lately?
I’ll tell you what’s too bad. It’s too bad that in the electronic communications age we can’t do away with the Electoral College on the one hand, and the Primaries and Precint Caucuses on the other. Campaigning could be held to one month before the parties’ conventions, then one month before the election. Expenditures could be cut to the bone, with matching funds—from taxes! That would concentrate the candidates wonderfully, their fortunes depending on what they said, not on what they spent. And it would take a chain from round the leg of the Namurrican attention span, too—also good for concentration.
As for Mr. Sanders, Ms. Warren and a few others pulling the Democrats to the Left? “Variety is the spice of life!” --Old Dick Tumm
*TBD (it's written) later.
A thoughtful perceptive article. As a Bernie fan I look forward to the remaining primaries.
While Egan's estimation of Bernie's remaining chances for their nomination are probably correct, I will continue to support him.
His estimation of Hillary's leftward movement is pure nonsense.
She's a Republican. She's a warmongerer. She would sell the middle class straight down the river to a job at Walmart or Tyson Chicken.
She won't get the chance, because she cannot motivate the Obama base, and she will lose the election that will sweep even more Democrats out of Congress. Well played, Debbie!
His estimation of Hillary's leftward movement is pure nonsense.
She's a Republican. She's a warmongerer. She would sell the middle class straight down the river to a job at Walmart or Tyson Chicken.
She won't get the chance, because she cannot motivate the Obama base, and she will lose the election that will sweep even more Democrats out of Congress. Well played, Debbie!
6
I think once HRC has the nomination sewn-up, she will consider Bernie to be in her rear view mirror and she will start scooting back farther to the right. I hope I am wrong.
The idea of the Clintons in the White House again is repulsive to me. Ugh. But if it is Hillary against Trump, I will jump out of bed on Election Day, run down to the polling place and make sure I vote for her. We Bernie supporters CANNOT afford to be complacent and sit out the election if he is not the nominee, and we cannot afford to write him in, as much as our instincts (including mine) might be to do just that. The memory of the 2000 election haunts me and lots of others. Trump in the White House would be a very dangerous and disastrous outcome for this nation.
The idea of the Clintons in the White House again is repulsive to me. Ugh. But if it is Hillary against Trump, I will jump out of bed on Election Day, run down to the polling place and make sure I vote for her. We Bernie supporters CANNOT afford to be complacent and sit out the election if he is not the nominee, and we cannot afford to write him in, as much as our instincts (including mine) might be to do just that. The memory of the 2000 election haunts me and lots of others. Trump in the White House would be a very dangerous and disastrous outcome for this nation.
6
Agreed Tim. I don't want Hillary for bestie, but from the outset she has been the Only candidate in either race with the breadth of resume for the job. Bernie's made her Much better.
Now, she must skillfully, compassionately and inclusively assist the Berners through their stages of grief -- 'denial' being the sentiment evident in these comments.
Eventually, a strong gesture would help -- I dunno, maybe Warren for VEEP?
Now, she must skillfully, compassionately and inclusively assist the Berners through their stages of grief -- 'denial' being the sentiment evident in these comments.
Eventually, a strong gesture would help -- I dunno, maybe Warren for VEEP?
5
Right on Tim!
And Bernie. You're beautiful in your strength of purpose. You are the lone sane voice of the seriously aggrieved: from heavily indebted graduates to fading-prospects middle agers. Without you, Clinton would be waltzing to her coronation without so much as a sniffling hood-eyed glance in our direction. Instead, Hillary had to stop - repeatedly - and think and speak about us. And if she now believes the unfettered path to the White House means resuming the bloodless neoliberal agenda, Hill had better think twice and hard. Should that scenario come to pass, Clinton's campaign travails will have been mere inconveniences compared with the pressure tactics we'll bring to bear on a feckless socio-economically wooden presidency.
Bernie: Hillary needed you then and now as she will in the future. Keep up the good fight nonetheless - take it to the limit. You're too diplomatic, gracious and cunning to scotch the party from blind ambition, and with it, progressives' fervent wishes for a balanced slate all the way through November.
Vice President Bernie Sanders. 'Has a nice comforting ring to it. The next best way to keep the neo-aristocracy in check.
It'll be down to you Bernie - or Elizabeth Warren. Should Hill pick a crony as running mate, all bets are off, and regardless of who takes up residency, it'll be a pox on the White House; the gloom before the doom.
Feel the VP Bern!!
And Bernie. You're beautiful in your strength of purpose. You are the lone sane voice of the seriously aggrieved: from heavily indebted graduates to fading-prospects middle agers. Without you, Clinton would be waltzing to her coronation without so much as a sniffling hood-eyed glance in our direction. Instead, Hillary had to stop - repeatedly - and think and speak about us. And if she now believes the unfettered path to the White House means resuming the bloodless neoliberal agenda, Hill had better think twice and hard. Should that scenario come to pass, Clinton's campaign travails will have been mere inconveniences compared with the pressure tactics we'll bring to bear on a feckless socio-economically wooden presidency.
Bernie: Hillary needed you then and now as she will in the future. Keep up the good fight nonetheless - take it to the limit. You're too diplomatic, gracious and cunning to scotch the party from blind ambition, and with it, progressives' fervent wishes for a balanced slate all the way through November.
Vice President Bernie Sanders. 'Has a nice comforting ring to it. The next best way to keep the neo-aristocracy in check.
It'll be down to you Bernie - or Elizabeth Warren. Should Hill pick a crony as running mate, all bets are off, and regardless of who takes up residency, it'll be a pox on the White House; the gloom before the doom.
Feel the VP Bern!!
2
"Sanders has organized them, thrilled them with ideas once considered radical,"
Oh, Mr. Egan, you know better than that. The truth is that he has thrilled them with ideas once considered mainstream and it was Bill Clinton who helped make them seem left wing.
Nothing in his policy proposals is the least bit out of the ordinary, except in these dangerous, right wing, very extraordinary times. I won't vote for Hillary because I believe once she gets into office she will repeat all the tricks on the American people which were perpetrated by her husband. But I'm frightened.
Oh, Mr. Egan, you know better than that. The truth is that he has thrilled them with ideas once considered mainstream and it was Bill Clinton who helped make them seem left wing.
Nothing in his policy proposals is the least bit out of the ordinary, except in these dangerous, right wing, very extraordinary times. I won't vote for Hillary because I believe once she gets into office she will repeat all the tricks on the American people which were perpetrated by her husband. But I'm frightened.
8
The problem with Bernie is this: almost everything he says about the current state of life in the USA is true. But he would never have won the general election, anymore than McGovern did-- who most assuredly was correct on the issues of his day. Hillary hopefully can beat whomever the GOP puts on the ballot. We need systemic change in this country, but a left leaning president cannot accomplish this on his own. It takes major teamwork and a battle plan. Make no mistake people-- this is a war. It is us against the "powers that be," and we MUST win. Maybe Bernie can foster and lead that in really effective ways. Otherwise, his fundamental truths will wilt on the vine. How very sad.
6
As a lifelong Democrat, I will vote for Mrs. Clinton whom I see as the likely nominee. However, I voted for Sanders in the Florida primary yesterday. I was put off by Clinton's remarks about Nancy Reagan as an advocate for those with HIV/AIDS. It made me wonder just what else she could say or imagine. That was followed by a snarky criticism of Sanders about helping her with healthcare in the 90s. It backfired when it became abundantly clear that he was in fact helping her back then. Yes, Mrs. Clinton is better prepared than any other candidate of either party. She needs to start unifying the Democrats and to remember just what Democrat's values are. Her win in November is essential when considering the alternative.
1
A lot of Democrats have been impacted (and inspired) by Bernie Sanders. The Democratic Party Machine (and I say that as a life long Democrat) has not. Nor in reality has HRC - she has proven that she will do and say anything to get what she see's is her right - to be elected President. We are simply fooling ourselves to believe that someone who accepts hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees also speaks for the common man and woman. If the Democratic party and mainstream media had not both been so vociferously opposed to Senator Sanders we might be looking at a different reality now.
Instead - what we have seen over the last few weeks is that HRC is a seriously flawed candidate. Two significant groups that support Bernie Sanders - younger voters and white males are very unlikely to throw their support behind HRC. The millennials simply will stay away from the voting booths in November and white males will do the same or vote Republican.
Instead - what we have seen over the last few weeks is that HRC is a seriously flawed candidate. Two significant groups that support Bernie Sanders - younger voters and white males are very unlikely to throw their support behind HRC. The millennials simply will stay away from the voting booths in November and white males will do the same or vote Republican.
1
"Clinton is a far better candidate because of him."
One of the most back-handed compliments you could provide to either of these sorry souls.
The only thing that makes me somewhat positive about the slate of Republican candidates, and its current vote-topper, is the knowledge that our country is going through a political form of exorcism. When you look at both slates of candidates, and the newspaper of record is contented with Hillary and Bernie, you know we are turning into the homestretch of a process that will ultimately make the country stronger. We just need to hold our noses for a short while.
I wonder what Obama will do for his "Next Act". I can guarantee it will have nothing to do with either economics or foreign policy.
If Clinton loses in the general election, I am sure she will find a lucrative career in either corporate compliance or criminal defense.
One of the most back-handed compliments you could provide to either of these sorry souls.
The only thing that makes me somewhat positive about the slate of Republican candidates, and its current vote-topper, is the knowledge that our country is going through a political form of exorcism. When you look at both slates of candidates, and the newspaper of record is contented with Hillary and Bernie, you know we are turning into the homestretch of a process that will ultimately make the country stronger. We just need to hold our noses for a short while.
I wonder what Obama will do for his "Next Act". I can guarantee it will have nothing to do with either economics or foreign policy.
If Clinton loses in the general election, I am sure she will find a lucrative career in either corporate compliance or criminal defense.
1
Bernie has accomplished all that he set out to do. He wasn't in this race to come in first. His definition of "winning" has been to move the political needle left as far as possible and keep it there. He has done a spectacular job of that. All of America can be proud of seeing how a Presidential campaign should be run, with grace and integrity and a firm commitment to the people instead of himself. Bernie may not be the winner in this election, but he is victorious, for himself and for the country.
3
I believe that the contention that the word "socialist" is no longer toxic in the United States is a bit premature; perhaps not as toxic.
Both Socialism and Capitalism contain serious faults at their extremes. Mr. Sanders has contributed as far as educating the public that their are positive aspects of socialism that can be used to prevent capitalism from running rampant over the general population.
The electorate is, perhaps, now less likely to view the two philosophies in a simple, binary manner.
Both Socialism and Capitalism contain serious faults at their extremes. Mr. Sanders has contributed as far as educating the public that their are positive aspects of socialism that can be used to prevent capitalism from running rampant over the general population.
The electorate is, perhaps, now less likely to view the two philosophies in a simple, binary manner.
2
I think you make some good points about Sanders making the Clinton campaign better, but you missed big on the term "Socialist." It is still extremely toxic to the majority of Americans. That may be partly because it has been so misused over the years nobody remembers what it actually means, but a candidate Sanders would have his clock cleaned with that name association in a general election. It is the best reason to not consider him for a VP spot.
The other is that a candidate Clinton owes it to the party to lift up a younger, new face that can inspire for the next election regardless of whether she becomes President. Both parties lack viable, younger/newer faces to run for President. Hence, the reliance on either the same bunch of retreads (and I include Clinton in that group) or the wacko fringe (Trump, Fiorina, & Carson). Where are the distinguished Governors who have legislative AND executive experience beyond Kasich (no, mayor of a city of 40,000 does not count for Sanders)?
The other is that a candidate Clinton owes it to the party to lift up a younger, new face that can inspire for the next election regardless of whether she becomes President. Both parties lack viable, younger/newer faces to run for President. Hence, the reliance on either the same bunch of retreads (and I include Clinton in that group) or the wacko fringe (Trump, Fiorina, & Carson). Where are the distinguished Governors who have legislative AND executive experience beyond Kasich (no, mayor of a city of 40,000 does not count for Sanders)?
2
Bernie Sanders can still have a lasting-impact on America if he uses his considerable influence to help progressive-thinking, down-ballot candidates. We can't endure another 10-years of a gerrymandered Congress, and we can't wait until 2020 to start thinking about how to avoid that.
3
Well, I, for one, am not giving up until the last voter votes. What makes you think that at the end of the day and the delegate count has narrowed, and superdelegates are the major deciding factor, that things might not get interesting at the convention? And I've decided to send Senator Sanders a daily contribution, so at least I am doing my part. I encourage all Senator Sanders supporters to do the same. Let's see him through this journey.
95
At some point it is going to fully register with Americans that 33,000 email messages from Sec. Clinton's mixed work and email account contained solely on her private server were deleted without anyone from the government having taken a look for them. Trump will have a field day.
Bernie needs to hang in and stand by.
Bernie needs to hang in and stand by.
3
Yes, I am very glad Sanders ran, and urge him to continue the conversation he is insisting we have. The longer Hillary is forced to give voice to progressive ideas so that she can co-opt Sanders' voters, which she will do right up until the election, the harder it will be for her to walk away while President. Will she walk away? You betcha, but the question is "how far?" Thank goodness Bernie is here.
Of course I will vote for Hillary. It will be uninspiring, but the alternative is unimaginable.
Of course I will vote for Hillary. It will be uninspiring, but the alternative is unimaginable.
So now begins the phase where people of principles, ideals and hopes are admonished that they were fools, and it's time to give up, vote for the less appalling candidate, and sink back down into impotent despair for this ruined country and world. Okay, sure. Here comes climate change, endless war and terrorism, unchallenged concentration of wealth, and more strategic, repellently phony rhetoric about the future we can build together. When I think about that future, I lie awake crying for my children.
So now begins the phase where people of principles, ideals and hopes are admonished that they were fools, and it's time to give up, vote for the less appalling candidate, and sink back down into impotent despair for this ruined country and world. Okay, sure. Here comes climate change, endless war and terrorism, unchallenged concentration of wealth, and more strategic, repellently phony rhetoric about the future we can build together. When I think about that future, I lie awake crying for my children.
5
My politics fall somewhere between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton. I like Sanders and am thankful that he has made such a good run. I am happy that he has pulled Clinton to the left and made a more honest politician of her. Like many here, I am no great fan of Clinton but I will smile and vote for her against any of the radicals the GOP nominates.
I only ask that Sanders not pull a 1968 Gene McCarthy by refusing to endorse Clinton and sit out the campaign. The Democrats will need him to stump for their candidate early and often. He will be a key to voter turnout especially in light of the inevitable efforts by state level Republicans to suppress the vote when it comes to Those People.
Thank you, Bernie.
I only ask that Sanders not pull a 1968 Gene McCarthy by refusing to endorse Clinton and sit out the campaign. The Democrats will need him to stump for their candidate early and often. He will be a key to voter turnout especially in light of the inevitable efforts by state level Republicans to suppress the vote when it comes to Those People.
Thank you, Bernie.
6
So here's my plan: as soon as my state has its primary, I'm switching my affiliation to independent. I no longer trust the Democratic Party and fully expect Hillary to resume her corporate/hawkish ways as soon as she thinks the coast is clear. I do not expect Bernie to support her but rather to continue to lead us to a better politic. Here's to a viable third party!
3
I do not agree that Clinton has moved to the left. There is a huge -- no, hating that word now -- vast difference between changing one's views and modifying campaign rhetoric. Clinton is savvy and smart, but I see no evidence her principles have been modified one iota. Only change I see is trying to wage a negative campaign against Sanders which is always awkward and nearly always a miss. Hardly engendering confidence in her integrity and like-ability.
Has Hillary disavowed her pushing for US waging war in Libya? While serving as our chief diplomat?
Clinton is a moderate Republican. And a hawk. Go Bernie!
Has Hillary disavowed her pushing for US waging war in Libya? While serving as our chief diplomat?
Clinton is a moderate Republican. And a hawk. Go Bernie!
7
"On health care, on banks, on the influence of Wall Street, Sanders has pulled Clinton to the left."
Yes, yes. We all know this is campaign promise season, not what will fill agendas when the Oval Office gets a new occupant. Hillary Clinton's policy positions are like socks-- something you change at your convenience. Where she stands on any given issue depends far more on political calculations than it does on any core value or conviction.
2004-- Senate speech against gay marriage; 2008-- "Do you think New York State should recognize gay marriage?" --No; 2013-- special announcement of her change of heart.
2003-- "I am adamantly against illegal immigrants" and we should enforce the border, e.g. as a Senator she voted many times for building a "barrier" at the border --funny, because she also said we shouldn't be building walls but tearing down barriers. Her words. Now her website says she wants 'comprehensive immigration reform' with a path to citizenship.
2008-- "Since when do Democrats attack each other on universal health care?" 2016-- "I don't know where [Bernie Sanders] was when I was trying to get health care in '93 & '94..."
As first lady she opposed bankruptcy legislation, and encouraged Bill to veto it, which he did. When it resurfaced in the Senate, she voted for it.
Ch-ch-changes.
And of course, her vote for going to war in Iraq, and her propensity for regime change in general. Hardly worth mentioning.
This left handed endorsement comes a little too late.
Yes, yes. We all know this is campaign promise season, not what will fill agendas when the Oval Office gets a new occupant. Hillary Clinton's policy positions are like socks-- something you change at your convenience. Where she stands on any given issue depends far more on political calculations than it does on any core value or conviction.
2004-- Senate speech against gay marriage; 2008-- "Do you think New York State should recognize gay marriage?" --No; 2013-- special announcement of her change of heart.
2003-- "I am adamantly against illegal immigrants" and we should enforce the border, e.g. as a Senator she voted many times for building a "barrier" at the border --funny, because she also said we shouldn't be building walls but tearing down barriers. Her words. Now her website says she wants 'comprehensive immigration reform' with a path to citizenship.
2008-- "Since when do Democrats attack each other on universal health care?" 2016-- "I don't know where [Bernie Sanders] was when I was trying to get health care in '93 & '94..."
As first lady she opposed bankruptcy legislation, and encouraged Bill to veto it, which he did. When it resurfaced in the Senate, she voted for it.
Ch-ch-changes.
And of course, her vote for going to war in Iraq, and her propensity for regime change in general. Hardly worth mentioning.
This left handed endorsement comes a little too late.
7
Just one example of why Sanders should drop out. Last night, Clinton congratulated her opponent. Sanders used his moment to attack the person who will undoubtedly be Democratic nominee.
The whole "pull her to the left" argument is pointless. If we want to avoid a Republican presidency, we need to support our candidate and her party, not trash her. I doubt Sanders will ever do that, nor most of his petulant supporters.
The whole "pull her to the left" argument is pointless. If we want to avoid a Republican presidency, we need to support our candidate and her party, not trash her. I doubt Sanders will ever do that, nor most of his petulant supporters.
1
It is not Sanders who has moved Clinton further to the left but the numbers of people voting for him who have given Clinton permission to do so. Though not a leftist, I don't see Clinton Republican-lite either. She is cautious, an incrementalist who learned much from her husband's time in the WH and her experience serving under Obama. Sanders has been around for a long time. I voted for him on my mail in ballot so I am share his vision and his values. He did not, however, introduce them to me but he was the most progressive candidate running for the DEM nomination. Since the Great Recession, and the tremendous losses suffered by many as we watch a small group of the very privileged gain more and more wealth, there are many who also were looking for radical change in the form of democratic socialism.
1
Bernie should run as an independent candidate as there is no good alternate choice to his voice and passion for what he believes in. He should not be used as a surrogate to make Hillary a better politician. If only African Americans voted based on issues that will help them move up in the socio economic ladder and not based on rhetoric, we would be seeing different results thus far in the democratic election. sigh!
3
Bernie has no reason to quit now, and it would be dangerous for him to do so. Lots of folks are voting for Hillary not because they like her better but because they think she has a better chance of beating Trump (or whoever the GOP nominates) than does Bernie. This "truth" has been drummed into their heads by the media, including the NYT. But it it true? I don't think so. And if that becomes more apparent by the summer -- ie if Trump is leading in the polls -- the superdelegates may rethink their support. And I'm still waiting for Hillary (or someone else, eg some Republican who attended) to disclose her speeches -- I suspect they will be damaging.
Everyone seems to think Trump will be easy for the Dems to beat. Again, I don'l think so. He's an actor, able to switch personas at will. I predict that once he has consolidated his lead he'll start sounding "presidential" and "reasonable." This won't lose him his nutty supporters but it will make it acceptable for the GOP to unite behind him to "stop Hillary." Can she generate enough enthusiasm to overcome that? I think Bernie could.
Everyone seems to think Trump will be easy for the Dems to beat. Again, I don'l think so. He's an actor, able to switch personas at will. I predict that once he has consolidated his lead he'll start sounding "presidential" and "reasonable." This won't lose him his nutty supporters but it will make it acceptable for the GOP to unite behind him to "stop Hillary." Can she generate enough enthusiasm to overcome that? I think Bernie could.
1
I don't have to hold my nose to support Hillary Clinton. She is the better candidate because she is pragmatic just as Barack Obama is pragmatic. The hyperbolic attacks on both repeated over and over ad nauseum cause damage to favorability but do not change their ability. I like Bernie Sanders and hope his movement steps up into the void left by declining unions. The American worker needs more political power. However, switching the from one sided big business to one sided populist is still unbalanced and a strong pragmatic leader will be a benefit for all.
8
The only things that will ensure the Democrats of another presidency is a ringing endorsement of Hillary by Sanders before the convention and acceptance by responsible Republicans and business leaders that the nation will be far better served by a stable, qualified candidate (Hillary) than by the perpetually destabilizing, self-aggrandizing, internationally despised Trump. Also, Hillary has to be utterly transparent about her Wall St. speeches and apologize again for the email fiasco, while showing that national security wasn't compromised in any way. Further, she has to propose sensible, practical ways of fixing the college loan program, improving Obamacare, partnering with the states on infrastructure, and enlisting John Kerry's experience in charting new ways to combat ISIS, deal with Putin, stop the killing in Syria and repair relations with Israel. In ln other words, she has to campaign as though she already were president (without sounding entitled to the presidency). A lot to ask for, but after all the drama of the primaries, the country will be looking for real leadership and real solutions.
2
Bernie has no reason to quit now, and it would be dangerous for him to do so. Lots of folks are voting for Hillary not because they like her better but because they think she has a better chance of beating Trump (or whoever the GOP nominates) than does Bernie. This "truth" has been drummed into their heads by the media, including the NYT. But it it true? I don't think so. And if that becomes more apparent by the summer -- ie if Trump is leading in the polls -- the superdelegates may rethink their support. And I'm still waiting for Hillary (or someone else, eg some Republican who attended) to disclose her speeches -- I suspect they will be damaging.
Everyone seems to think Trump will be easy for the Dems to beat. Again, I don'l think so. He's an actor, able to switch personas at will. I predict that once he has consolidated his lead he'll start sounding "presidential" and "reasonable." This won't lose him his nutty supporters but it will make it acceptable for the GOP to unite behind him to "stop Hillary." Can she generate enough enthusiasm to overcome that? I think Bernie could.
Everyone seems to think Trump will be easy for the Dems to beat. Again, I don'l think so. He's an actor, able to switch personas at will. I predict that once he has consolidated his lead he'll start sounding "presidential" and "reasonable." This won't lose him his nutty supporters but it will make it acceptable for the GOP to unite behind him to "stop Hillary." Can she generate enough enthusiasm to overcome that? I think Bernie could.
9
This campaign has a 1930's feel - our Overton Window has moved from the far right, to a place even farther to the right. The dark place where far right and far left join. Socialism is on the left and National Socialism is on the right, and all of the candidates are now struggling to fit into the window. I'm not sure that's a good thing.
Obama and Hillary were originally trying to nudge the window back to the center, where it was during America's best decades of the 20th Century. I wish that had happened. A clash of Socialism and Fascism never ends well.
Obama and Hillary were originally trying to nudge the window back to the center, where it was during America's best decades of the 20th Century. I wish that had happened. A clash of Socialism and Fascism never ends well.
48
Considering the role of money in these campaigns, the fact that Hillary can sing "i got my own" is a plus. Trump can't financially overpower her. If she gets to be President moreover, she'll be in the driver's seat and not beholden to Wall Street as much. Maybe Bernie has done her some permanent good like Mr. Egan claims. Hillary used to be more liberal. And Wall Street is major influence but still only one special interest out of many. On domestic issues Hillarybmight be still be good: on the environment, for example. On foreign affairs she carries weight; Bernie has next to none. The Republican, he whose name should not be spoken, inspires fear. Good or bad, voter decides. Hillary has to some serious mea culpas to make: Benghazi, the Iraq War, all those mistakes as Senator when she was trying to prove she was tough enough to be President. Ironically, standing up to Republicans, not caving, is where she does best. Still, she has to win young people herself somehow. Bernie can't just tell his supporters who to vote for.
1
"Sanders has pulled Clinton to the left" for the primaries. But to transfer his support to her after the nomination, there will have to be a credible expectation that she will not recenter as President. There needs to be a clear public promise that Sanders will be given a role and authority to enact some specific parts of his agenda under a President Clinton, and then he can endorse her in such a way as to carry his supporters to her.
Time to unify against the darkness of the right.
Time to unify against the darkness of the right.
6
My biggest concern is that voters who plan to "hold their nose" and vote for Clinton and the millennials who support Sen. Sanders will stay home in November.
I hope Clinton can take some of what Sanders has been saying and consider that those issues are important to a large section of voters.
I would hope that the thought of four years of Trump, or Cruz or Kasich woulod mobilize the party.
I hope Clinton can take some of what Sanders has been saying and consider that those issues are important to a large section of voters.
I would hope that the thought of four years of Trump, or Cruz or Kasich woulod mobilize the party.
2
Bernie Sanders' supporters are nothing if not passionate. But when their passion degenerates into a misogynic stew of Hillary-hate, they lose me completely. Let's hope that we can put our differences behind us, like we did in 2008, and unite behind the only person qualified to lead the United States.
10
Bernie has been focusing on Wall Street as the establishment that needs to be more beholden to the people. But the political parties are another force that must be opposed. For this reason I'll vote for whichever party brings the people an independent candidate: Sanders or Trump, much as I will have to hold my nose for Trump. Th control of the parties, which are in hock to big-money special interests, must be broken.
1
Bernie lost big time on Tuesday. There is no solace to be taken from that. Hillary Chameleon will be the nominee, she will be financed by Goldman Sachs, she will represent the corporate establishment in Nov and the economic collapse of the former middle class will go on ... until. Until the next Bernie, younger by a generation or two, arrives. The time to begin that campaign is now, right now, before the 2016 voting takes place. Political revolutions take a long time to win, muçh longer than one campaign cycle. Forget Hillary, remember Bernie with great fondness, but work for the Idea of All Men and Women are Created Equal. That idea cannot be defeated in any rigged contest. It's not for sale in exchange for a bribe. Bernie reawakened the idea for yet another generation, for which we thank him! The struggle goes on, not in the 2016 election -- rigged, successfully, yet again -- but in the trenches, where a great advance has been won: "socialism" is a respectable word in American politics! We won't carry the day, or the year, but the battle lines have been dràwn anew by the next generation. We shall overcome!
9
Bernie has done a great service. He has altered the discussion. We should be grateful. Now he should step aside and do everything he can to help unify Democrats behind Hilary Clinton.
Changing the dialogue has been a real accomplishment in a career that is remarkably thin on tangible accomplishment in terms of introducing and passing legislation.
So, dear Bernie, do what you do best...hold up socialist ideals. I'm not being snarky, I was on the ballot twice as a Socialist Elector, got a massive five votes without any campaigning at all! But hold up the ideals and get out of the way of a candidate who has some slim (given our we're-against-everything Congress) chance of achieving at least some moderate progressive gains.
I know all of Hilary's minuses. They are serious and have been aired relentlessly. But she is the only candidate with the experience and gravitas to lead this country domestically and internationally.
Changing the dialogue has been a real accomplishment in a career that is remarkably thin on tangible accomplishment in terms of introducing and passing legislation.
So, dear Bernie, do what you do best...hold up socialist ideals. I'm not being snarky, I was on the ballot twice as a Socialist Elector, got a massive five votes without any campaigning at all! But hold up the ideals and get out of the way of a candidate who has some slim (given our we're-against-everything Congress) chance of achieving at least some moderate progressive gains.
I know all of Hilary's minuses. They are serious and have been aired relentlessly. But she is the only candidate with the experience and gravitas to lead this country domestically and internationally.
2
Only way this Democrat votes for, in effect, a third term for Bill is if she does something extraordinary, like choosing Elizabeth Warren as her VP.
As it stands, I bet there will be two surprising things out of this. The first will be the weird cross vote, as "poorly educated" labor oriented Dems vote for Trump, and women Republicans mumble " I am woman, hear me roar" to themselves as they vote for her in secret, loving the idea of a woman of any political stripe in the White House.
And why not, she is more moderate Republican, in the traditional sense, than anything else.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene
As it stands, I bet there will be two surprising things out of this. The first will be the weird cross vote, as "poorly educated" labor oriented Dems vote for Trump, and women Republicans mumble " I am woman, hear me roar" to themselves as they vote for her in secret, loving the idea of a woman of any political stripe in the White House.
And why not, she is more moderate Republican, in the traditional sense, than anything else.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene
3
"Now is the time for all good men (and women) to come to the aid of their country." That's right, Bernie's candidacy isn't finished. He made a good showing in a difficult environment. We expected Hillary would win the South, just as we expected Trump to do the same. In the important states (for democrats in the general election), Bernie made an outstanding showing and millions of voters want him. He needs to stay in the race and play it out. Anything can happen. The disaster that the Republicans would bring on this country is incalculable.
9
For independents the fear of Trump will be stronger than any interest in Sanders. The recent violence at Trump events has has begun to turn the independent tide toward Clinton. That is why she strengthened in the period leading op to Tuesday's primaries - even after the Michigan loss. Clinton should have no fear of pivoting to the general election. And we can expect Trump to recognize this but he is not yet free to maneuver toward the center - and he has a long way to go.
1
It is obvious that the people do not trust the leaders of either party. As a result we have Trump leading in the polls for Republicans. And a sizable portion of the Democrats are against the party's favored candidate, Hillary.
The Republican party leaders have only themselves to blame for encouraging rhetoric that attacked government, ridiculed bipartisanship. The people have taken them at their word and voted for Trump.
The Democratic party leaders have been too timid to adopt the economic changes that the voters want. I don't know how they will manage to enthuse the voters to turn out in November to vote for Hillary.
The Republican party leaders have only themselves to blame for encouraging rhetoric that attacked government, ridiculed bipartisanship. The people have taken them at their word and voted for Trump.
The Democratic party leaders have been too timid to adopt the economic changes that the voters want. I don't know how they will manage to enthuse the voters to turn out in November to vote for Hillary.
5
Sanders can continue to do good by negotiating a deal to swing the platform left in exchange for helping to bring his young supporters behind Hillary. He is uniquely situated to teach his disappointed followers that politics is the art of the possible and that the perfect should not be the enemy of the good. He should disabuse them of the notion that staying home in November is in their interest. He should exhort them to get out and vote to turn the Congress blue. If he stays in he must not go negative. That will help only the Republicans.
10
This article was spot on. Absolutely Sanders should stay in. For a very long time the Democratic elite have taken liberals and minorities for granted. I have been advocating as Sanders has since Clinton's presidency which was nothing short of appeasing the GOP in Congress and Wall Street. I recall how he cozied up to Enron, whose Chairman and entire leadership were Republicans, and held them in high esteem; we all know how that company ended up. We in Texas have benefited from NAFTA while the rust belt got worse, even though the majority of Democrats voted against it. And let's not forget the effects of the catastrophic reduction in welfare benefits to the poor.
Burn, baby, Burn.
Burn, baby, Burn.
7
As a moderate (gasp!) Hillary supporter, it is heartening to see a few more Hillary supporters finally emerging from their bunkers, after yesterday's victories, and posting again on the NYT comments pages today.
I am still struck by the ferocious personal anger towards Hillary that many of the Sanders supporters display on here, virtually indistinguishable from that of the Tea Party right.
As a Hillary supporter, while I strongly disagree with many of Sanders' positions, I bear no ill will towards the man or his candidacy and I agree with Mr. Egan that his candidacy has opened up the Democratic Party to new voices and ideas.
I am concerned, however, that we are now entering a dangerous period of diminishing returns with Sanders, where his "dead-end" candidacy, to use Mr. Egan's phrase, will do more harm than good to the Democratic Party's chances in November, not just in the presidential race, but in the critical down-ballot races for Congress, governors, state legislatures and county and municipal offices.
Bernie Sanders has some hard decisions to make in the next few weeks.
I am still struck by the ferocious personal anger towards Hillary that many of the Sanders supporters display on here, virtually indistinguishable from that of the Tea Party right.
As a Hillary supporter, while I strongly disagree with many of Sanders' positions, I bear no ill will towards the man or his candidacy and I agree with Mr. Egan that his candidacy has opened up the Democratic Party to new voices and ideas.
I am concerned, however, that we are now entering a dangerous period of diminishing returns with Sanders, where his "dead-end" candidacy, to use Mr. Egan's phrase, will do more harm than good to the Democratic Party's chances in November, not just in the presidential race, but in the critical down-ballot races for Congress, governors, state legislatures and county and municipal offices.
Bernie Sanders has some hard decisions to make in the next few weeks.
15
I wonder if his supporters can continue to financially support a lost campaign. Staying in seems, like much of his employ promises, irresponsible to the very people he says he wants to help.You, Mr. Egan, seem to want him to stay around and continue to pummel the soon to be Democratic nominee. Seems sort of counter productive to putting a Democrat in office and more just disruptive noise to match the noise on the right. I vote no thanks as do the 4 states Clinton swept last night.
1
Well said. I only wish that Senator Sanders left the race now because it would make his more avid supporters of color less likely targets for the 1% driven thugs for Trump. Why one-third to one-half of the Republican Party wants racial violence is a mystery to me. His message is most welcome, and I wish that more of the party agreed with it.
As much as I love Senator Sanders, the best way to reward his hard work is with a Democratic majority in Congress.
As much as I love Senator Sanders, the best way to reward his hard work is with a Democratic majority in Congress.
2
"It was the last chance for Sanders to show that he had a path to the nomination."
This country is supposed to be about Equal Justice for All.
Hillary violated the law concerning national secrets. On top of this, the evidence is that she used her office to extend favorable treatment to governments which donated to the Clinton Foundation. This is corruption in its most crystalline form, short of a sweaty wad of cash -- and don't sell the Clintons short in that department either.
If the law meant anything in America, and it seems not to, Hillary would be under Indictment. If the Justice Department actually enforced the law equally and without bias, which it doesn't, Hillary's path to the Presidency would not be so smooth.
This country is supposed to be about Equal Justice for All.
Hillary violated the law concerning national secrets. On top of this, the evidence is that she used her office to extend favorable treatment to governments which donated to the Clinton Foundation. This is corruption in its most crystalline form, short of a sweaty wad of cash -- and don't sell the Clintons short in that department either.
If the law meant anything in America, and it seems not to, Hillary would be under Indictment. If the Justice Department actually enforced the law equally and without bias, which it doesn't, Hillary's path to the Presidency would not be so smooth.
4
I very strongly disagree that Sanders has made Clinton a better candidate. He has attacked her viciously, calling her essentially corrupt at every opportunity, and has done nothing but dampen Democrats enthusiasm for her. He did everything he could to estrange Democrats not only from Clinton but from their party. He dredged up all the shibboleths of Republican attacks and added some of his own - attacks which have never been used in a Democratic primary in my lifetime.
Clinton's race with Obama in 2008 was much different in that Obama was untested, green, had some things in his past that could have tripped him up (Reverend Wright), and she forced him to answer those charges before the general election. Sanders charges were based on unanswerable tenets - she takes campaign money from corporations so therefore she must be corrupt. He stirred up a lot of nasty stuff and I will be happy to see the back of him.
Clinton's race with Obama in 2008 was much different in that Obama was untested, green, had some things in his past that could have tripped him up (Reverend Wright), and she forced him to answer those charges before the general election. Sanders charges were based on unanswerable tenets - she takes campaign money from corporations so therefore she must be corrupt. He stirred up a lot of nasty stuff and I will be happy to see the back of him.
137
Interesting commentary. I guess I could see why Timothy has a problem with socialism since it brings clean water into our homes, sewage out of our homes, roads to drive our cars on, forests and public spaces to walk in, dams to help farmers irrigate fields, subsidizes affordable food, CRP grass to hunt in, and subsidizes farmers so they can make a go of it. I can certainly see the evils of socialism.
But on the other hand, I can see why Timothy loves capitalism since it brings us outrageous prescription drug prices, health insurance companies to manage and bloat the price of care, trade deals that send jobs to cheaper labor markets overseas so corporations can thrive, keeps wages down so investors can profit, and buys congressmen who intelligently deny climate change in order to erode the EPA.
I also know that Timothy realizes we already have a mix of socialism and capitalism and it is that mix that makes America great. We really must stop demonizing socialism and idolizing capitalism and recognize we need a strong balance of socialism and capitalism. Socialism to take care of the health, education, and public services of our nation. Capitalism to spark innovation and maintain a strong economy and jobs for our populous.
But on the other hand, I can see why Timothy loves capitalism since it brings us outrageous prescription drug prices, health insurance companies to manage and bloat the price of care, trade deals that send jobs to cheaper labor markets overseas so corporations can thrive, keeps wages down so investors can profit, and buys congressmen who intelligently deny climate change in order to erode the EPA.
I also know that Timothy realizes we already have a mix of socialism and capitalism and it is that mix that makes America great. We really must stop demonizing socialism and idolizing capitalism and recognize we need a strong balance of socialism and capitalism. Socialism to take care of the health, education, and public services of our nation. Capitalism to spark innovation and maintain a strong economy and jobs for our populous.
18
The mass media have been enjoying comparing Sanders and Trump. Now will
they start seeing the similarities between Trump and Clinton? She has demonstrated her ability to use her particular skills to deceive voters on her record and clearly is motivated by a total belief in her entitlement to the presidency. Both are motivated by undisguised personal need to win the office, no matter how much they say they're doing it for "regular people". Voting for either Trump or Clinton, we won't really know what we're voting for, with one exception. We know we'll be voting for four more years of
military interventionism.
they start seeing the similarities between Trump and Clinton? She has demonstrated her ability to use her particular skills to deceive voters on her record and clearly is motivated by a total belief in her entitlement to the presidency. Both are motivated by undisguised personal need to win the office, no matter how much they say they're doing it for "regular people". Voting for either Trump or Clinton, we won't really know what we're voting for, with one exception. We know we'll be voting for four more years of
military interventionism.
5
The analysis of exit polls in Ohio that I read says that independents and some Democrats crossed over and voted for Kasich. Under any other circumstance the same people would probably have voted for Bernie. Given that in another two states Bernie essentially tied Clinton I think he still has a great shot at the nomination. He should do very well out West in the coming weeks. Hang in there Bernie supporters. This is not over.
6
I think the Oligarchy is a failure and "democratic socialism" is hardly the failure that you say. More and more of our children are growing up in grinding poverty--our anti social corporations are benefiting from the infrastructure and wanton exploitation of resources without accountability for the long term impact of their profit on the environmental devastation they are leaving to the people. Wake up!
The kind of change Bernie's Campaign represents is needed and opens the door to a new ethic that just might help overcome the greed is good mentality we operate under now.
The kind of change Bernie's Campaign represents is needed and opens the door to a new ethic that just might help overcome the greed is good mentality we operate under now.
6
The very first thing to do with trade and investment agreements is to amend their odious system to solve conflicts. Instead of national judges looking for common good there are paid arbitrators protecting the rights of investors. Like in Rome protecting the citizens, or in the Dark Ages protecting the Church and Feudal Lords. There is nothing more undemocratic, in both political and economic terms, that justice designed to protect the power havers who call the shots.
4
I am grateful to Sanders for bringing back the notion that safety nets don't make the nations "takers." That politicians are supposed to work to improve our lives and the country, not help a few extract every last cent of value from it, like spiders, leaving only a husk behind.
But I am also frustrated, because in this election, it is critical that we have one branch of government to act as a brake, and slow down some of the most damaging ideas coming from the real power of the GOP in Congress and the State Houses. And Sander's run has encouraged a lot of the party to view Hillary Clinton to be as toxic as the right see her.
In reality, we need Wall Street, we need employers. We need trade deals. But we need to make sure that all those parts work FOR the electorate, not against them. Clinton is a lot more likely to help there than anyone from the right. And we have dented her enough that we could lose the whole shebang in a 49.99% to 50.0% election.
But I am also frustrated, because in this election, it is critical that we have one branch of government to act as a brake, and slow down some of the most damaging ideas coming from the real power of the GOP in Congress and the State Houses. And Sander's run has encouraged a lot of the party to view Hillary Clinton to be as toxic as the right see her.
In reality, we need Wall Street, we need employers. We need trade deals. But we need to make sure that all those parts work FOR the electorate, not against them. Clinton is a lot more likely to help there than anyone from the right. And we have dented her enough that we could lose the whole shebang in a 49.99% to 50.0% election.
2
Bernie Sanders' campaign has been a stunning, exhilaration success. But even if he won the most important thing would would be the continual engagement and mobilization of people to help bring about the changes that are necessary (maybe even going way further--certainly in terms of imperialism and militarism-- than what Bernie Sanders is calling for.) One very significant part of what was said that it was a movement of people more then the election of any one person that was most crucial. That still is true.
6
Europeans are chuckling with calling Sanders a "socialist", even though he himself may have used the term in the past. For Europeans, Sanders is a solid "social democrat" and would be considered middle-of-the-road, he's not even close to being a 'leftist', or 'socialist'. No European, for example, could ever imagine a socialist voting to *protect* the gun industry from being prosecuted in court.
This is a sad reflection on the conservative nature of American politics, and how successful the GOP has been in brainwashing the mass of American voters into believing that trickle-down plutocracy is in their best interests.
This is a sad reflection on the conservative nature of American politics, and how successful the GOP has been in brainwashing the mass of American voters into believing that trickle-down plutocracy is in their best interests.
5
About triangulation -- does anybody actually remember the 90s? The center of gravity of the voting public was way to the right. Remember Reagan Democrats? Remember Newt Gingrich and his gang sweeping into power in the House of Representatives? Remember that the only way Bill Clinton got elected in the first place was when Ross Perot split that majority conservative block in two, allowing Clinton to win with a plurality - NOT a majority?
Bernie is showing that times have changed -- that the center of Democratic political opinion is finally, visibly, shifting back to the left, and that a pragmatic politician needs to shift with it. So if Hillary shifts, that's the direction she's going to go -- not right. Unless we see the mirror-image of the 92 election, and a majority left-leaning vote is split, allowing Trump (or whoever) to win with a plurality.
I'll vote for whoever the Democratic presidential candidate is in November, and continue to work for bottom-up change at the local and state level. I believe that's the road to real change.
Bernie is showing that times have changed -- that the center of Democratic political opinion is finally, visibly, shifting back to the left, and that a pragmatic politician needs to shift with it. So if Hillary shifts, that's the direction she's going to go -- not right. Unless we see the mirror-image of the 92 election, and a majority left-leaning vote is split, allowing Trump (or whoever) to win with a plurality.
I'll vote for whoever the Democratic presidential candidate is in November, and continue to work for bottom-up change at the local and state level. I believe that's the road to real change.
7
This Bernie Sanders movement will be the undoing of the Democratic Party the way the Tea Party's was for the Republicans. Bernie is selling middle class whites and young people the pipe dream that the globalisation and technology induced stagnation in their wages will be corrected by redistribution, government freebies and trade protectionism. Bernie's intentions maybe noble and his focus on income inequality is just. His policy proposals however are fanciful for all but the naïve and will no more work in the US than socialism worked anywhere else. If what we want as a society is a European style welfare state Bernie should say so directly and be less naïve (or more honest) with us that it will imply much higher taxes and lower growth for all of us (Europe grows at half the rate of the US, has twice the unemployment rate, and Germany and France's per-capita incomes are only 2/3 of the US'). I for one do not believe this will fly in the US. The fact Hillary is forced to pander to this non-sense is a negative not a positive. The Democratic party's day of reckoning will come sooner or later if this path is followed. Sorry to spoil your reader's love fest with the Bernie unicorn !
3
I support Sanders, but it is time for him to get out of the race and let Clinton have the floor to herself. He cannot influence Clinton and, in any event, the voters have decided they don't want what he's selling. They want endless war. They want a continuation of the status quo that favors the rich and destroys the middle class. They want crushing debt for college students and an end to any sort of progressive suggestions on trade and health care. They want a nice republican president who won't do anything to force meaningful change. They want Clinton.
6
This op-ed seems to me to be trying to channel Senator Sanders into the very limiting role of fading away towards the sidelines, ultimately endorsing Mrs. Clinton, and then going off to history's dustbin. I'd rather he didn't do that.
The current situation reflects the corruption of our primary system. I don't particularly care that Mrs. Clinton is cleaning up in the Old Confederacy. She won't carry those states in the general election. While Sanders didn't win in Ohio and Missouri, he came so close that he is still a factor. More significant states - including my own - are still to be heard.
Stay in the race, Senator Sanders. Mrs. Clinton might make a decent vice president.
The current situation reflects the corruption of our primary system. I don't particularly care that Mrs. Clinton is cleaning up in the Old Confederacy. She won't carry those states in the general election. While Sanders didn't win in Ohio and Missouri, he came so close that he is still a factor. More significant states - including my own - are still to be heard.
Stay in the race, Senator Sanders. Mrs. Clinton might make a decent vice president.
5
By wrongly asserting "that socialism has generally been a failure wherever it's been broadly applied"Mr Eagan, with whom I generally agree" reduces his logic to a fearful analysis of the structural changes necessary in the U.S. to vastly change the quality of life of the majority who have been left behind by the great engine of free market capitalism. Or should we all assume that becoming a visitor to the show "shark tank" will bring us the american dream. This is from someone who was self-employed his whole adult life.
6
Mr. Egan, I would take German and Scandinavian socialism over American capitalism any day. Maybe you haven't noticed the millions of Americans in poverty, our inability to retrain workers up to the much higher standards of German workers, the primacy of an industry (financial) that produces nothing of value and just extracts wealth, and the tens of thousands of murders year after year because of the lack of social cohesion that is the inevitable result of our 'every man for himself' ethos. This country is broken and its broken because unfettered capitalism by its very nature leaves people behind. Capitalism succeeds because it coopts and divides in subtle and not so subtle ways.
I would point to the Centrist Democrat approach, which gains huge support from teachers unions and public employee unions who are not affected by free trade agreements, but which has left millions of other members of the working class unemployed and with no future prospects. As the teachers and public employees in Wisconsin and elsewhere have found out, there is a price exacted for abandoning solidarity. Former working class union members who may once have been on your side won't have your back this time around.
I would point to the Centrist Democrat approach, which gains huge support from teachers unions and public employee unions who are not affected by free trade agreements, but which has left millions of other members of the working class unemployed and with no future prospects. As the teachers and public employees in Wisconsin and elsewhere have found out, there is a price exacted for abandoning solidarity. Former working class union members who may once have been on your side won't have your back this time around.
13
Socialism a failure wherever it's been broadly applied? How about in the US in the late 1930s WPA, CCC etc. through the government's absolute control of most industrial output during WWII at least up to the Interstate Highway project of the 1950s-60s? Let's be honest, some of our greatest accomplishments as a country were as a largely socialist power. Disagree with the ideology if you want but don't deny the facts.
16
Hillary Clinton is a better candidate now, as Timothy Egan points out, and having to deal with Bernie Sanders may have been a factor in that improvement, as Egan also urges. That does not mean, however, that Sanders should stay in the race.
Clinton improved, primarily, because she is very bright and recognized that giving stump speeches and using the debate format to broaden her appeal are not activities for which she has a natural aptitude. Candidate Barack Obama also was not instinctively good at those things. President Obama still isn’t.
Senator Sanders should drop out of the presidential race now, but he should not leave the stage. He can perform a valuable service for the Democrats, and he can also enhance his own image and legacy.
Sanders is a decent man, but he has some of the same bad habits of someone who is not decent, Donald Trump. Sanders promises things which he knows cannot be achieved, at least in the foreseeable future.
Clinton improved, primarily, because she is very bright and recognized that giving stump speeches and using the debate format to broaden her appeal are not activities for which she has a natural aptitude. Candidate Barack Obama also was not instinctively good at those things. President Obama still isn’t.
Senator Sanders should drop out of the presidential race now, but he should not leave the stage. He can perform a valuable service for the Democrats, and he can also enhance his own image and legacy.
Sanders is a decent man, but he has some of the same bad habits of someone who is not decent, Donald Trump. Sanders promises things which he knows cannot be achieved, at least in the foreseeable future.
5
I am so, so disheartened by Sanders supporters (and Trump supporters) repeating the angry, often hateful phrases they see and hear others saying as if repeating them makes them true. A majority in each campaign is reacting in anger and powerlessness. The government we have got the way it is because American voters couldn't be bothered to pay attention to issues and vote in elections at the local level. Now the Republican Party has locked up policies made at every level of government. If Sanders supporters want a revolution, it begins by being active on issues at the local level and electing representatives to move your agenda forward. We have seen what can be done by the reactionary right. If you want a progressive agenda, you are going to have to work a lot harder than just voting for one person. No matter who wins the Presidency, the work does not stop after the votes are counted.
14
When the Democratic party nominated Hubert Horatio Humphrey (HHH) they did so because he was "electable." His nomination turned off a generation of young people who could see the disdain he expressed privately for them. Despite clear evidence that HRC is similarly disliked by broad swaths of the electorate, most especially millennial voters necessary to swing key congressional races, the party is poised for a similar mistake, and the GOP, despite fears of their own, has their best chance at beating the Democrats with Clinton. Conventional wisdom in this, as in so many areas, is based on the herd instinct, just as the myth of lemmings.
5
There is no need to hold your nose to vote for Hillary. She is a technocratic candidate who will likely listen to all points of view and come to decisions that are considered broadly mainstream. She just happens to be the best candidate in this election cycle. The actual experience of the Bush 43 administration suggests that worse things are possible (and I get shudders by just the thought of a Trump or Cruz presidency). Unfortunately, a highly principled, eloquent, and effective technocratic politician like Obama comes along only once in a while. We will know it when we see one again, and for all his positives, Sanders certainly is not that candidate.
9
While you can agree with Sander's ideology and the excitement he has brought to the democratic party, staying in the race and actively campaigning requires money, money that he must raise from donations from regular people. Without a chance to win the nomination, is it really fair to those people for him to continue to ask for money to fund a campaign that cannot win? If his sole purpose at this point is to lobby and or give passionate speeches, he can continue to do this, but should not continue asking people to give money to support his doomed candidacy for president.
1
As one of those "regular people," I am happy to continue to support the dialog of ideas that Bernie Sanders has provoked--a dialog sorely missed before his campaign.
1
You are 100% correct on both counts: he made Hillary a better candidate for what is certain to be the nastiest campaign in a life time and he helped build enthusiasm among key Democrat constituencies. I might add he helped maintain some focus on the Democrats while Trump was sucking the air out of the news cycles.
The big question now is whether Bernie will be as strong and enthusiastic supporter of Hillary as Hillary proved to be for Obama. I hope so or I would be very disappointed in who Bernie really is. The nation or the world can simply not afford a Donald Trump as President.
The big question now is whether Bernie will be as strong and enthusiastic supporter of Hillary as Hillary proved to be for Obama. I hope so or I would be very disappointed in who Bernie really is. The nation or the world can simply not afford a Donald Trump as President.
5
Sad day for this country.
I'm not playing the lesser of two evils game. Been played on the American people by the elites for decades. It's a game to maintain the status quo. Both sides do it, both beholden to the same money in Washington.
This country needed real change. Instead we're going to throw up Clinton. The 1 percenters are rejoicing tonight.
At least the republicans didn't use shady tactics and main stream media to force the election towards their candidate of choice. The Democrat elites, they didn't mess around, Clinton was preordained and they did evetything in their power to make it happen. They win, the American people loose.
Choices are: an apparent racist, billionaire businessman 1 percenter or an apparent lying politician 1 percenter. Not much to be excited about here. Not much hope for the 90%. On one hand, we get who knows what for the country maybe good, maybe horrible. On the other hand, we get more of the same, a slow agonizing decline for most of the country, continued economic strangulation of the middle class, continued unaffordable healthcare, continued mass incarceration, continued poorly educated populance by limiting easy access to higher education, continued record poverty levels. . .Cheers to our future.
I'm not playing the lesser of two evils game. Been played on the American people by the elites for decades. It's a game to maintain the status quo. Both sides do it, both beholden to the same money in Washington.
This country needed real change. Instead we're going to throw up Clinton. The 1 percenters are rejoicing tonight.
At least the republicans didn't use shady tactics and main stream media to force the election towards their candidate of choice. The Democrat elites, they didn't mess around, Clinton was preordained and they did evetything in their power to make it happen. They win, the American people loose.
Choices are: an apparent racist, billionaire businessman 1 percenter or an apparent lying politician 1 percenter. Not much to be excited about here. Not much hope for the 90%. On one hand, we get who knows what for the country maybe good, maybe horrible. On the other hand, we get more of the same, a slow agonizing decline for most of the country, continued economic strangulation of the middle class, continued unaffordable healthcare, continued mass incarceration, continued poorly educated populance by limiting easy access to higher education, continued record poverty levels. . .Cheers to our future.
6
I don’t understand the anti-free trade stance of Sanders or Trump. Here is why – I am an engineer, who designs machines for manufacturing products. I see the manufacturing sector coming back to the United States from overseas. Now this sector is different from the 1970s, unskilled blue-collar workers are not needed as much. Many new machines are autonomous now. There is little need for cheap Chinese labor if the machine runs itself.
So the argument against free trade seems dishonest to me. A cheap ploy to get votes.
Hillary is capable and smart. I hope she wins in November.
So the argument against free trade seems dishonest to me. A cheap ploy to get votes.
Hillary is capable and smart. I hope she wins in November.
2
" The only thing standing between a thuggish narcissist and the White House is the almost-certain Democratic nominee — Hillary Clinton.". hillary differs from the donald only in her being nop-thuggish; she no less of a narcissist.
1
"On health care, on banks, on the influence of Wall Street, Sanders has pulled Clinton to the left. "
For as long as she needed to while Bernie was a threat. What makes anyone think that Hillary REALLY moved to the left? She made the right 'left' noises when it seemed advantageous to do so, but because she is demonstrably unprincipled, no one can say that she moved to the left, or that she won't be on the far right tomorrow.
For as long as she needed to while Bernie was a threat. What makes anyone think that Hillary REALLY moved to the left? She made the right 'left' noises when it seemed advantageous to do so, but because she is demonstrably unprincipled, no one can say that she moved to the left, or that she won't be on the far right tomorrow.
6
Funny thing is, people are actually voting to ensure we fail. The democrats are voting in favor of maintaining the broken system we have which guarantees the continued decline of the middle class. Republicans are voting for change, but are actually voting for more of the same with tougher immigration laws. Either case, total win for the upper class, complete failure for everyone else.
You thought the economic inequality was bad now, just wait till you see what happens next. Both parties are electing a candidate guaranteed to make it worse.
Income inequality and the money in politics that maintain it was the #1 issue we face today. Bernie tried to wake us up to the severity of the problem. Fix that, everything else starts to right itself. It's the root problem. There's only one candidate who will tackle that. The others are fully part of the problem and benefit from it, they don't want it to change.
And just think, neither front runner will do a thing about climate change. One denies it, the other profits from fossil fuel. Fracking, Clinton sold the idea of fracking all over the world. You think she's about to stop fracking, ha, never going to happen, well maybe after the ground opens up and swallows Oklahoma she'll think about it. Thats what happens when you put a 1 percenter in charge of your country. They get to do their very, very favorite thing, make more money for themselves. I certainly hope you didn't think either of them were actually going to look out for you.
You thought the economic inequality was bad now, just wait till you see what happens next. Both parties are electing a candidate guaranteed to make it worse.
Income inequality and the money in politics that maintain it was the #1 issue we face today. Bernie tried to wake us up to the severity of the problem. Fix that, everything else starts to right itself. It's the root problem. There's only one candidate who will tackle that. The others are fully part of the problem and benefit from it, they don't want it to change.
And just think, neither front runner will do a thing about climate change. One denies it, the other profits from fossil fuel. Fracking, Clinton sold the idea of fracking all over the world. You think she's about to stop fracking, ha, never going to happen, well maybe after the ground opens up and swallows Oklahoma she'll think about it. Thats what happens when you put a 1 percenter in charge of your country. They get to do their very, very favorite thing, make more money for themselves. I certainly hope you didn't think either of them were actually going to look out for you.
6
Couldn't disagree more, his pie in the sky ideas are good to help lift people's spirits but not realistic. The fact they know this and still support him is unbelievable, they must really hate Hillary a true politician who knows how to get things done. Can't wait for Bernie to drop out of the race.
2
Social Democrat!!
What don't you get about the rest of the first world and declines here?
What don't you get about the rest of the first world and declines here?
3
Sanders needs to stay in because this nation still needs a political awakening , his political revolution, to regain its economic vitality. A larger percentage of the American people need more hard facts about how the rich have rigged the system just for their own benefit. They need to understand in gory detail how the rigging , the worker lynching, and the American pocket picking happened.
Hillary and Bernie make a great team. Hilary will deliver the Presidency and Bernie will deliver an awakening of the American mind. You need both.
Hillary and Bernie make a great team. Hilary will deliver the Presidency and Bernie will deliver an awakening of the American mind. You need both.
4
So, Sanders is beneficial because he has helped the Democratic Party? The same party run by the corporate elite? The same party that has sold us down the river many times over, whose only virtue is that it is marginally better than the Republicans?
Sanders may be "pulling the country to the left". But the Democratic party (after its 'left' electioneering rhetoric) will only pull it back again.
Sanders may be "pulling the country to the left". But the Democratic party (after its 'left' electioneering rhetoric) will only pull it back again.
74
The same could be said for Trump.
However:
Vision is not action. Most of Bernie's 'future world' will most likely happen, but appealing as it's 'virtual image' is, it's ultimate form will be shaped by time and evolution.
Our best bet is a revolution in the implementation of democracy using available technology. We no longer need polls, caucus's, long, drawn out primaries, political delegates, or the electoral college.
All of those institutions are artifacts of the founding father's 'fear of democracy', and the obstacles presented by the logistics of the time.
Let's get the 'smoke filled rooms', and the 'fear of democracy' out of the equation and find a way to open the vote to as many people as possible using the Internet. Let's find a way to communicate and debate the policies that ultimately drive our path forward, rather than the broken promises, wishes and delusions of wannabee Kings. Better yet, let's vote more directly for the policies themselves the rather than just the implementer's.
We need thoughtful people who can negotiate and compromise, but these skills do not require either demi-Gods or demagogues. The wisdom of democracy is in general consensus, not in either ideological purity or in classism of any sort.
However:
Vision is not action. Most of Bernie's 'future world' will most likely happen, but appealing as it's 'virtual image' is, it's ultimate form will be shaped by time and evolution.
Our best bet is a revolution in the implementation of democracy using available technology. We no longer need polls, caucus's, long, drawn out primaries, political delegates, or the electoral college.
All of those institutions are artifacts of the founding father's 'fear of democracy', and the obstacles presented by the logistics of the time.
Let's get the 'smoke filled rooms', and the 'fear of democracy' out of the equation and find a way to open the vote to as many people as possible using the Internet. Let's find a way to communicate and debate the policies that ultimately drive our path forward, rather than the broken promises, wishes and delusions of wannabee Kings. Better yet, let's vote more directly for the policies themselves the rather than just the implementer's.
We need thoughtful people who can negotiate and compromise, but these skills do not require either demi-Gods or demagogues. The wisdom of democracy is in general consensus, not in either ideological purity or in classism of any sort.
3
What I see from all the primaries is this:
About 60% of Republicans don't want Trump.
About 45% of Democrats don't want Clinton.
Somewhere in there is common ground.
About 60% of Republicans don't want Trump.
About 45% of Democrats don't want Clinton.
Somewhere in there is common ground.
31
45% of democrats don't want Clinton, which means the majority want Bernie. Plus loads of Independents want Bernie.
1
I'm afraid that Hillary may have Early-Onset Alzheimers. She appears to have difficulty remembering events accurately. The Daily Show highlighted these troublesome moments…
1. On Friday afternoon, Clinton said the Reagans were more or less heroes during the AIDS crisis, which couldn't be further from the truth.
2. On Saturday, she questioned where Sanders was during her fight for health care reform in 1993 and 1994. Video surfaced to reveal that he was literally standing right behind her during a speech on the issue.
3. On Sunday, during a town hall in Ohio, Clinton said it was her plan to put "coal miners and coal companies out of business" while trying to appeal to white, working-class voters who are worried about their jobs.
4. And let's not forget her Brian Williams moment as she recalled dodging bullets in Bosnia.
Think about it… if you still can.
1. On Friday afternoon, Clinton said the Reagans were more or less heroes during the AIDS crisis, which couldn't be further from the truth.
2. On Saturday, she questioned where Sanders was during her fight for health care reform in 1993 and 1994. Video surfaced to reveal that he was literally standing right behind her during a speech on the issue.
3. On Sunday, during a town hall in Ohio, Clinton said it was her plan to put "coal miners and coal companies out of business" while trying to appeal to white, working-class voters who are worried about their jobs.
4. And let's not forget her Brian Williams moment as she recalled dodging bullets in Bosnia.
Think about it… if you still can.
13
Agreed! Absolutely. Bernie Sanders shows why, even in an apparently losing effort, why a candidacy can and should matter. I'm "in for Hill" as they say but I applaud Senator Sanders taking to the mainstream issues that have been previously relegated to the fringes of the media, not the least of which is the concentration of wealth among a very few and how that threatens democracy. As for tempering and hammering Hillary Clinton into a more progressive candidate (if you'll indulge a blacksmithing metaphor), keep an eye out for Democratic victories in Congressional and Senate elections in November. If victories are significant and if those candidates are more left-leaning than expected, the Bernie effect will have proved even more profound. For one thing, a putative President Clinton will be strongly dissuaded from pivoting away from the leftward positions that won her the nomination.
4
Speaking as a Clinton supporter because I think she will be a good President, I think that Hillary made two important mistakes in dealing with Bernie. First, her failure to respond in kind to his courteous, decent, respectful, and even gallant campaign, instead sharply attacking him with distorted claims about his votes, raises doubts about her character. Second, she made a serious strategic error, when comparing her lack of campaign skill with that of her husband and the President, by not acknowledging Bernie's skill as well. It was a missed opportunity for her to show some grace, and perhaps begin to win approval from Bernie's supporters--and Bernie himself. I think she has managed to make Bernie and his followers mad, and done so needlessly and boorishly.
6
Senator Sanders has often earned the votes of 80+% of democratic voters under 35. He has made their issues viable and started a revolution which will make us a better country. Clinton and the democratic party now understand that there is an engaged voting block under 40 that is the future of the party and the country. From what I can see, our sons and daughters will turn out in the general election to make this country a better place and if Clinton is the candidate, will support her over Trump without question. All I can say is thanks Bernie, keep going.
7
@bob miller
Durango Colorado
About 15 million Democrats have voted. Nearly 9 million have voted for Clinton. It appears fairly clear who the majority to want to be the Democratic nominee.
Durango Colorado
About 15 million Democrats have voted. Nearly 9 million have voted for Clinton. It appears fairly clear who the majority to want to be the Democratic nominee.
2
For years the media have pointed out how much being President ages people. Bernie Sanders seems to me to be exhausted already. Every time I see him, I worry more and more that he is going to drop dead from the rigors of campaigning. When he spouts that "revolution" line these days, I think it's because he doesn't have the energy to come up with anything else to say.
Hillary was amazing during the Congressional Benghazi marathon, which went on endlessly. She has much more stamina than Bernie. And that's something a Democratic president needs to combat the constant onslaught of Republican attacks both on the campaign trail and in the White House.
Hillary was amazing during the Congressional Benghazi marathon, which went on endlessly. She has much more stamina than Bernie. And that's something a Democratic president needs to combat the constant onslaught of Republican attacks both on the campaign trail and in the White House.
5
Sanders should just drop out if numerically it's a lost cause for him. He has not influenced Hillary at all as far as I can discern. She has quite successfully voiced his ideas as unrealistic and why should we believe that suddenly once she is President she will change?
The current standings do prove one thing however. That Hillary, calculated correctly, that taking the money from Wall Street didn't make a bit of difference. I'll bet she's kicking herself for not taking more.
The current standings do prove one thing however. That Hillary, calculated correctly, that taking the money from Wall Street didn't make a bit of difference. I'll bet she's kicking herself for not taking more.
5
Bernie must stay in the race to show Hillary and the Democratic Party everything they have been doing wrong for years. They must stop waging a political race/gender war and wage a war for the people, all the people. If the Democratic Party wants to regain the Congress and the state houses, it must represent white working class Americans, especially males. It has basically ignored them and plays the demographic race card. This has secured the White House but has lost everything else.
Bernie has shown us that it is possible to recapture that support with a policy based campaign that addresses all of us. Look, Bernie is a non-Christian, a secular Jew, who calls himself a democratic socialist with no big money financing. He should be lucky to get 5% of the vote. Instead, he is challenging the Party's chosen one to a very tight race. That demonstrates how powerful his message is.
Wake up Hillary and wake up Democratic Party. The era of divisive politics must end. When someone as far out as Ted Cruze is considered to be preferred to the GOP front runner, that reveals how far divisive politics has gone. Waging a gender based "It's get even time" campaign could put Trump in the White House.
Bernie has shown us that it is possible to recapture that support with a policy based campaign that addresses all of us. Look, Bernie is a non-Christian, a secular Jew, who calls himself a democratic socialist with no big money financing. He should be lucky to get 5% of the vote. Instead, he is challenging the Party's chosen one to a very tight race. That demonstrates how powerful his message is.
Wake up Hillary and wake up Democratic Party. The era of divisive politics must end. When someone as far out as Ted Cruze is considered to be preferred to the GOP front runner, that reveals how far divisive politics has gone. Waging a gender based "It's get even time" campaign could put Trump in the White House.
11
Not sure I agree with much of what you say here, Mr. Egan other than Mr. Sanders has indeed debunked socialism for at least a few people. Sadly, the poorly educated demographic supporting Trump will never grasp its meaning and will continue to understand it as pure evil. As far as Sanders pulling Mrs. Clinton to the left, his supporters at least made her take notice of some of his long standing socialist principles. A deeply divided Congress, including blue dog democrats which are not going away anytime soon, along with an increasingly conservative electorate will most likely prompt a pragmatic Hillary Clinton, much like Obama, to compromise a lot to move the country forward in fits and starts. A Bernie revolution was never going to happen even in the unlikely event he won both the nomination & the general election.
For those hoping for a Clinton-Sanders ticket, I fear that would be an enormous mistake since that would put Bernie squarely at odds with a President Clinton on so many issues. Either his principles would be jettisoned completely or he would be criticizing nearly every Hillary negotiation with intransigent Congressional Republicans. Like Elizabeth Warren, Bernie can be more effective in Congress, free to criticize both Congress and the president, while pushing for the change within the legislative branch of government he has been attempting for the past 25 years. Maybe he'll be taken a little more serious by his peers after his notable presidential bid.
For those hoping for a Clinton-Sanders ticket, I fear that would be an enormous mistake since that would put Bernie squarely at odds with a President Clinton on so many issues. Either his principles would be jettisoned completely or he would be criticizing nearly every Hillary negotiation with intransigent Congressional Republicans. Like Elizabeth Warren, Bernie can be more effective in Congress, free to criticize both Congress and the president, while pushing for the change within the legislative branch of government he has been attempting for the past 25 years. Maybe he'll be taken a little more serious by his peers after his notable presidential bid.
2
My hope for the future is with Sanders and his majority of under-45-to-50-year-olds. The Republicans are falling apart. The Democrats are going with Big Money interests and bad decisions like Iraq, Syria, and a private server that could be wiped whenever she wanted. But then, there are big numbers who stood with Bernie Sanders, and his fight--for economic equality, addressing systemic racism, getting Big Money out of politics, addressing climate change, taking the long view in foreign policy, and on, you all know the speeches. It's so encouraging to see the response: people giving money, people voting. People being excited about politics, and having hope. And perhaps the most encouraging, is that these are the majority under 45-50: yes, the college kids, but all the way up to middle age. That's the future. And there are a lot of them, Democrats and Independents, who support these progressive ideas.
So it's possible to imagine that these people, now that they have had a national focus, can pull together, and continue to grow in focus and political strength. An enormous thanks to Bernie Sanders, for showing us this hopeful path. He might not win this election, but he's touched off a new movement. And hope for a brighter future.
So it's possible to imagine that these people, now that they have had a national focus, can pull together, and continue to grow in focus and political strength. An enormous thanks to Bernie Sanders, for showing us this hopeful path. He might not win this election, but he's touched off a new movement. And hope for a brighter future.
7
Timothy Eagan, transparent attempts to manipulate readers into supporting Clinton won't work.
We know that Sanders did not pull Clinton to the left. She's the same neoconservative that she has always been and always will be. She is rigid, limited and has neither the wisdom nor the intellect to even understand her own monumental foreign policy blunders, let alone the character to improve. And Clinton is not "a better candidate because of Sanders". She is the same tone-deaf gaffe machine she has always been.
You have incorrectly characterized Sanders' core supporters. They are not a narrow group of "young, college-educated white". They are an overwhelming super-majority of all young voters, which the Democratic elite have spurned at their peril -- over 65% of millenials in Florida and over 80% in the rest of the country have voted for Sanders.
I wouldn't assume that they are going to flock en masse to Hillary, whether Bernie endorses her or not. From the polls I have seen, it looks like around 40% of Sanders supporters would consider a third party candidate.
As a senior citizen Sanders supporter, I would encourage them to move in that direction, because the Democratic party no longer represents progressive values. It's time to contemplate serious, structural change to our failed two party system.
We know that Sanders did not pull Clinton to the left. She's the same neoconservative that she has always been and always will be. She is rigid, limited and has neither the wisdom nor the intellect to even understand her own monumental foreign policy blunders, let alone the character to improve. And Clinton is not "a better candidate because of Sanders". She is the same tone-deaf gaffe machine she has always been.
You have incorrectly characterized Sanders' core supporters. They are not a narrow group of "young, college-educated white". They are an overwhelming super-majority of all young voters, which the Democratic elite have spurned at their peril -- over 65% of millenials in Florida and over 80% in the rest of the country have voted for Sanders.
I wouldn't assume that they are going to flock en masse to Hillary, whether Bernie endorses her or not. From the polls I have seen, it looks like around 40% of Sanders supporters would consider a third party candidate.
As a senior citizen Sanders supporter, I would encourage them to move in that direction, because the Democratic party no longer represents progressive values. It's time to contemplate serious, structural change to our failed two party system.
13
Those supporters of Bernie Sanders who are contemplating staying at home on election day, or perhaps casting their vote for a third party candidate, should simply recall the election of 2000. Gore beat Bush in the popular poll, but Ralph Nader diverted enough votes to prevent Gore from capturing a majority in the electoral college. Had Nader listened to the voice of reason instead of his own ego, no Supreme Court intervention could have saved Bush.
We could have avoided one of the most disastrous presidencies in the country's history. But this year Americans face an even starker choice. A graduate student could write a doctoral dissertation on Clinton's shortcomings, but it would require a library to analyze those of Trump. His vicious personality, coupled with a vast ignorance of policy and his contempt for the democratic political process, make him the most unsuitable candidate ever to contend for the presidency.
Clinton has both the experience and expertise to maker her an effective president. Despite her ties to Wall Street, moreover, no one can predict how she would deal with abuses associated with the financial industry. After all, the most liberal president in our history, FDR, belonged to the American version of an aristocracy. Almost no one predicted in 1932 that he would become a transformational president. Clinton may not match FDR, but she will be infinitely superior to either Trump or Cruz.
We could have avoided one of the most disastrous presidencies in the country's history. But this year Americans face an even starker choice. A graduate student could write a doctoral dissertation on Clinton's shortcomings, but it would require a library to analyze those of Trump. His vicious personality, coupled with a vast ignorance of policy and his contempt for the democratic political process, make him the most unsuitable candidate ever to contend for the presidency.
Clinton has both the experience and expertise to maker her an effective president. Despite her ties to Wall Street, moreover, no one can predict how she would deal with abuses associated with the financial industry. After all, the most liberal president in our history, FDR, belonged to the American version of an aristocracy. Almost no one predicted in 1932 that he would become a transformational president. Clinton may not match FDR, but she will be infinitely superior to either Trump or Cruz.
7
I like, admire and respect Bernie Sanders. And I greatly appreciate what his campaign is doing: marshaling millions of young people - who are fed up with student debt, corrupted government and phony politics - and for spotlighting income inequality so forcefully.
But Bernie's policy prescriptions -- tuition-free college, health care coverage expansion and re-erecting trade barrier, to name a few -- would be dead on arrival if elected, even if the Congressional scales move in favor of the Democrats.
With respect to international trade, he has ignored the negative collateral damage of protectionism on our broader political ties with both our allies and economic powers like China. And he is naïve to believe that tougher trade policies would address the employment picture in our country. There are better ways to re-vitalize manufacturing and create jobs, like positive ROI fiscal stimulus to rebuild our dangerously failing infrastructure that we now know threatens our lives.
My greatest fear for Bernie, his principles and our country is that, if elected, he would face even fiercer obstructionism in his first two years than Obama has throughout his tenure. The mind-numbing gridlock, lack of progress and dashed hopes would turn the young away and douse whatever flames would be left in the revolution he professes we need.
But I hope he stays in the race, then endorses Hillary and campaigns with passion for her – and then becomes an even more powerful voice for change.
But Bernie's policy prescriptions -- tuition-free college, health care coverage expansion and re-erecting trade barrier, to name a few -- would be dead on arrival if elected, even if the Congressional scales move in favor of the Democrats.
With respect to international trade, he has ignored the negative collateral damage of protectionism on our broader political ties with both our allies and economic powers like China. And he is naïve to believe that tougher trade policies would address the employment picture in our country. There are better ways to re-vitalize manufacturing and create jobs, like positive ROI fiscal stimulus to rebuild our dangerously failing infrastructure that we now know threatens our lives.
My greatest fear for Bernie, his principles and our country is that, if elected, he would face even fiercer obstructionism in his first two years than Obama has throughout his tenure. The mind-numbing gridlock, lack of progress and dashed hopes would turn the young away and douse whatever flames would be left in the revolution he professes we need.
But I hope he stays in the race, then endorses Hillary and campaigns with passion for her – and then becomes an even more powerful voice for change.
3
Bernie Sanders is an absolutely essential corrective to the rabid (and patently stupid) form of capitalism that the US practices. The irony is this: American capitalism was always going to collapse. It was too raw, hard-edged and socially destructive. It simply had a slightly longer shelf-life than Soviet communism. But the seeds of its destruction were always present and, ironically, allowed to sprout into full-grown plants once the Cold War was over and the US thought it had "won." Without the threat of the USSR to hold it in check, US capitalism metastasized into its full, most cancerous form and spread (was spread - thanks, IMF!) around the world in its most toxic forms. Now, its full effects are being felt in the US, producing predictable results. Sanders understands all of this and has articulated what many people understand, both instinctively and intellectually. If the US does not adopt some socialist alternatives to its present system, it will continue its social and political decline. Sanders was the right person in the right place at the right time. Whether or not the Democratic Party is smart enough to realize this and reform accordingly remains to be seen. At least Sanders has proved that it is possible to run an effective political campaign without selling your soul for Wall St. money.
7
I have voted for every democratic presidential candidate since Carter. This primary has exposed the Democratic party: it believes goals that place the public good above powerful business interests are "zany pie in the sky dreams." The lefts leaders are intoxicated by the trappings of power and wealth. They are self deluded that they are working for the common man. They are self righteous; they feel superior to those "terrible bigoted Republicans". But they do nothing. From family farms to the banks, every industry consolidates and looks toward legislation as the road to increased profits. Incomprehensible wealth at the top accumulates, as more join the hundreds of millions with neither financial or job security. But in Hillary's heart she knows she is a good person. Well good for her, but so did W.
In a democracy the people get what they deserve. Bernie was offering to subdue the special interests, and he was dismissed by those who decided such a fight is not grown up.
I believe that fight is good governance, and avoiding it becasue it is hard is cowardly. Assuming Sanders loses, I will note vote in November, -no matter who the Republicans nominate. I can't stomach the Dems any longer no matter how hard I squeeze my nose.
My time, votes and money will never go to the democratic party again. I am eager to support a new progressive party.
In a democracy the people get what they deserve. Bernie was offering to subdue the special interests, and he was dismissed by those who decided such a fight is not grown up.
I believe that fight is good governance, and avoiding it becasue it is hard is cowardly. Assuming Sanders loses, I will note vote in November, -no matter who the Republicans nominate. I can't stomach the Dems any longer no matter how hard I squeeze my nose.
My time, votes and money will never go to the democratic party again. I am eager to support a new progressive party.
8
With your attitude, we will get whomever the GOP selects. Thanks a lot. That worked really well when your team voted for Nader instead of Gore.
This morning I tremble for the future for my country.
Not because I think Secretary Clinton will lead us on the path to perdition as president. Whatever her flaws (and they are many), she would likely be a competent and possibly exceptional leader of our nation. Nor is there any doubt that I will "hold my nose" (a bit of an exaggeration) and vote for her this November.
But as a Sanders supporter who has been tuning into the anger of the citizens over the last six months, I am deeply aware of how thin Clinton's base of support is, even here among the educated and relatively leftist readers of this paper. If Clinton was once "likable enough", she isn't anymore.
Yes, there are great fireworks ahead in the Republican convention in Cleveland and maybe things will really blow up on the GOP side. I hope they do. But I doubt it: At the end of the day the cost of losing political power and the entitlement that accompanies it will drive the GOP into some Faustian bargain behind which the Kochs and all of the other PACs and corporate money will pledge their support.
I really believe that Clinton's character is not one to provide the leadership necessary to bring our party together. Moreover, I expect she will, with the reliability of a windsock, pivot right after the convention in Philadelphia.
If these two things happen, it is basically impossible for me to imagine a Democratic victory in November.
I hope to God I am wrong.
Not because I think Secretary Clinton will lead us on the path to perdition as president. Whatever her flaws (and they are many), she would likely be a competent and possibly exceptional leader of our nation. Nor is there any doubt that I will "hold my nose" (a bit of an exaggeration) and vote for her this November.
But as a Sanders supporter who has been tuning into the anger of the citizens over the last six months, I am deeply aware of how thin Clinton's base of support is, even here among the educated and relatively leftist readers of this paper. If Clinton was once "likable enough", she isn't anymore.
Yes, there are great fireworks ahead in the Republican convention in Cleveland and maybe things will really blow up on the GOP side. I hope they do. But I doubt it: At the end of the day the cost of losing political power and the entitlement that accompanies it will drive the GOP into some Faustian bargain behind which the Kochs and all of the other PACs and corporate money will pledge their support.
I really believe that Clinton's character is not one to provide the leadership necessary to bring our party together. Moreover, I expect she will, with the reliability of a windsock, pivot right after the convention in Philadelphia.
If these two things happen, it is basically impossible for me to imagine a Democratic victory in November.
I hope to God I am wrong.
4
Socialism?
Look at the German social market economy. Extremely socialist and extremely high taxes on both individuals and corporations. Strong wages, innovative small and medium businesses that don't sell out to international conglomerates, and a economic engine that supports all the "socialist" programs by returning profits to the people in a far more fair distribution that exists in the United States. If this country doesn't embrace cooperative capitalism, small business, green energy, vertical farming, hemp, and many other "radical" notions my family will immigrate. Anywhere in Europe is better than here. So much religion and such a lack of innovation. With religion ruling politics and corporations controlling innovation this country is doomed!
Look at the German social market economy. Extremely socialist and extremely high taxes on both individuals and corporations. Strong wages, innovative small and medium businesses that don't sell out to international conglomerates, and a economic engine that supports all the "socialist" programs by returning profits to the people in a far more fair distribution that exists in the United States. If this country doesn't embrace cooperative capitalism, small business, green energy, vertical farming, hemp, and many other "radical" notions my family will immigrate. Anywhere in Europe is better than here. So much religion and such a lack of innovation. With religion ruling politics and corporations controlling innovation this country is doomed!
7
All true. But I'd like to see Bernie's grass roots energy turned into grass roots action - to push Congress to act, to support progressive state and local candidates, and maybe to campaign in the few swing Congressional districts.
After all, most of Bernie's ideas were present in Congress in 2009, the brief time when Democrats had majorities and momentum, and went down because they did not have 60 votes in the Senate. Since then the problem has not been a not-Progressive-enough President, but a regressive House and Senate. To fix that we don't need a President Bernie, we need more Senators like Bernie.
Obama in 2008 had a network of millions who would have walked through fire for him, and he wasted it - turning over his organization to the same old mass-market fundraisers, never using them to pressure Cingress for change or to have a presence in Congressional races. Instead, all the grass roots pressuring to the right-wing Tea Party.
Maybe Bernie can do better with his millions of young supporters.
After all, most of Bernie's ideas were present in Congress in 2009, the brief time when Democrats had majorities and momentum, and went down because they did not have 60 votes in the Senate. Since then the problem has not been a not-Progressive-enough President, but a regressive House and Senate. To fix that we don't need a President Bernie, we need more Senators like Bernie.
Obama in 2008 had a network of millions who would have walked through fire for him, and he wasted it - turning over his organization to the same old mass-market fundraisers, never using them to pressure Cingress for change or to have a presence in Congressional races. Instead, all the grass roots pressuring to the right-wing Tea Party.
Maybe Bernie can do better with his millions of young supporters.
6
Sanders is not a narcissist. Obama has narcissistic tendencies and thus was disinterested in the mundane activities of getting out the vote, and campaigning for like-minded (I guess) democrats. I think Bernie will do as you suggest.
Your views are quite realistic. Thank you. Yet, I'm left unsatisfied. I was sad listening last night to Sen. Sanders's results, because I believe its a basic right to have health care, and I see the unaffordability of deductibles, copays and premiums for those who are sole proprietors and underemployed, and I also believe in breaking up the big banks as wealth is moving according to an economy that is rigged, and I am so excited that there even exists a candidate who shuns super pacs and speaks truth in the political arena and is not instantly defamed and destroyed. I also listened to Sec. Clinton's victory speech and was bothered by Sec. Clinton's political correctness, words of professional politician-ism, and her copying of key messages as if her own, not to mention the question of judgment setting up a private server. Who will be Sec. Clinton's opponent? I listened to Republican Gov. Kasich's victory speech last night. It held my attention. His talk was refreshing, supported by his sincerity, selflessness in service and a reminder of his skills and accomplishments. How little attention Gov. Kasich has received as a result of Mr. Trump's mastery of the press and as a result of the media's addiction to an audience. Sen. Sanders and Gov. Kasich are not easily compared. But I experience in them two things in common. They have hearts devoted to the good of the people of this country. They are hopelessly behind in delegates.
1
You think Gov Kasich has a good heart? Not if you're a woman. If you're a woman, or black or poor you are second, or even third class citizen. Heaven forbid you don't bow to his god.
Don't ever compare Sen Sanders to that miserable excuse of a self-serving bureaucrat. He's a horror in sheep's clothing. A wholly owned subsidiary of the Koch brothers...
Don't ever compare Sen Sanders to that miserable excuse of a self-serving bureaucrat. He's a horror in sheep's clothing. A wholly owned subsidiary of the Koch brothers...
1
Yes, Mrs. Clinton's appeal has now been proven in Florida. And though Bernie Sanders has not racked up enopugh victories to continue his quixotic campaign for the Presidency - he deserves to stay in the race and keep his statement alive - that he is full of integrity, that the Democratic Party is paying attention to the millions of marginalized Americans, angry to have slim to no choice among the Republican Party. Trump's braggardy and promises have yet to be fulfilled - his yuge wall across the southern US, deporting millions of unwanted illegal immigrants (but hiring those he chooses to work on his hundreds of projects from New York down to Mar a Lago, which will be the Soputhern White House for First Lady Melania and his family if he wins the Presidency). Bernie Sanders has pulled an unwilling Hillary Clinton towards the left - towards a much clearer message to the disadvantaged and left-behind American people. to the millenial voters who have flocked to Bernie, who has thrilled them with ideas once considered radical - free college for all, the insidious influence of Wall Street, raising the minimum wage, and perhaps above all by paying attention to the angry marginalized poor who have fallen for the yuge Trump demagoguery and braggadocio that he will make America great again!. Mrs. Clinton has learned much from her Vermont adversary, not least of which is to listen to all and to respond with fire and passion - missing from her stump speeches before Bernie came along.
2
Mr. Egan says that socialism has generally been a failure wherever it has been broadly applied. I do not know what world he lives on as we have plenty of examples of highly successful social democracies. Not only Scandinavia, the examples that Sanders often uses, but also Germany, France, and the Netherlands. Even supposedly "free-market" Britain has strong social elements (the NHS, highly subsidised universities, etc.). And he should not forget that the US itself is already "socialist" in many ways, e.g., Medicare, earned income credit, etc.). So Sanders is not pulling Hillary to the "left". He is actually bringing Hillary to reality. If Hillary wins, I hope that the biggest effect that Sanders had on her is to avoid those Clintonian compromises with the GOP that she is now regretting.
5
Thank you for saying this. The ONLY programs the USA has that work for us all, are socialist by definition: public schools, social security, medicare-- to name three. Programs that should be socialist-- such as healthcare-- represent disastrous for-profit capitalism at its worst. I would only add to your "clintonian compromise," that a huge failing of Obama was to negotiate with GOP bandits who actually wanted to denigrate SS. The Dems should sanctify SS, not agree to change it.
1
I don't think Bernie has any intention of dropping out, nor should he. However I am puzzled by your Clinton "meh." These are the two finest candidates our party has fielded in my lifetime and we should be celebrating the wonder of that--particularly in contrast to the GOP's ghastly options. You really can't go wrong no matter who you vote for!
I think the Clinton narrative is a subtle and insidious result of conservative media and unfortunately, misogyny, even from the left. Hillary is still blamed in part for Bill's infidelity and excesses. Condy Rice and Colin Powell have both said their emails were handled the same as Clinton's. And even if that were not true--its just not as big a deal as people make it.
Based on her intelligence, compassion, experience and knowledge of government at many levels and in many roles, Hillary has the potential to be one of the best presidents this nation has ever had. We have known her in all those iterations for decades, and as such have come to know her faults as well. Personally, I think she holds up well to all that scrutiny--and much better than anyone I know, accept or love as family, friend or neighbor.
Hillary is not dramatic or particularly suited for our obsession with TV sound-bite charisma. Mostly she is just hoarse from trying to be heard. I'll take her version of "real" any day over the clowns on the other ticket. And here's to Bern for bringing a buffet of liberal ideas back to the table! Woohoo!
I think the Clinton narrative is a subtle and insidious result of conservative media and unfortunately, misogyny, even from the left. Hillary is still blamed in part for Bill's infidelity and excesses. Condy Rice and Colin Powell have both said their emails were handled the same as Clinton's. And even if that were not true--its just not as big a deal as people make it.
Based on her intelligence, compassion, experience and knowledge of government at many levels and in many roles, Hillary has the potential to be one of the best presidents this nation has ever had. We have known her in all those iterations for decades, and as such have come to know her faults as well. Personally, I think she holds up well to all that scrutiny--and much better than anyone I know, accept or love as family, friend or neighbor.
Hillary is not dramatic or particularly suited for our obsession with TV sound-bite charisma. Mostly she is just hoarse from trying to be heard. I'll take her version of "real" any day over the clowns on the other ticket. And here's to Bern for bringing a buffet of liberal ideas back to the table! Woohoo!
10
Timothy. Bernie Sanders is an FDR democrat, which was a mainstream position and a raving success back in the day. Sanders' policies are also very similar to the ones applied in Germany and some of the Scandanavian countries in recent decades. Tuition free post secondary education, affordable health care for all, government support for nonrenewable energy are the agenda - not Stalinist 10-year plans. These countries all have capitalist economic systems with serious regulation and much higher taxes, especially for the highest earners, that provide social programs Americans can barely dream of. Many, many people look to these countries with admiration and for very understandable reasons. This is the model that Sanders is championing and the people in these countries look with disbelief at America's grotesque inequality, its insane gun and campaign finance laws, the most expensive and least effective health care system of any modern, industrialized democracy and wonder why anyone who would want to live there. There are much better ways to run a country and Bernie Sanders is pointing to other very successful alternatives which are the farthest things from failures. It is America that is dysfunctional, with a middle class sinking into poverty and despair while the rich get obscenely richer and more powerful. Well educated young people are rejecting the status quo and embracing Sanders because they know the game is rigged and will remain so under President Clinton.
10
France is cracking under the pressure of it's pro-socialist economic policies and Germany is now observing the ugly underbelly of negativity towards goverment benefits to low-income (largely immigrant) masses. Denmark, a bastion of peace and prosperity has displayed its xenophobia for all to see by outlawing humanitarian aid to refugees. The countries you mention are all small, nearly mono-ethnic with a tax base upwards of 95%.
1
On the worst day ever, Clinton is more "for" we the people than any and all GOP candidates, not to say president, would be. So those feeling the Bern-- get out and vote. Change YOUR world. Stay engaged.
It's not over yet, and the best result of Bernie's campaign may be to inspire youngsters to really get into the political process. We need candidates for Congress, state legislatures, city councils, and so on who will champion Bernie's goals. Bernie got a shot at the Democratic nomination for presidency by working the system always edging towards the things we really needed. The Clintons have politicked by always edging toward the things Wall Street really wanted. I agree with another commentator who said that he hopes Bernie will broaden his campaign message with the other planks that will help us forward in the future. More attention to climate and warming, for instance. Shutter the coal plants as fast as possible, before 2025. Tax fossil fuels at the well-head, not cap and trade. (Did you notice that Pope Francis actually denounced cap and trade?) Build out renewable energy generation on an emergency program. Broaden and strengthen the transmission grid so that renewables can be shared. This is a genuine catastrophe facing all of us, and we need stronger political leadership.
3
I support Bernie though he's politically to my left. I agree with many of his policies but not those concerning free trade and globalisation. Australia has transitioned to both as much as the US but opposition to them here is almost non-existent. I expect our more generous unemployment benefits and higher minimum wage may have a lot to do with this. I also think more effort was put into re-training workers who lost their jobs here in Australia, because of the transition to free trade and globalisation. We've not likely to produce the equivalent of Trump or Sanders on free trade here. The US needs to look to Australia's example to make free trade and globalisation work for all and uncontroversial in the US. Even for Bernie.
But though he may be wrong about free trade he's right about just about everything else. Bernie's policies don't represent socialism usurping capitalism but rather simply the US as a liberal democracy becoming more like others - such as Australia and Canada - and the social democracies of
But though he may be wrong about free trade he's right about just about everything else. Bernie's policies don't represent socialism usurping capitalism but rather simply the US as a liberal democracy becoming more like others - such as Australia and Canada - and the social democracies of
8
Hillary Clinton's policy positions are no different than they ever were, which is to say they are whatever they need to be to allow her to get what she wants.
The distinction between the two candidates couldn't be more clear. One is driven by a desire to make life better for the large majority of Americans who are virtually powerless in our winner take all society. The other seeks to win the political game that ensures access, power, and wealth.
Bernie's success has been remarkable given the obstacles that he has faced, not the least of which has been the vehement opposition from the media. Watching the Times opinion page move from ignoring, to ripping, to congratulating Bernie on a nice effort has been hard to stomach.
He may not have been the perfect messenger but his message will endure. It has to, as the country is on an unsustainable path toward feudalism.
A Clinton presidency will look little different from what we have seen for 30 years. No doubt it will be preferable to the presidency of any Republican candidate. But no one should expect any meaningful change in the systemic unfairness of U.S. capitalism. That change will come some day but we still don't know what it will look like. We need to hit bottom and I fear we aren't there yet.
The distinction between the two candidates couldn't be more clear. One is driven by a desire to make life better for the large majority of Americans who are virtually powerless in our winner take all society. The other seeks to win the political game that ensures access, power, and wealth.
Bernie's success has been remarkable given the obstacles that he has faced, not the least of which has been the vehement opposition from the media. Watching the Times opinion page move from ignoring, to ripping, to congratulating Bernie on a nice effort has been hard to stomach.
He may not have been the perfect messenger but his message will endure. It has to, as the country is on an unsustainable path toward feudalism.
A Clinton presidency will look little different from what we have seen for 30 years. No doubt it will be preferable to the presidency of any Republican candidate. But no one should expect any meaningful change in the systemic unfairness of U.S. capitalism. That change will come some day but we still don't know what it will look like. We need to hit bottom and I fear we aren't there yet.
12
Sanders should stay in the race so that Clinton doesn't give in completely to corporate interests. Much of the corporate class is suspicious of Trump and would feel safe donating to Clinton. The Democrats risk being taken over even more by corporate interests who are seeing the GOP implode. Big business needs to back someone they feel will protect their tax breaks and corporate subsidies and Clinton will be there go to person.
Sanders needs to stay in order to counter that influence. We are witnessing a major shift in the political alignment of the country and having someone espouse socialism helps defend the little of social democracy we have left; Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, minimum wage, Unemployment insurance, public transit, public education, etc. etc.
Sanders needs to stay in order to counter that influence. We are witnessing a major shift in the political alignment of the country and having someone espouse socialism helps defend the little of social democracy we have left; Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, minimum wage, Unemployment insurance, public transit, public education, etc. etc.
9
The Sanders candidacy has been popular with many progressives for the same reason that superhero movies dominate the box office. Both have larger-than-life protagonists with larger-than-life virtues, and both are fictional.
Sanders comes across as a superhero in the political sphere because of his exceptional ideological purity. Where exceptional strength marks the superhero in the cinematic universe, ideological purity marks the superhero in the political universe. For example, a recent study by The Lugar Center and Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy ranked Sanders as the least bipartisan senator, edging out even Ted Cruz.
As to larger-than-life virtues, Sanders has benefited from the enormous paucity of the personal attacks he's received relative to those Secretary Clinton has received. Slime works, which is why we see so much of it. Slime directed at Sanders has been artificially constrained because Republicans are giddy at the prospect of running against a real-life wild-eyed liberal and have thus gone mute on attacks against him, other than "he's a socialist," which doesn't actually hurt Sanders in the Democratic primaries. At the same time, they've pulled out the stops on his opponent, and she's also having mud shoveled on her from Bernie's supporters.
He may look like a superhero to the many Americans dismayed at what a mudfest American politics has become, but this perception is the political equivalent of a movie special effect.
Sanders comes across as a superhero in the political sphere because of his exceptional ideological purity. Where exceptional strength marks the superhero in the cinematic universe, ideological purity marks the superhero in the political universe. For example, a recent study by The Lugar Center and Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy ranked Sanders as the least bipartisan senator, edging out even Ted Cruz.
As to larger-than-life virtues, Sanders has benefited from the enormous paucity of the personal attacks he's received relative to those Secretary Clinton has received. Slime works, which is why we see so much of it. Slime directed at Sanders has been artificially constrained because Republicans are giddy at the prospect of running against a real-life wild-eyed liberal and have thus gone mute on attacks against him, other than "he's a socialist," which doesn't actually hurt Sanders in the Democratic primaries. At the same time, they've pulled out the stops on his opponent, and she's also having mud shoveled on her from Bernie's supporters.
He may look like a superhero to the many Americans dismayed at what a mudfest American politics has become, but this perception is the political equivalent of a movie special effect.
8
All these angry anti-HRC voices will eventually have to fall silent if the Democrats want to send their nominee to the White House. All the vitriol and dooms-day scenarios that are now painted by frustrated and antagonistic Democrats will have to give way to the political reality that a Hillary Clinton is the last bulwark to stop America from becoming a pariah to an apprehensive and jittery world that is deeply fearful of a Trump Presidency. With good reason.
There would be an unprecedented retrograde steam roller that would lumber through the political and social landscape with a furious energy. The word bully would attain a new and sinister meaning. All those who poutingly want to sit out the election will have to come to the realization that they would be aiding and abetting the unthinkable, a Trump Presidency.
When Ralph Nader uttered his infamous words that there was no difference between the Democrats and Republicans we all know what the sad consequences were. This time the repercussions would be of a far more serious nature.
I think we can still steer clear of the iceberg. The responsibility towards ourselves and an anxious world has to transcend our personal chagrin and dismay over a dream that did not become a reality.
There would be an unprecedented retrograde steam roller that would lumber through the political and social landscape with a furious energy. The word bully would attain a new and sinister meaning. All those who poutingly want to sit out the election will have to come to the realization that they would be aiding and abetting the unthinkable, a Trump Presidency.
When Ralph Nader uttered his infamous words that there was no difference between the Democrats and Republicans we all know what the sad consequences were. This time the repercussions would be of a far more serious nature.
I think we can still steer clear of the iceberg. The responsibility towards ourselves and an anxious world has to transcend our personal chagrin and dismay over a dream that did not become a reality.
13
Few columns have angered me as much as this one.
First, Clinton is by far the more qualified candidate. I don't need to "hold my nose" to vote for her, and I would never have voted for Sanders.
Second, this column continues the regrettable populist rhetoric of Sanders' campaign. Hillary Clinton is not the agent of Wall Street. And as far as Wall Street is concerned, many of us enjoy an adequate retirement because of our investments. We worked hard, saved our money, and certainly don't belong to the 1%, the 5%, or even the 20%.
Third, the notion of trade protectionism will only impoverish American workers further. Instead of resenting the success of other economies, we need to use our vast ingenuity to outclass them and sell more to them. That's how we will create jobs, not by erecting "walls." (Sanders sounds a lot more like Trump in this)
Finally, in his continued railing against Clinton, Sanders hurts the Democratic Party (which he just recently joined) and puts his own agenda in peril. He won't accomplish it in a Republican senate (and much of it makes no economic or common sense). We won't be able to nationalize our health-care system, and the notion of "free" college tuition benefits the well off more than the disadvantaged. That's because the more wealthy among us send their children to better primary and secondary schools. If Sanders really wants progress in education, he should focus on K-12.
First, Clinton is by far the more qualified candidate. I don't need to "hold my nose" to vote for her, and I would never have voted for Sanders.
Second, this column continues the regrettable populist rhetoric of Sanders' campaign. Hillary Clinton is not the agent of Wall Street. And as far as Wall Street is concerned, many of us enjoy an adequate retirement because of our investments. We worked hard, saved our money, and certainly don't belong to the 1%, the 5%, or even the 20%.
Third, the notion of trade protectionism will only impoverish American workers further. Instead of resenting the success of other economies, we need to use our vast ingenuity to outclass them and sell more to them. That's how we will create jobs, not by erecting "walls." (Sanders sounds a lot more like Trump in this)
Finally, in his continued railing against Clinton, Sanders hurts the Democratic Party (which he just recently joined) and puts his own agenda in peril. He won't accomplish it in a Republican senate (and much of it makes no economic or common sense). We won't be able to nationalize our health-care system, and the notion of "free" college tuition benefits the well off more than the disadvantaged. That's because the more wealthy among us send their children to better primary and secondary schools. If Sanders really wants progress in education, he should focus on K-12.
20
First, she may be qualified in terms of experience but that doesn't change the fact that she is ethically challenged and a representative of the pro-corporate, DNC wing of the Democratic Party.
Second, many people don't enjoy security because Wall Street gave us the Great Recession through its rampant speculation and generates a greater threat because of its greater concentration into even bigger too-big-to-fail banks.
Third, NAFTA has been shown to have cost U.S. jobs and helped depress wage growth, so clearly the type of deals that Clinton supports already impoverishes workers.
Fourth, the critiques of Clinton are valid and the responsibility for their impact is on her.
Second, many people don't enjoy security because Wall Street gave us the Great Recession through its rampant speculation and generates a greater threat because of its greater concentration into even bigger too-big-to-fail banks.
Third, NAFTA has been shown to have cost U.S. jobs and helped depress wage growth, so clearly the type of deals that Clinton supports already impoverishes workers.
Fourth, the critiques of Clinton are valid and the responsibility for their impact is on her.
5
We need a more informed voting public. Most of our traditional politics has been more about obfuscating facts than disclosing facts.
Now, more than at any time in the history of civilization, we have the technology and the economic resources to insure that we have both well informed voters and 100% access to the vote.......even from our living rooms.
In fact, we're even in a position to be able to have the voting public vote on legislation itself.
We should cautiously move to change our current approach of 'democracy by proxy' to a full participatory democracy. Governance is complicated, but not quite as complicated as our governor's would have us believe.
Now, more than at any time in the history of civilization, we have the technology and the economic resources to insure that we have both well informed voters and 100% access to the vote.......even from our living rooms.
In fact, we're even in a position to be able to have the voting public vote on legislation itself.
We should cautiously move to change our current approach of 'democracy by proxy' to a full participatory democracy. Governance is complicated, but not quite as complicated as our governor's would have us believe.
3
Basically under Sanders' platform we'll have an over educated populous with no job opportunities. In other words: a lot of philosophers.
Without a colorable candidate Hillary's loathsome candidacy would look even more of coronation. Still it is an odd election where the Democrats are running the Queen of crony capitalism and the Republicans a populist clown supported by the angry working class.
14
Senator Sanders is promoting a Social Democracy and Social Capitalism, where wealth is equitably distributed to those of us who fund it - average taxpayers - and the investment class. There is nothing scary about it. That is the ONLY way to sustain a democracy.
37
You're right: Senator Sanders is a social democrat. That really should have been his "label" from the beginning. Would have come across much less scary in this country.
2
"The math now makes it nearly impossible for him to get the bid, even with a favorable string of states ahead."
Whoa! Not so fast, Tim Egan. My calculation shows that Sanders needs about 55.5 percent of the remaining delegates to win. If the DNC thinks that the superdelegates can tip the election for Clinton they do so at the peril of the party.
Whoa! Not so fast, Tim Egan. My calculation shows that Sanders needs about 55.5 percent of the remaining delegates to win. If the DNC thinks that the superdelegates can tip the election for Clinton they do so at the peril of the party.
42
Bernie's chances at this point are moot. He should stay in the race because he makes Hillary a stronger candidate in doing so and because if he continues to win a state here and there and is a strong second in others, it will boost his bargaining leverage with Hillary at the convention. She needs his endorsement and he knows it.
Yes, "the Democratic Party is paying attention to the angry millions in the margins, those who may be tempted by the demagogue who wants to make America white again. Thank Sanders for that." Thank You, Senator Sanders. Now, WE must join together to get out the vote for this historic occasion - for the first time in our 240 year HIStory WE will elect Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton because SHE is the MOST QUALIFIED CANDIDATE WITH THE MOST NATIONAL AN INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL CAPITAL. She is the WOMAN FOR THE JOB to help us start writing OUR story!
17
For those of us who have not had caucuses or primaries this is the crap we listen to every presidential campaign. Please hold your it's over pontificating until the entire country votes. You take the wind out of our sails. Sounds like the south will rise again! I think not.
No so fast! "most qualified? "Most national and International political capital?
Oh! yes without question but only for the business that will patronize her "family enterprise".
Don't forget she is a compulsive liar and flip flop. But do not worry the republican and Wall Street will help her to get in the job. For money she will do anything for them, and forget her promises.
The republican do not have a real candidate for the post.
Oh! yes without question but only for the business that will patronize her "family enterprise".
Don't forget she is a compulsive liar and flip flop. But do not worry the republican and Wall Street will help her to get in the job. For money she will do anything for them, and forget her promises.
The republican do not have a real candidate for the post.
What is the thing with you about electing a woman? Imelda Marcos was a woman, was she great for the Filipinos? And yes, I know it was her husband who was really in power. How about Margaret Thatcher? Would you be voting for Condeleeza Rice if there was no woman running on the Democratic side?
If you did a modicum of research you would see how the Clinton policies (and she was a real partner to Bill in his presidency) harmed most Americans. Take a look at Salon.com and educate yourself.
If you did a modicum of research you would see how the Clinton policies (and she was a real partner to Bill in his presidency) harmed most Americans. Take a look at Salon.com and educate yourself.
Browsing the comments, I see the usual interminable back-and-forth about socialism v capitalism. Fact is, the theoretical system the people choose is unimportant for two reasons: 1) There is no pure form of either system being practiced, today, therefore, the actual system that the people get will undoubtedly remain a mixture of the two, and 2) It's not really about the system; it's all about the people. Good people can make bad systems work but even the best systems fail without good people.
29
We have one candidate who is the lesser of two evils. We have another candidate who champions policies that will actually help our Country reverse the 40 year slide into haves and have nots.
I will continue supporting hope over the inevitability of evil.
Bernie is the only reason I have hope for the future.
I will continue supporting hope over the inevitability of evil.
Bernie is the only reason I have hope for the future.
76
Try an antidepressant, they say they help individuals like yourself. You know,
"The glass can be half full, not half empty."
"There's got to be a morning after............"
"Today is the first day of the rest of my life."
"If happy little bluebirds fly beyond the rainbow, why can't I?"
Dorothy, The Wizard of Oz
"The glass can be half full, not half empty."
"There's got to be a morning after............"
"Today is the first day of the rest of my life."
"If happy little bluebirds fly beyond the rainbow, why can't I?"
Dorothy, The Wizard of Oz
I agree with Scott. America needs to change policies. The 99.9% are not being treated fairly and they know it. Clinton 2 represents Clinton 1, whereas Sanders is offering a way forward. He is honest, and bold. America needs him badly.
I am a woman who does not feel inspired at ALL by the prospect of a Clinton 2 presidency. Her competence is not enough.
I am a woman who does not feel inspired at ALL by the prospect of a Clinton 2 presidency. Her competence is not enough.
52
"Because of Sanders, the word “socialist” is no longer toxic in the United States. I have many problems with socialism, not the least of which is that it’s generally been a failure wherever it’s been broadly applied."
I suppose it's utterly hopeless at this point to say that Sanders is a democratic socialist, not a "socialist."
And that all those "failed countries" where democratic socialism has been broadly applied include Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Finland. Countries that rate as the "happiest" in the world. Where standards for everything from health to education are far beyond what we have here.
But gee, it's only March of the election year. Why bring it up now?
I suppose it's utterly hopeless at this point to say that Sanders is a democratic socialist, not a "socialist."
And that all those "failed countries" where democratic socialism has been broadly applied include Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and Finland. Countries that rate as the "happiest" in the world. Where standards for everything from health to education are far beyond what we have here.
But gee, it's only March of the election year. Why bring it up now?
91
Every pundit who writes Sanders' policies won't work, or will never pass, are already receiving good healthcare, benefits, family leave and have enough money to educate their children. Egan is one of those pundits. There are lots a faux liberals who are taken care of and really have no interest in seeing any of Bernie's policies passed. In my youth, we called them Republicans.
62
@ScottW
Chapel Hill, NC
Would you like to provide a brief explanation of how, for example, the existing US healthcare system will be abandoned and replaced by a single payer system. Shouldn't be too difficult for you to do.
Chapel Hill, NC
Would you like to provide a brief explanation of how, for example, the existing US healthcare system will be abandoned and replaced by a single payer system. Shouldn't be too difficult for you to do.
It has been hopeless from the start to try to get people to understand that "socialist" and "democratic socialist" are different.
This is the country in which a huge number of people not only think that the President is an African Muslim, but a liberal as well. This is a nation that thinks that the ACA is actually socialized medicine. And we won't mention that 6000 year old thing. It is best to just try to wish that away.
What I would also say is that we invoke Germany and Scandinavia as successes; we have the naysayers poised to point out Greece.
The biggest problem with Sander's full agenda is that we are cantankerous Americans and a huge swath of us are suspicious of government, slightly to immoderately libertarian, anti-tax, and feel that the best are divinely rewarded so the suffering must have earned it. That puts the rest of us, who are more communal, at a disadvantage.
This is the country in which a huge number of people not only think that the President is an African Muslim, but a liberal as well. This is a nation that thinks that the ACA is actually socialized medicine. And we won't mention that 6000 year old thing. It is best to just try to wish that away.
What I would also say is that we invoke Germany and Scandinavia as successes; we have the naysayers poised to point out Greece.
The biggest problem with Sander's full agenda is that we are cantankerous Americans and a huge swath of us are suspicious of government, slightly to immoderately libertarian, anti-tax, and feel that the best are divinely rewarded so the suffering must have earned it. That puts the rest of us, who are more communal, at a disadvantage.
2
Well I hope Mark Thomason is correct in at least one way. That Hillary will not abandon free-trade policies. To often the comversation is carried out in the context of jobs. As if jobs were in and of themselves are a national economic priority. But a this piece makes refernce to a renewed, of sorts, interest in the victims of trade deals, but this is absolutley false. The people to which the author refers as the implied victims are those thst benefit the most. Yes there is disruption, but in many ways the harmful effects of restrictions on trade are invisibile and so we do not take them into account. How is the consumer harmed by low prices? How are we harmed by putting labor to its most productive use? Its the most absurd argument and it is pure fallacy from beginning to end.
3
"The people to which the author refers as the implied victims are those that benefit the most."
How, exactly, is that the case? If Sanders' position is "pure fallacy" perhaps you could actually make an argument against it rather than trumpeting your completely unsupported claim as gospel.
How, exactly, is that the case? If Sanders' position is "pure fallacy" perhaps you could actually make an argument against it rather than trumpeting your completely unsupported claim as gospel.
Please, God, let Hillary be indicted. Let the Goldman transcripts be leaked. Something. Soon. I don't think she can beat Trump.
47
You really think that poorly of American voters? All those people who voted for Hillary and Sanders will now vote for Trump? That many have swallowed the decades of Hillary vilification by the GOP noise machine and various people from right and left will not convert her into the caricature that has been unrelentingly promoted. Like all politicians she has made some bad calls, she has also made many good calls. It does not take prophetic powers to predict that a Trump presidency will be a catastrophe even worse than the one that preceded Obama.
36
@Serban--what makes you think Hillary has any chance of beating Donald? The lesser of two evils argument does not inspire. We are tired of Hillary and her constant apologizing for policies she supported, but now feigns regret over. Her message is not one of hope and change, but inevitability of money in politics. She is a poster child of the bought and paid for candidate who tells her supporters to take a hike when they ask to see transcripts of her speeches.
Sanders is the only candidate who can beat Trump because he is the only candidate who is not flawed by scandal and legal suspicion. Hillary will bring voters to the polls in huge numbers in November if nominated. But they aren't going to be supporting the candidate of your choice.
It's time to cast the Clintons aside and start anew.
Sanders is the only candidate who can beat Trump because he is the only candidate who is not flawed by scandal and legal suspicion. Hillary will bring voters to the polls in huge numbers in November if nominated. But they aren't going to be supporting the candidate of your choice.
It's time to cast the Clintons aside and start anew.
11
@ScottW
Chapel Hill, NC
The Bernie Bros seem to be having some sort of deep emotional crisis.
Chapel Hill, NC
The Bernie Bros seem to be having some sort of deep emotional crisis.
2
And, fast running out of oxygen. He is too old, came in too late and so fades away his revolution.
9
If we fault Hilary for her past decisions, then Sanders can be questioned for why he is running for the candidacy of a party that he only recently joined. He was too "good" for the party, but convenience trumped (no pun intended) principles.
Don't underestimate the oxygen that America's young are breathing into his campaign. I'm "old," but am following the wisdom of the young on this one.
1
One of the greatest things to come out of Sanders' campaign is the outpouring of passion from his supporters on this forum. Before that, I thought I was the only like-minded soul within a thousand miles.
That, and the fact that I finally got to vote for someone I respect -- the first time in 40 years of voting -- has made his campaign worthwhile for me. I will write his name on my ballot in November if have to. The thought of voting for Clinton disgusts me almost as much as voting for Trump.
That, and the fact that I finally got to vote for someone I respect -- the first time in 40 years of voting -- has made his campaign worthwhile for me. I will write his name on my ballot in November if have to. The thought of voting for Clinton disgusts me almost as much as voting for Trump.
303
And this is why we could very well see a Trump presidency. Not that the Berniebros care one iota about their future, their sisters' future, their wives' future, or their children's future. Because after all, the Supreme Court has done more to swing elections to people like Trump, and it's done more for the moneyed class you so despise, than any other entity in the American political system. Citizens United? The Heller Decision? Two thorns in the side of the American body politic, thanks to presidents who were more concerned about the wealthy you so despise than the average citizens of this country. If you honestly think that Trump will appoint Supreme Court justices who will overturn Citizens United, or even uphold Roe v. Wade, then you are deluding yourself and insuring the women and minorities in this nation remain second class citizens. Thank you.
2
Can you say Nader Florida President Bush
2
That would be a Naderian vote for Drumpf.
1
Senator Sanders should stay in the race through the convention. The super delegates and the media shouldn't have such a strong role in influencing the determination of the winner. The media wrote him off from the beginning as a fringe candidate while the Times endorsed Clinton early on. Sanders will have a strong chance of becoming president running against Trump while I am highly doubtful about Hillary's.
52
What Super Delegates ?
She's got 58% of the PLEDGED delegates and 60% of the VOTE.
Why are you pretending that Bernie's losing because of some inside conspiracy.
Last month, you insisted that Hillary was afraid to debate and if she debated, Bernie would crush her. He didn't.
She's got 58% of the PLEDGED delegates and 60% of the VOTE.
Why are you pretending that Bernie's losing because of some inside conspiracy.
Last month, you insisted that Hillary was afraid to debate and if she debated, Bernie would crush her. He didn't.
I don't understand this so-called Clinton fatigue. It sounds like something the Republicans came up with to discredit her. He was one of the best presidents we have had with the exceptions of his morals and she has been for the people of this country for decades. Get over this fatigue stuff, she is the best candidate by far.
72
Clinton was the 3rd worst president we have had since 1980. The economic boon that the fluke takeoff of the tech industry after he hit office had been building since Carter was in office and had nothing to do with him or his policies which would have killed it all off had he been potus since 88 instead of 92.
He like his wife is actually a moderate republican who happily enacted reagan's coupe de grace to our post depression government which made and kept us well off and protected from exploitation for over 50 years. If he had been as good as he is credited for he would have replaced the people and rules/regs that reagan & bush removed instead he finished off what they started while pretending to be a democrat.
He like his wife is actually a moderate republican who happily enacted reagan's coupe de grace to our post depression government which made and kept us well off and protected from exploitation for over 50 years. If he had been as good as he is credited for he would have replaced the people and rules/regs that reagan & bush removed instead he finished off what they started while pretending to be a democrat.
4
"Clinton Fatigue" *IS* the result of Republicans trying to discredit her. Again and again and again, steadily since about 1992. After a quarter century, it gets old, and people are tired of having to hear the disharmony and vitriol. For some, the fatigue is with Clinton herself, and for others it is with the Republicans and sheer awfulness that they put the nation through every time she is on stage.
I don't believe most of what both the right and the left have thrown at her. If she is the candidate, I will be voting for her. But she is a lightening rod, and the downside to that is considerable.
I don't believe most of what both the right and the left have thrown at her. If she is the candidate, I will be voting for her. But she is a lightening rod, and the downside to that is considerable.
If Sanders has the interests of the country at heart, he will stay in the campaign to fortify the Democratic platform but stop denouncing his party's certain candidate in the general election for being soft on Wall Street, uncritical of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, etc., and instead challenge Clinton to clarify and toughen her stance on the issues he has championed in preparation for the election.
For her part, Clinton should challenge Sanders: "if you are the Democratic nominee, I will campaign vigorously for your election and work to convince everyone who supported me to vote for you as I did for then-Senator Obama after I lost to him in the primaries. If I am our party's nominee, will you do the same for me?" I believe he'll rise to the occasion and do that.
For her part, Clinton should challenge Sanders: "if you are the Democratic nominee, I will campaign vigorously for your election and work to convince everyone who supported me to vote for you as I did for then-Senator Obama after I lost to him in the primaries. If I am our party's nominee, will you do the same for me?" I believe he'll rise to the occasion and do that.
30
Bernie has already said he'll support Clinton, and Clinton will no doubt support him, as she did Obama.
Not sure what you mean by "a failure when broadly applied".
Sweden, Denmark, and Norway are not failures. Is the socialism in the UK, Germany, Canada, and France not "broadly applied"?
Sweden, Denmark, and Norway are not failures. Is the socialism in the UK, Germany, Canada, and France not "broadly applied"?
100
Thank you, Seattle.
The only thing standing between a billionaire brawler and the White House is a billionaire-owned liar – some choice. We're screwed either way, it seems, as with either one we face more wars abroad and thus increasing inequality at home.
49
So vote!
So vote! BTW. thank you Bernie Sanders!
b
So vote! BTW. thank you Bernie Sanders!
b
1
The oligarchy, the one percent, Wall Street, the neocons, AIPAC and our utterly corrupt political class must be breathing a sigh of relief this morning. At least one of their preferred options, Clinton, won last night.
If they can't have a Republican president, at least they can have a republican-lite one.
She'll do their bidding as she always has.
If they can't have a Republican president, at least they can have a republican-lite one.
She'll do their bidding as she always has.
1
I'm always amassed at the accusations of lying but I never hear what the actual lies are,very strange. She is smart,experienced and liberal. A much better choice than the November opposition.
1
Yes, I believe Bernie Sanders should stay in. I would like to see him express much more clearly and systematically his dreams in the two areas in which I consistently file comments: 1) Renewable/sustainable energy, 2) A health-care and health-care education system like the Swedish system.
Sanders is more knowledgeable about renewable than any other potential president but I see no systematic presentation of that knowledge, not even of Vermont's good examples.
In Sweden, there is equal access fo free-medical school (all fields in health-care) whatever your ethnicity as long as you can show you are qualified. There is equal access for Universal Health Care on the same terms.
The result is shown anecdotally by my Horn of Africa friends who are now doctor, nurses, practical nurses with no debt burden. The result of universal access is shown statistically; Horn of Africa mothers to be and mothers do almost as well as the general population still maintaining Sweden as one of top 3 in the world in infant and maternal mortality - in contrast with America's poor record.
So Bernie, stay and educate Hillary by laying out detailed informaqtion in these two areas.
Only-neverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen-USA-SE
Sanders is more knowledgeable about renewable than any other potential president but I see no systematic presentation of that knowledge, not even of Vermont's good examples.
In Sweden, there is equal access fo free-medical school (all fields in health-care) whatever your ethnicity as long as you can show you are qualified. There is equal access for Universal Health Care on the same terms.
The result is shown anecdotally by my Horn of Africa friends who are now doctor, nurses, practical nurses with no debt burden. The result of universal access is shown statistically; Horn of Africa mothers to be and mothers do almost as well as the general population still maintaining Sweden as one of top 3 in the world in infant and maternal mortality - in contrast with America's poor record.
So Bernie, stay and educate Hillary by laying out detailed informaqtion in these two areas.
Only-neverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen-USA-SE
46
"socialism...generally been a failure wherever it's been broadly applied"
It seems to me that the Scandinavian countries have been very successful with a "Democratic Socialism" that combines market economies with more egalitarian states. The South American countries have not been successful...but then it doesn't seem that countries south of the border have been very successful with most governmental forms.
Where there's corruption, nothing works. Where there's honor, some reasonable incentives, and resources, many governing variations can succeed.
It seems to me that the Scandinavian countries have been very successful with a "Democratic Socialism" that combines market economies with more egalitarian states. The South American countries have not been successful...but then it doesn't seem that countries south of the border have been very successful with most governmental forms.
Where there's corruption, nothing works. Where there's honor, some reasonable incentives, and resources, many governing variations can succeed.
67
The Scandies themselves say they practice capitalism. Bernie really digs Cuba though, Castros and all. I can just never figure out why he likes Castro so much more than American autoworkers. Perplexing. Who would destroy the auto industry in order to destroy the banks, that's just immoral.
"Clinton has now hedged her support for the latest of these trade agreements, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, one that she helped negotiate"
You're being terribly optimistic, aren't you?
Clinton has no imagination, no policy, except the illusion of grandeur and self entitlement of becomi President.
Once she secures the nomination, she'll reverse course yet again, as she has done so many times, on so many issues. Give her a bit of time and she'll come around and declare her undying support of these disastrous trade deals.
Clinton, like her husband, cares fo no one but herself.
Heck, at this point, I'd rather Trump. I may not agree with his stand on many issues. Still, I just cant seem to shake this uneasy feeling that at the very least, I can trust that he says what he thinks, and as such, I, at the very least, am able to agree or disagree, somehting I just cant seem to be able to do with Clinton.
I just cant seem to be able to trust her. She is indeed deeply flawed.
She's got too much to prove. Her husband, the then sitting President humiliated her in the worst of ways and somehow, I think it still nags at her.
Too much to prove, for the wrong reason, and as such, unfit to be President.
You're being terribly optimistic, aren't you?
Clinton has no imagination, no policy, except the illusion of grandeur and self entitlement of becomi President.
Once she secures the nomination, she'll reverse course yet again, as she has done so many times, on so many issues. Give her a bit of time and she'll come around and declare her undying support of these disastrous trade deals.
Clinton, like her husband, cares fo no one but herself.
Heck, at this point, I'd rather Trump. I may not agree with his stand on many issues. Still, I just cant seem to shake this uneasy feeling that at the very least, I can trust that he says what he thinks, and as such, I, at the very least, am able to agree or disagree, somehting I just cant seem to be able to do with Clinton.
I just cant seem to be able to trust her. She is indeed deeply flawed.
She's got too much to prove. Her husband, the then sitting President humiliated her in the worst of ways and somehow, I think it still nags at her.
Too much to prove, for the wrong reason, and as such, unfit to be President.
27
I agree entirely that Clinton cannot be trusted to hold a position, and is a demagogue in her own right. However, the problem for all of us who dread the possibility of a Trump/Clinton choice is that Trump may say what he thinks, but what he thinks changes from moment to moment, and what he thinks he thought does as well. He has no agenda other than a cult of personality. Clinton, at least, would be restrained somewhat by her awareness of her own narrative, she has nothing if not a memory.
Please elaborate on Trump's policies, once you get past, "Build a wall," "Keep Muslims out," and advocating the beating up of dissenters, who are usually people of color. "It'll be good, believe me," is not a policy.
None of what you've said here makes the least bit of sense! None of it. Sigh.
"socialism...generally been a failure wherever it’s been broadly applied." That must be why America is overwhelmed by so many Swedish, Danish and French refugees. Must be a relief for the NYT to not have to spend so much time burying Bernie in the headlines (you think we didn't notice?). But guess what? Those Millennials will not be working for Hillary, and many of them won't be voting for her either. Short term gain by the media. Potential long term tragedy for America.
65
I hope that those Millennials won't be sitting this election out or working for or voting for Trump. I hope that when push comes to shove, they hold their collective noses and vote for Hillary, because a Trump presidency would be the true long-term unmitigated tragedy for America, and a Cruz presidency would be even worse.
Socialism is a failure everywhere it's been tried? Sanders-style socialism is basically the New Deal. It's been tried in almost every single developed country. Please consider looking on the global innovation index and comparing Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Norway, Finland, Iceland, etc. to the US on a wide variety of business indicators. You might also consider doing some research on life expectancy, infant mortality, violent crime, and quality of life in those many, many countries that have roughly democratic socialist governments. Such systems best the US in all of these categories and it is fairly clear that democratic socialism is a not insignificant contributor to all these benefits for the citizens of those countries.
Democratic socialism also shaped the economic and political structure of France, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, etc. It is less in force now but the elements that are in force are all the things Sanders advocates. The people of those countries also do better than American citizens on a wide variety of economic and social indices.
Democratic socialism also shaped the economic and political structure of France, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, etc. It is less in force now but the elements that are in force are all the things Sanders advocates. The people of those countries also do better than American citizens on a wide variety of economic and social indices.
87
The only reason I see that democratic socialism might not work here is that we are a culture of the individual which leads to selfishness whereas countries such as Sweden have a community based culture where people want their neighbors to have the same benefits they enjoy. Could you image our culture beliefs turning a 180 to say that what is good for me is good for my neighbor. I doubt it, yet I remain hopeful.
Bernie is the first politician in the US in 70 years to be brave enough to express these ideas.
Bernie is the first politician in the US in 70 years to be brave enough to express these ideas.
1
Agree, 100%, with Duffle Bag. Democratic Socialism has been a success everywhere it was tried, except where the CIA murdered the democratically elected leader (such as Allende in Chile).
I think Egan's column was just a typo or auto-correct failure. He meant unbridled capitalism has been a failure everywhere it's been tried. It leads to gated communities, then recessions, and eventually, fascism.
I think Egan's column was just a typo or auto-correct failure. He meant unbridled capitalism has been a failure everywhere it's been tried. It leads to gated communities, then recessions, and eventually, fascism.
I would not exactly call this a "clock cleaning."
Sanders, despite the prodigious opposition from the Democratic party establishment, determined as "Republican lite," especially as epitomized by the odious machinations of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, intended to deny him a public platform and access to critical party resources such as funding and voter registration lists, has only narrowly had his legitimately earned majority stolen for the Clinton machine.
In Missouri, the primary may be decided by less than 500 votes.
This is also in an atmosphere where Republicans have denied the votes to young people, especially students, across the country. The Illinois race will be purloined by perhaps less than 2% of the votes cast.
The question for Democrats in November is whether or not the immense enthusiasm and support entrusted to Sanders by america's youth will translate into voter turnout for the distant second, default choice, of those young people, and thusly enable the defeat of the hatemonger.
Sanders, despite the prodigious opposition from the Democratic party establishment, determined as "Republican lite," especially as epitomized by the odious machinations of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, intended to deny him a public platform and access to critical party resources such as funding and voter registration lists, has only narrowly had his legitimately earned majority stolen for the Clinton machine.
In Missouri, the primary may be decided by less than 500 votes.
This is also in an atmosphere where Republicans have denied the votes to young people, especially students, across the country. The Illinois race will be purloined by perhaps less than 2% of the votes cast.
The question for Democrats in November is whether or not the immense enthusiasm and support entrusted to Sanders by america's youth will translate into voter turnout for the distant second, default choice, of those young people, and thusly enable the defeat of the hatemonger.
42
It's an old adage: be cautious about what you wish because your wishes might be granted. This time the electorate is mobilised. Four years of the same old same old might have unwanted long term consequences for the Democratic party.
16
I support Hillary, but I agree that she'll need watching in the White House, and Bernie's the best person to do it. And the best PLACE to do it would be as Hillary's Vice-President.
11
Aside from presiding over the Senate, the Vice President has no Constitutional powers. I am very dubious that a President Clinton would brook any interference from Vice President Sanders. Senator Sanders has a better chance to keep Clinton honest from the Senate.
1
Oh come on. With apologies to Joe Biden, a VP is, at best, a place-sitter. If Hillary wins, Bernie should get a cabinet seat.
"His ideas will shape every part of the party platform, which will give Clinton what she lacks: a clear message. " Then why should we vote for her if we can have the real thing? It is not only college-educated 20-year-olds who support Bernie Sanders for President of the United States. As just one of the millions of the over-fifty crowd, I #Feelthebern. And to discount the success of socialist policies is to ignore that Bernie Sanders cleaned Hillary Clinton's clock in preliminary tallies from the Democrats Abroad Global Presidential Primary...votes from many of us living in countries with democratic socialist policies.
54
I hope he has a voice within the Clinton Administration. He is a good person, just naive. Keep him away from foreign affairs, trade and gun policy though.
11
Keep him away from foreign policy? So Hillary can support more disastrous wars of choice like the one in Iraq? So she can look the other way like she id over the coup in Honduras?
1
I'm for the Democratic candidate for president, whoever he or she may be. Bernie is too, he's said so. It would be a huge mistake for Bernie supporters [and I am one] to sit out this election or go Green. Hilary is not Hubert Humphrey and we do not want 2016 to be anything like 1968, when young people [as I was at the time] sat out the election because HHH refused to oppose the Vietnam War. [Hint: Nixon won.]
We can support Bernie all the way, including if and when he doesn't become the Democratic candidate and puts his full support behind Hilary. And we must trust and hope that Hilary supporters will do the same for Bernie.
Bernie's revolution, as we can call it, has a chance of importance no matter who ends up being the Democratic nominee. But *only* if that nominee gains the support and efforts of all independents, progressives, and Democrats, and wins the election.
Spread the word.
We can support Bernie all the way, including if and when he doesn't become the Democratic candidate and puts his full support behind Hilary. And we must trust and hope that Hilary supporters will do the same for Bernie.
Bernie's revolution, as we can call it, has a chance of importance no matter who ends up being the Democratic nominee. But *only* if that nominee gains the support and efforts of all independents, progressives, and Democrats, and wins the election.
Spread the word.
32
Bernie hasn't "personally insulted his rival"? He's certainly made false implications about her, and has seemingly encouraged his followers to say outrageous things about her. I don't know if you spend any time on social media, Tim, but the ugliness of the misogyny, the evidence of the mass credibility of the decades-long Rove-and-Koch attacks, the vicious memes . . . well, it's hardly been a realm of Vermont-style politeness. I know many women that post their ideas and feelings re Hillary's campaign to secret groups on Facebook because their Bernie-believing friends pile on if they are public about this. Perhaps you should revise your estimate of the honor of the Bernie. It's been slipping lately.
66
Ann, thank you for your post. I feel the same way. It is hard for me to believe that Sanders, who has indeed run a negative campaign despite his assertions to the contrary, is not at least partly responsible for the extraordinary hate, yes, hate, that many of his supporters now bestow upon Clinton. For her part, Clinton could have made negative innuendos about Bernie's overall lack of effectiveness as a Senator during his 26 years as a member of the federal establishment, but chose not to. She stuck to her platform and has critiqued Sanders' platforms when provoked to do so, such as in the town halls and debates. Her record is not impeccable, but neither is she deserving of SO MUCH HATE AND RIDICULE. She has survived years and years of false accusations and frivolous investigations by the republicans. They have gone after her because they know she will be a successful change agent for all of Americans, especially those most in need now.
72
Won, won, won! I feel as if I am halloing into the void. ALL of the Democratic delegates are awarded proportionally, so in states where Clinton and Sander are quite close (Florida and Illinois), they pretty much get the same number of delegates. Sanders currently has two-thirds of the number of Clinton's delegates; which is not to say he will win the nomination, but he has made a huge difference in Clinton's message, as Mr. Egan so correctly writes.
10
@Miriam
Err...They weren't remotely "Close" in FL. She trounced him and will probably get about two thirds of the delegates.
Err...They weren't remotely "Close" in FL. She trounced him and will probably get about two thirds of the delegates.
10
Yes, Bernie has pushed Hillary left, and that's a good thing. But Bernie is a man of integrity and has been consistent throughout his long political career. He does not say the most politically-advantageous thing in order to get elected, which is one reason that I like him. Hillary, though, is like 99.9% of the other politicians. She will say whatever it takes to get elected, but like 99.9% of the other politicians, will revert back to her old positions after she wins. Fortunately, her old positions are still better for this country than anybody else's, so even if she wins, it's not a complete loss. Point is, her moving-to-the-left is probably temporary. But, better closer to the middle than all of the way to the right.
1
You are correct. Illinois (51%), otherwise...thank you for being courteous...?
I don't really agree that Sanders has not personally attacked his rival, but more signficantly Sanders supporters have torn her apart. And not on the merits, it's all guilt by association and gotcha sound bites. The reality is that Clinton is a thoughtful, genuine woman, and I hope Sanders supporters take some time really looking at her (not what her opponents say about her) to form an opinion. I think when you do you'll look forward to voting for her for president.
And speaking of looking forward, another problem of the Sanders campaign is that it has caused a lot of young adults to have an overly dim view of their future prospects. There are structural problems, no doubt, and growing inequality must be fought. But many of the Sanders supporters claiming they have no future actually do. Obama has ensured they will pay no more than ten percent of their income on student loans, and will only be obliged for twenty years. Their employment prospects are good and they have health care options thanks to the ACA. Many have been encouraged to believe they have miserable lives and no prospects. That seems like a political movement moving in the wrong direction.
And speaking of looking forward, another problem of the Sanders campaign is that it has caused a lot of young adults to have an overly dim view of their future prospects. There are structural problems, no doubt, and growing inequality must be fought. But many of the Sanders supporters claiming they have no future actually do. Obama has ensured they will pay no more than ten percent of their income on student loans, and will only be obliged for twenty years. Their employment prospects are good and they have health care options thanks to the ACA. Many have been encouraged to believe they have miserable lives and no prospects. That seems like a political movement moving in the wrong direction.
30
The Sanders campaign has caused a lot of young adults to have an overly dim view of their future prospects? I think that the Republican Party, along with Mr. Clinton's dismemberment of Glass-Stegall, has a lot more to do with that than does the Sanders campaign. Why should they pay any of their incomes on student loans? Twenty years in debt to go to college? What a GREAT deal! I guess that's why the dozens of nations that provide free college tuition for their citizens are lining up for the details on that plan. Hillary Clinton is not what I would deem a person of integrity.
The political machines that control America are incredibly entrenched.
People get their news from sources that are incredibly biased.
And, though I hate to say so, America is a right wing country, i.e., all about war and money.
So, HRC, the anointed puppet of the establishment, looks set to win.
Trump is caricature, not a candidate.
If by some miracle he wins, though, maybe it will force people on both the right and the so-called left to face their own dark side.
Who knows what is bad or good or what the future will bring?
A terrible president and a social and economic catastrophe might be just the ticket to wake the sleeping giant.
The crony capitalist status quo is unsustainable but maybe America has to really and truly hit bottom before it can get clean.
People get their news from sources that are incredibly biased.
And, though I hate to say so, America is a right wing country, i.e., all about war and money.
So, HRC, the anointed puppet of the establishment, looks set to win.
Trump is caricature, not a candidate.
If by some miracle he wins, though, maybe it will force people on both the right and the so-called left to face their own dark side.
Who knows what is bad or good or what the future will bring?
A terrible president and a social and economic catastrophe might be just the ticket to wake the sleeping giant.
The crony capitalist status quo is unsustainable but maybe America has to really and truly hit bottom before it can get clean.
30
I have been wondering the same thing. There is so much apathy out there on both sides. When did Democrats turn into Republicans, acting in collusion with Wall Street? Why won't Hillary #ReleaseTheTranscripts of those speeches?
Mr. Egan, here are some examples of American Socialism:
The Post Office (written into the Constitution, no less)
Public K-12 Education
Community Colleges
Public Universities, especially before they were captured by bean counters
Medicare
Medicaid
Public Roads
Public Libraries
Without many of these, particularly the Post Office and Public Schools, America could not have become the nation it is. The Post Office, you say? Early on it was the internet of its day, its mission being to facilitate the distribution of of educational materials, information and indeed books of all kinds to a spread our population. A good precedent for treating broadband as a public utility.
The Post Office (written into the Constitution, no less)
Public K-12 Education
Community Colleges
Public Universities, especially before they were captured by bean counters
Medicare
Medicaid
Public Roads
Public Libraries
Without many of these, particularly the Post Office and Public Schools, America could not have become the nation it is. The Post Office, you say? Early on it was the internet of its day, its mission being to facilitate the distribution of of educational materials, information and indeed books of all kinds to a spread our population. A good precedent for treating broadband as a public utility.
65
Come to think of it, by this argument (with which I agree) the internet started out as a socialist institution.
Unfortunately, this oped reflects the nihilism and narrowness of thought that is all too prevalent on the left of the Democratic party. Here's a great idea. Let's waste:
a)vast material resources (not to mention the emotional energy) that could be better employed in defeating Republicans in a totally useless quest that is not going to succeed
b)a tremendous messaging opportunity to rip apart the Republican party that is in total chaos and disarray.
Will Rogers had it right to be sure.
a)vast material resources (not to mention the emotional energy) that could be better employed in defeating Republicans in a totally useless quest that is not going to succeed
b)a tremendous messaging opportunity to rip apart the Republican party that is in total chaos and disarray.
Will Rogers had it right to be sure.
13
Two most abused terms in political discourse today: nihilism and narcissism.
4
@taopraxis
nyc
In denial?
nyc
In denial?
2
@John: 'Denial' is a good one, too. I'll add it to my list of overused pop psychology and pop philosophy terms...;)
4
One votes "for" in primaries, and then, more often than not, "against" in November. It's just a fact of life. In my eight general elections to date, I've only been able to vote "for" twice. Those were the last two, when my preferred candidate was the nominee. In the other six, I've voted against the Republican (though in '96 I got to vote against Clinton AND Dole). I would have liked to vote for Sanders in November, but, failing that, I will make sure not to deny myself the pleasure of voting against Trump. Or anyone else the GOP cares to promote. And don't think it won't be a pleasure, tinged though it is by a familiar melancholy.
53
"I have many problems with socialism, not the least of which is that it’s generally been a failure wherever it’s been broadly applied."
Er, Mr. Egan: Have you ever heard of a sub-continent called Western Europe? A country called Canada, rumored to be just north of the United States? A mythical continent nation called Australia?
All of these lands have socialist, or more specifically, social democratic, policies, which seem to work quite well. Their inhabitants seem to like them, anyway.
But let's not strain geographically. I'm sure you've heard of the United States of America. Have you heard of Social Security and Medicare? Socialist. And very popular, I hear.
Er, Mr. Egan: Have you ever heard of a sub-continent called Western Europe? A country called Canada, rumored to be just north of the United States? A mythical continent nation called Australia?
All of these lands have socialist, or more specifically, social democratic, policies, which seem to work quite well. Their inhabitants seem to like them, anyway.
But let's not strain geographically. I'm sure you've heard of the United States of America. Have you heard of Social Security and Medicare? Socialist. And very popular, I hear.
445
Perhaps Timothy is using the formal definition of socialism as opposed to the colloquial? Formally Socialism is: social ownership and democratic control of the means of production. None of the cited states have socialism by that definition. They all have socialist capitalist governments, where the socialist portion results in the social safety net because their capitalism is more tightly regulated.
Timothy is soaking the fresh air of the Pacific Northwest, ignoring the neighbor north of him, next door. If he turns his nose towards them, he might be able to see past his nose to the Canadian flavor of socialism. Spring is in the air...
1
Brilliant!
Clinton has been pulled only temporarily to the left. Come September, she'll be back to her hawkish and pro-corporate ways. Senator Chameleon for President.
87
Agree. Sadly.
How do you know this?
At the same time, your work as a citizen doesn't stop after election day: you need to remind your elected representatives of these positions.
At the same time, your work as a citizen doesn't stop after election day: you need to remind your elected representatives of these positions.
And you know what.People will not vote for senator chameleon...
The question is whether Bernie will be as popular in the Western states as Hillary was in the South. I think he will be.
Bernie initially appealed to me because he reminded me of California Governor Jerry Brown. Out West, we respect people with big ideas, not fear them. Hillary is too status-quo, she's IBM to Bernie's Apple. I also think that because we either are (like California) or clearly on the way to becoming minority-majority states, we are more focused on policy than identity politics. Minorities don't need to be pandered to over here. They're already in charge.
Hillary says free public higher ed is impossible, but we were successful at keeping it virtually free in the past. Medicare for all is supposed to be impossible, but Covered California has done a great job expanding healthcare access. Infrastructure is supposed to be too expensive, but we're breaking ground on America's first line of true high-speed rail.
Maybe to the states that have voted so far, Bernie was a crazy revolutionary with scary new ideas. But in many of the states that will be voting now, Bernie's proposals are (or were) reality.
You think Hillary's been pushed to the left? Wait a week. She'll start talking so progressively, it might actually sound authentic.
I'm confident Bernie will win.
I look forward to reading Mr. Egan's work in January, when he will be writing about how Bernie should be President because it does "a real service" to Hillary.
Bernie initially appealed to me because he reminded me of California Governor Jerry Brown. Out West, we respect people with big ideas, not fear them. Hillary is too status-quo, she's IBM to Bernie's Apple. I also think that because we either are (like California) or clearly on the way to becoming minority-majority states, we are more focused on policy than identity politics. Minorities don't need to be pandered to over here. They're already in charge.
Hillary says free public higher ed is impossible, but we were successful at keeping it virtually free in the past. Medicare for all is supposed to be impossible, but Covered California has done a great job expanding healthcare access. Infrastructure is supposed to be too expensive, but we're breaking ground on America's first line of true high-speed rail.
Maybe to the states that have voted so far, Bernie was a crazy revolutionary with scary new ideas. But in many of the states that will be voting now, Bernie's proposals are (or were) reality.
You think Hillary's been pushed to the left? Wait a week. She'll start talking so progressively, it might actually sound authentic.
I'm confident Bernie will win.
I look forward to reading Mr. Egan's work in January, when he will be writing about how Bernie should be President because it does "a real service" to Hillary.
222
What Hillary said is not that free public education is impossible, she merely pointed out that public college education at present is the responsibility of the states. not the Federal government. If you want free public colleges you must elect governors and state assemblies that are willing to raise the necessary revenues.
5
No he will not win. I admire your idealism, but at the point where you have to deny reality to accept your ideals, haven't you become a Republican. The race is over, sanders should switch his attacks from Clinton to Trump and Republicans. If he doesn't, than he shows that he has no allegiance to the broader Progressive movement and is only concerned about himself.
I, for one, will continue to support his campaign. He is saying what needs to be said. UMass economists have said his free public college is very do-able. What we lack is not the funds. We can always find those for wars and military equipment or corporate welfare. We lack the will. The donor class doesn't like it.
Bernie should stay in, stay cordial, stay committed, and stay true - he is making a difference, and should pony up for the rest of this campaign trip.
He won't lose - he will bring a shred of honesty to an otherwise vulgar and disgusting campaign by the Republicans, and some spine to his opponent.
He won't lose - he will bring a shred of honesty to an otherwise vulgar and disgusting campaign by the Republicans, and some spine to his opponent.
64
Amen
Please tell me what he's ever accomplished in his 24 years in Congress.
Look at it this way. For Bernie: Socialism = Social Democracy. In the Scandinavian sense. And it works. That simple. It's not a "dictatorship of the people," although I would dare say you are better off living in Cuba than Honduras. And should you decide to leave, you are welcome with open arms in Laredo with buses leaving for Miami on the hour. Forget detention centers and the Sonoran Dessert. Everything is relative.
13
All this is very well, but it’s naïve to suggest that Bernie has pulled Hillary left. Hillary has reacted to eddies in the electoral streams as she’s needed, caused by Bernie or Elizabeth Warren or other forces. That means precisely zip when it comes to governance. This is a woman who has been on the national political scene at the highest levels for well over twenty years: to suggest that she’s sufficiently malleable that she’d be untrue to her basic nature simply because she needs to counter forces in her party on her left is unreasonable.
Tim’s argument appears to be that Bernie has run an exemplary campaign and has espoused ideas and values that Tim supports, therefore he should remain in a campaign he has dramatically diminishing chances of winning – for fear that the message Tim supports will be de-emphasized as Hillary turns her battleship toward Donald Trump. But consider that it’s Bernie’s message that has electrified some but not enough of the electorate to beat Hillary’s far more moderate message; and it’s unlikely to prove compelling to Republicans in a general election.
Best for the Democratic nomination to be resolved as soon as possible, freeing Hillary to develop the messages and the approach she needs to take to the real battle to come.
Tim’s argument appears to be that Bernie has run an exemplary campaign and has espoused ideas and values that Tim supports, therefore he should remain in a campaign he has dramatically diminishing chances of winning – for fear that the message Tim supports will be de-emphasized as Hillary turns her battleship toward Donald Trump. But consider that it’s Bernie’s message that has electrified some but not enough of the electorate to beat Hillary’s far more moderate message; and it’s unlikely to prove compelling to Republicans in a general election.
Best for the Democratic nomination to be resolved as soon as possible, freeing Hillary to develop the messages and the approach she needs to take to the real battle to come.
16
So does that mean she will shift to the right or shift to the left, shift to the left-right or shift to the right- left? Oh wait she already does that.
Hillary vs. Trump.
Feh.
Either one will be a one-term president. Hillary will be half way between Obama and George W. Bush, unsupported by congress unless she escalates war in the mideast. She will not be re-elected. Trump will be a disaster. He will govern the country with the same attitude that Chris Christie brings to governing NJ or Sarah Palin brought to governing Alaska - they just liked winning elections, but didn't want to have to actually do the work their position requires. Trump will make a point of stirring things up, but not for the better. He will escalate wars, de-stabilize our economy, and take a nail-gun to the coffin of the middle class.
This is not an age for optimism.
Feh.
Either one will be a one-term president. Hillary will be half way between Obama and George W. Bush, unsupported by congress unless she escalates war in the mideast. She will not be re-elected. Trump will be a disaster. He will govern the country with the same attitude that Chris Christie brings to governing NJ or Sarah Palin brought to governing Alaska - they just liked winning elections, but didn't want to have to actually do the work their position requires. Trump will make a point of stirring things up, but not for the better. He will escalate wars, de-stabilize our economy, and take a nail-gun to the coffin of the middle class.
This is not an age for optimism.
36
Sorry but the pessimistic woe is me story is just that, a story. Sure can you find people who have hard times? Yes, but you always can. Unemployment below 5%. Deficits are down by 80%. Increased HealthCare for millions. Do we have challenges? Yes. Is it the end of America? Not even close...
1
"...take a nail-gun to the coffin of the middle class." Now that is a phrase well-turned. I bow to you.
I'm very meh about Clinton, in fact I'm ultra-meh, but I am going to vote for her with a spring in my step because unless a Democrat is elected in November we are going to get another nutty, intransigent Supreme Court Justice who is going to block us from doing anything about climate change, and then it is goodbye planet. So. this being an election with our future in the balance, I say. once we've shed a tear for what might (should) have been let's get 'er done and work to see that Hillary gets elected in the fall.
44
Eagan is right: socialism sounds great but nobody can point to somewhere where it actually achieved its promise. Capitalism is tough: it results in winners and losers, some of which is deserved and some not. Bankers have been supported (with appropriate penalities for illegal behavior) because we need them; trade deals have been adopted because they benefit consumers (constrain US company and labor monopoly). The 2008 debacle resulted from Republicans limiting bank regulation and Democrats wanting poor credits to qualify for subsidized mortgages. Let's move on to a better future.
3
"Nobody can point to somewhere where it actually achieved its promise"
How about Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany to some extent, France...especially the Scandinavian countries have better entrepeneurship stats and social mobility than we do in the US, they are not failed commie states like the Right wing of this country likes to portay.
The real issue I have with Sanders is he needed to come up with a better term than socialism (or at least work very hard to redefine that term) to describe what he plans and what they've done in those European countries. Americans barely know who their vice president is, expecting them to understand the subtle nuances between communism, socialism and Democtratic socialism is unrealistic and what I see as his real failure. He should have called it "Social Capitalism" or some other creative term (he has a lot of creative young people working for him I'm sure) because that is what it is. And he should have stressed the Social part...ie an economy that works for people not for banks (where capital comes from). Americans love Social Media, Social networking, etc., he should have parlayed that to help redefine his approach. Maybe he still can, or he can get Hillary to help do that...long term it's all part of shifting the conversation, and I do applaud him for getting that all started...
How about Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany to some extent, France...especially the Scandinavian countries have better entrepeneurship stats and social mobility than we do in the US, they are not failed commie states like the Right wing of this country likes to portay.
The real issue I have with Sanders is he needed to come up with a better term than socialism (or at least work very hard to redefine that term) to describe what he plans and what they've done in those European countries. Americans barely know who their vice president is, expecting them to understand the subtle nuances between communism, socialism and Democtratic socialism is unrealistic and what I see as his real failure. He should have called it "Social Capitalism" or some other creative term (he has a lot of creative young people working for him I'm sure) because that is what it is. And he should have stressed the Social part...ie an economy that works for people not for banks (where capital comes from). Americans love Social Media, Social networking, etc., he should have parlayed that to help redefine his approach. Maybe he still can, or he can get Hillary to help do that...long term it's all part of shifting the conversation, and I do applaud him for getting that all started...
Actually, many commenters have pointed to "somewhere where it (socialism) actually achieved it's promise." Trade deals are not adopted because they benefit consumers, they're passed because they benefit corporations and the already wealthy. As for constraining the "labor monopoly," that's simply a bad joke, since unions actually defend the rights of workers while so-called "free trade" pacts ensure that both domestic and foreign wages remain low. Instead of preaching capitalist orthodoxy, perhaps you could familiarize yourself with the real world.
3
Capitalism depends on a level playing field, which we haven't had for some time now.
So if we can't get it un-rigged, we'd better get some socialism a la FDR in here before the country truly turns cannibalistic as it seeks to wring more out of the 99%.
Capitalism has turned into just what Marx warned, and many 1%ers are pushing for more. Open your eyes. Bernie's yelling for a reason, and it's not for his ego.
So if we can't get it un-rigged, we'd better get some socialism a la FDR in here before the country truly turns cannibalistic as it seeks to wring more out of the 99%.
Capitalism has turned into just what Marx warned, and many 1%ers are pushing for more. Open your eyes. Bernie's yelling for a reason, and it's not for his ego.
2
"On health care, on banks, on the influence of Wall Street, Sanders has pulled Clinton to the left."
Whom are you kidding? Clinton's nomination will be a disaster for the country, even if (or especially if) she actually manages to beat Trump. Without Bernie Sanders, the election loses all interest. Time to vote Jill Stein again.
Whom are you kidding? Clinton's nomination will be a disaster for the country, even if (or especially if) she actually manages to beat Trump. Without Bernie Sanders, the election loses all interest. Time to vote Jill Stein again.
38
Kudos on "whom".
Get a hold of yourself. A Trump win will be the death of many people. Think about it. Sanders has been viable after 8 years of Obama. Another progressive will be viable next time around. Please don't be heartless and throw a temper tantrum. Think of your next door neighbor, maybe a Muslim, maybe Black, maybe a single parent, who is barely hanging on.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the .... well... the enemy of the not so bad.
Get a hold of yourself. A Trump win will be the death of many people. Think about it. Sanders has been viable after 8 years of Obama. Another progressive will be viable next time around. Please don't be heartless and throw a temper tantrum. Think of your next door neighbor, maybe a Muslim, maybe Black, maybe a single parent, who is barely hanging on.
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the .... well... the enemy of the not so bad.
2
Bernie's brand of "socialism" is working in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and much of the rest of Europe. It could work here too.
95
Bernie's Brand of socialism is those countries require taxes of 70% on incomes of $70,000.
Define "working". Do you really think Americans would go for a 60% tax rate plus a VAT?
"On health care, on banks, on the influence of Wall Street, Sanders has pulled Clinton to the left. By raising more than $135 million from 1.5 million individual donors, Sanders has shown he can match big money. His ideas will shape every part of the party platform...".
Well, yes. So why not just support him? Bernie Sanders always had a clear message. And how much further could he have gotten if the news had actually covered his candidacy?
First he was completely ignored, then finally, slightly, grudgingly noticed, and then constantly dismissed or minimized. He's the only candidate that has been granted no legitimacy in the news, but he's the only one running who is 100% real; don't make him out to be some Jimminy Cricket chirping a puppet into moral shape. Good grief. Believe me, his loss will be our loss.
Well, yes. So why not just support him? Bernie Sanders always had a clear message. And how much further could he have gotten if the news had actually covered his candidacy?
First he was completely ignored, then finally, slightly, grudgingly noticed, and then constantly dismissed or minimized. He's the only candidate that has been granted no legitimacy in the news, but he's the only one running who is 100% real; don't make him out to be some Jimminy Cricket chirping a puppet into moral shape. Good grief. Believe me, his loss will be our loss.
161
Exactly, JessiePearl!
1
Bernie's ideas will not die. To see a similar prescription for America and the world go to YouTube, watch Comedy Party Platform and Benton-Comedy2.
We need both Medicare for All and Welfare for all (sometimes called Universal Basic Income). We need to jail legislators who take bribes, and the people who offer them (like banks and lobbyists). We need to end gerrymandering and the separate primaries for each party.
Keep the discussion alive, send a buck to Bernie. Have some fun, invite me to speak. We really can save America. If we do not give up.
[email protected]
We need both Medicare for All and Welfare for all (sometimes called Universal Basic Income). We need to jail legislators who take bribes, and the people who offer them (like banks and lobbyists). We need to end gerrymandering and the separate primaries for each party.
Keep the discussion alive, send a buck to Bernie. Have some fun, invite me to speak. We really can save America. If we do not give up.
[email protected]
39
Sen. Sanders has been fighting the same good fight, usually alone, for 40 years. Now there are millions of us standing with him, and shame on anyone who abandons him now. This is not the end. This is not even the beginning of the end. It's not even the end of the beginning.
Hillary Clinton is political tofu: the flavor you get is entirely dependent on the environment in which you place her. So we need to make sure that wherever she goes, whatever she does, the Political Revolution is her shadow. We cannot trust her or rely on her to do a single thing she says. So we must continue to fight, and make it clear that the Democratic Party can no longer take the progressive vote for granted.
Hillary Clinton is political tofu: the flavor you get is entirely dependent on the environment in which you place her. So we need to make sure that wherever she goes, whatever she does, the Political Revolution is her shadow. We cannot trust her or rely on her to do a single thing she says. So we must continue to fight, and make it clear that the Democratic Party can no longer take the progressive vote for granted.
244
You're right, but I won't vote for Hillary unless she earns it, and she hasn't yet. It was never about Bernie, it was about the truth. I fully expect HRC to support TPP if elected, no matter what she says on the trail. Obama was for it, so why wouldn't she? It's not over till it's over, and maybe we'll get lucky, and she'll get indicted or some other skeleton from her closet will be exposed. But if you elected HRC, then she's the best you're ever gonna do because the message is that's the kind of dem who gets elected. If you stay home, and Trump wins, it might be worse for 4 years, but maybe the next Sanders (Warren?) has a chance in 2020.
31
How scary to hear you'd prefer trump, a blundering, self serving, proudly ignorant of world affairs, act from the gut would be better than Hillary. She has her flaws but she learns and she is not going to support the TPP once she gets elected. that horse is out of the barn. But those who think trade agreements alone are the cause of job loss are fooling themselves. Coal is not declining solely because of environmental regulations, either. Gas prices dealt the bigger blow.
1
You've siad this much better than I could.
You say "it might be worse for four years" if Dems stayed home and let Trump win? How about the next quarter century after a Republican president gets to name the next two Supreme Court justices? The damage would be horrific.
1
The way to make the nation safe from the GOP's domination is for Ms. Clinton to put Bernie Sanders on her ticket as Vice-President. She will then win the Presidency; I have no doubts.............If he is not on the ticket the people of the United States will lose. Their loss will be the Supreme Court, the Congress, the Senate and the young voters this country needs for any positive future.
44
Why do people feel Bernie will play a stronger role as VP than remaining a strong independent voice in the Senate?
( Same for Warren) We will need every Democrat- aligned Senate vote we can get to pass progressive legislation over the continuing threat of a Republican obstruction.
( Same for Warren) We will need every Democrat- aligned Senate vote we can get to pass progressive legislation over the continuing threat of a Republican obstruction.
38
He hasn't been a "strong voice in the Senate" - he's accomplished NOTHING.
1
Lynn,
You have a real legitimate concern; but can Ms. Clinton win the Presidency without his support as being part of the ticket? I do not think so. Also if both are on the ticket they will gain more Democrats in the Senate and House.
Mark in Colorado
You have a real legitimate concern; but can Ms. Clinton win the Presidency without his support as being part of the ticket? I do not think so. Also if both are on the ticket they will gain more Democrats in the Senate and House.
Mark in Colorado
1
"I have many problems with socialism, not the least of which is that it’s generally been a failure wherever it’s been broadly applied. But capitalism has its cruel excesses, its many failures as well."
Umm...Bernie "thinks" he's a Socialist but he's not even close. Which might be why Egen is confused. There are real Socialists in Europe but most wealthy countries (except the US) practice a 50-50% mix of Socialism and Capitalism - taking the best of both.
For some unknown reason, the US seems to be stuck on taking the worst of Capitalism (slave wages) and the worst of Socialism (universal health care and education but it'll cost you...).
A Clinton-Sanders ticket wouldn't be horrible.
Umm...Bernie "thinks" he's a Socialist but he's not even close. Which might be why Egen is confused. There are real Socialists in Europe but most wealthy countries (except the US) practice a 50-50% mix of Socialism and Capitalism - taking the best of both.
For some unknown reason, the US seems to be stuck on taking the worst of Capitalism (slave wages) and the worst of Socialism (universal health care and education but it'll cost you...).
A Clinton-Sanders ticket wouldn't be horrible.
37
Odd for you to say universal health care is the worst of socialism. We know those socialist democracies have better health care and social safety nets - for less in healthcare costs - than the US. We could use that kind of failure.
The worst of Socialism...Universal Health Care , but it'll cost you...??
What are you going on about?/ There is NOT A SINGLE OECD Country with Universal Health care where the costs are even 60% of the costs of the U.S Private Non Universal Health Care!
It's Costing YOU!
U.S Health Care which does not cover everyone and leaves so many open to Bankruptcy via medical costs (are you kidding?) is the most expensive Health system per capita in the developed World.
You need to get your facts straight and your information updated.
What are you going on about?/ There is NOT A SINGLE OECD Country with Universal Health care where the costs are even 60% of the costs of the U.S Private Non Universal Health Care!
It's Costing YOU!
U.S Health Care which does not cover everyone and leaves so many open to Bankruptcy via medical costs (are you kidding?) is the most expensive Health system per capita in the developed World.
You need to get your facts straight and your information updated.
2
Yes, Sanders was good for the Democratic Party but clearly the DNC, the New York Times and the usual establishment was having none of that. In addition to young voters, the DNC can also say goodbye to black voters. Hey DNC, good luck with your long delayed voter registration drive, too bad you stalled that until it was too late.
68
They don't want any more millenial votes for Bernie. Corrupt to their core. Independent party will RISE UP. We're here to stay.
It is African-American voters -- particularly people with some life-experience under their belts -- who have given Clinton significant support during this primary season. Although I have disagreements with some of her current rhetoric, Clinton is retaining so much of the super-delegate support because she understands the actual process of governance and legislation and she is animated by a lifetime of progressive values. A bittersweet truth of grown-up reality is that deep change filters slowly through a variegated society such as ours. SUPPORT HER. The real work of guiding that change is requires steady commitment. Don't give up and don't retreat because we're not going to reinvent the political wheel -- use your voices and your votes.
I don't think they are back in the Arena to vote for Hillary. Anybody who doesn't mention that is not paying attention.
5
The political ship of state in the U.S. has been drifting to the right for so long that if an informed citizen were plucked out of the 1960s and dropped down into today's politics, they would think Sanders was the Democrat, Clinton was the Republican, and God knows what kind of thing Donald J. Trump is.
I often find myself saying "hear, hear!" to Egan columns, but you lost me on this idea that Sanders-style socialism is a failure. Soviet-style socialism is a failure, and China's version is really just a matter of socialism being beside the point in that land's complex evolution. Socialism lives in varying degrees in much of Europe, in Canada, and is doing quite well, thank you. Is it perfect? Get serious.
Take a look at what we're building here. I'd say we need to keep pulling on Mrs. Clinton to get her back on the left side of the center line. Feel the Bern!
I often find myself saying "hear, hear!" to Egan columns, but you lost me on this idea that Sanders-style socialism is a failure. Soviet-style socialism is a failure, and China's version is really just a matter of socialism being beside the point in that land's complex evolution. Socialism lives in varying degrees in much of Europe, in Canada, and is doing quite well, thank you. Is it perfect? Get serious.
Take a look at what we're building here. I'd say we need to keep pulling on Mrs. Clinton to get her back on the left side of the center line. Feel the Bern!
61
If Hillary Clinton gets the nomination, my prediction is that not only will the Democrats stay home on Election Day, the Republican turnout will be record high because as much as folks don't like Trump, the rot of Clinton's politics offends people more than a lunatic showboat like Trump.
Something else which bothers me about this piece is the notion that Sanders' presence in the race would have any practical effect on a Clinton administration. Remember William Jennings Bryan? His calls for anti-imperialism, neutrality, trust-busting, etc. went unheeded even though he had millions of grass roots supporters. Whether or not we would have gone to Europe in 1917 or had the stock market crash in '29 is a topic for a tv show. However, the argument that reform candidates are best suited to shape party platforms rather than win elections is an old one and not borne out by history. instead, politics continue as usual after the election frenzy is over and the public no longer has a champion in the spotlight. That's what the anti-establishment fervor is about this year. People have once again grown tired of the lip service paid to their real and desperate situations. Clinton is not our champion. Neither is Trump. Sanders is that candidate, so why not finally vote in the true reformer and see what happens? I know that I vote for him even if I have to write him in.
Something else which bothers me about this piece is the notion that Sanders' presence in the race would have any practical effect on a Clinton administration. Remember William Jennings Bryan? His calls for anti-imperialism, neutrality, trust-busting, etc. went unheeded even though he had millions of grass roots supporters. Whether or not we would have gone to Europe in 1917 or had the stock market crash in '29 is a topic for a tv show. However, the argument that reform candidates are best suited to shape party platforms rather than win elections is an old one and not borne out by history. instead, politics continue as usual after the election frenzy is over and the public no longer has a champion in the spotlight. That's what the anti-establishment fervor is about this year. People have once again grown tired of the lip service paid to their real and desperate situations. Clinton is not our champion. Neither is Trump. Sanders is that candidate, so why not finally vote in the true reformer and see what happens? I know that I vote for him even if I have to write him in.
396
Nonsense. Why will those who already voted for Hillary stay home in November? And I find it hard to believe that those who supported Sanders will prefer to see Trump in the White House over Hillary. If that were the case they had no business supporting Sanders in the first place since Trump is the anti-Sanders, much more so than Hillary. Furthermore Trump is toxic to many Republicans, even more so than Hillary is toxic to Bernie supporters.
1
Sanders is the best chance for the Democrats to take the White House. This presidential election will be all about turn out. On the GOP side most of the non Trump people will turn out to vote against either Clinton or Sanders while all of the racists, know nothings etc will turn out for Trump. On the Dem. side I fear that large numbers of Sanders voters will be so disappointed that many will stay home and Clinton will go down in flames.
1
Agreed! I think a lot of people, myself included, will be writing Bernie in if he does not manage to get the nomination. Clinton will only keep pandering to her donors and pursuing a disastrous foreign policy - she is pretty much Trump Lite.
HRC and team have done all they can to listen to Sanders w/o hearing, to tweak her speeches as Sanders continued to annoy.
I hope she is smart enough to realize his supporters are the future and the now of the party. They're sick of how things are run, of which she is a diva.
Sanders has to stay in til the convention if only, as one commenter said elsewhere, by his votes show there are still good Americans in the country.
He's not extreme, the circumstances we're in are extreme. Look at the frontrunners.
I hope she is smart enough to realize his supporters are the future and the now of the party. They're sick of how things are run, of which she is a diva.
Sanders has to stay in til the convention if only, as one commenter said elsewhere, by his votes show there are still good Americans in the country.
He's not extreme, the circumstances we're in are extreme. Look at the frontrunners.
37
I don't think Mr. Egan has studied this subject enough to write a thoughtful, informative or useful column. This tossed off bit of wisdom has a late-night just-write-700-words kind of quality to it that rings hollow.
Timothy, please answer me this: Why will a majority of Americans vote for a candidate they don't especially like and DEFINITELY don't trust?
Are you praying that a big bad Donald Trump will force a majority into a shotgun marriage with Hillary?
Don't count on it -- she does worse than Sanders against Trump in every poll I've seen.
Do you remember when the ogre of our youth, RICHARD NIXON, was not scary enough to make people accept the Vietnam war-supporting, double-talking Hubert Horatio Humphrey?
HHH and HC have more than H in common.
I'm afraid Timothy, you are giving up and giving in to the force of group-think. You underestimate Sanders, his supporters, the primaries yet to come, the country itself and a year of surprizes that none of you in the important buildings predicted right six months ago.
Yup, I'm betting another $27 that you are wrong again.
Timothy, please answer me this: Why will a majority of Americans vote for a candidate they don't especially like and DEFINITELY don't trust?
Are you praying that a big bad Donald Trump will force a majority into a shotgun marriage with Hillary?
Don't count on it -- she does worse than Sanders against Trump in every poll I've seen.
Do you remember when the ogre of our youth, RICHARD NIXON, was not scary enough to make people accept the Vietnam war-supporting, double-talking Hubert Horatio Humphrey?
HHH and HC have more than H in common.
I'm afraid Timothy, you are giving up and giving in to the force of group-think. You underestimate Sanders, his supporters, the primaries yet to come, the country itself and a year of surprizes that none of you in the important buildings predicted right six months ago.
Yup, I'm betting another $27 that you are wrong again.
57
Wow, another Bernie Bro lashing out when his candidate doesn't win. Hillary Clinton is not beholden to corporate America. That comment is nonsense. I worked and got paid by a Southern Conservative Company and yet have always voted Democrat. Who pays you has little influence on how you vote no matter what others may tell you.
I like Hillary... the way she bobs and weaves, the double talk and machinations.... it's just what the nation needs. Lincoln would have kept slavery if it would have preserved the Union, so he danced with the Devil, and that is what Clinton does. Sanders and Trump are boring... I picked more interesting things out of my nose.
"He’s done a real service, for the party he only recently joined, and for the country. Clinton is a far better candidate because of him."
HRC is beholden to her donor's. She owes them something and they will demand payback. Her leftward movement is temporary. I have no intention of voting for Trump, he incites violence and is an embarrassment; however, I also have no desire to vote for HRC - she is, for all practical purposes, a Republican. The Republicans will be pleased if she gets the nomination and is ultimately elected in the general election. Even if she were to run against a Republican who isn’t a showman, traditionally moderate Republicans would be satisfied with HRC.
Things need to change. I fear for our children and grandchildren. We must get money out of politics. We need to stop the increase in economic disparity and nurture a healthy middle class. We must begin to truly care for our environment, yesterday. Our health care and education systems, jobs, and our infrastructure are all in dire need of real attention. We need elected officials that truly care about people not their own (or their political donor’s) pocketbooks and egos. We need elected officials that don’t create situations that make it necessary for them to prevaricate and/or lie every time they speak – that’s not HRC.
In our seeking for economic and political progress, we all go up - or else we all go down.
- Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Democrat
HRC is beholden to her donor's. She owes them something and they will demand payback. Her leftward movement is temporary. I have no intention of voting for Trump, he incites violence and is an embarrassment; however, I also have no desire to vote for HRC - she is, for all practical purposes, a Republican. The Republicans will be pleased if she gets the nomination and is ultimately elected in the general election. Even if she were to run against a Republican who isn’t a showman, traditionally moderate Republicans would be satisfied with HRC.
Things need to change. I fear for our children and grandchildren. We must get money out of politics. We need to stop the increase in economic disparity and nurture a healthy middle class. We must begin to truly care for our environment, yesterday. Our health care and education systems, jobs, and our infrastructure are all in dire need of real attention. We need elected officials that truly care about people not their own (or their political donor’s) pocketbooks and egos. We need elected officials that don’t create situations that make it necessary for them to prevaricate and/or lie every time they speak – that’s not HRC.
In our seeking for economic and political progress, we all go up - or else we all go down.
- Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Democrat
59
The sun will rise tomorrow, but the rich will be a liittle more rich, the Democrats will be a little more to the right, single-payer and free education will be a little further away, and the planet will be a little warmer and a little less diverse.
Of course, I am disheartened and sickened by the country's prospects. It is concievable that Bernie Sanders could still pull this off and it is my sincere wish. I can't stand to consider the alternative after having my hopes raised. The country faces more corporate rule and more wars otherwise. We live already in a nearly complete fascist state with corporate run government and militaristic police targeting people because of their race. I don't trust Clinton to adhere to her campaign promises, any more than I trust Trump to be a reasonable human being. I can only keep hoping that the country will wake up and that the better angels of the establishment people who could make a difference would get behind the candidate who would best represent the interests of the public..no other candidate would do it so well as Bernie Sanders. I profoundly regret the possibility that Hiliary Clinton could be my choice. I think I would write Sanders in or I would vote for Jill Stein. It is not enough he might only influence the party platform. It is not what this country so desperately needs. Words cannot express my sense of profound fear and loss if this country turns it back on the only decent candidate for president out there. If Egan thinks Hiliary Clinton will stay to the left once the candidate, he is sadly mistaken.
81
Vote according to your judgment and conscience, but consider that Sanders himself stated that he would not run as a third party candidate.
“If it happens that I do not win that process, would I run outside of the system?" Sanders said in the interview broadcast by C-SPAN. "No, I made the promise that I would not and I will keep that promise. And the reason for that is I do not want to be responsible for electing some right-wing Republican to be president of the United States.”
Will writing in Sanders take America any closer to the country you want it to be? Bernie apparently doesn't think so.
“If it happens that I do not win that process, would I run outside of the system?" Sanders said in the interview broadcast by C-SPAN. "No, I made the promise that I would not and I will keep that promise. And the reason for that is I do not want to be responsible for electing some right-wing Republican to be president of the United States.”
Will writing in Sanders take America any closer to the country you want it to be? Bernie apparently doesn't think so.
Carolyn,
In the real world unfortunately choices have to be made. Your choice to write in someone or vote for a non-major party candidate says that you don't care if Trump becomes President.
I can't see how that advances the world you would like to see.
In the real world unfortunately choices have to be made. Your choice to write in someone or vote for a non-major party candidate says that you don't care if Trump becomes President.
I can't see how that advances the world you would like to see.
do not forget that Lincoln would have kept slavery if it would have preserved the Union. Politicians have to dance with the Devil.
None of this excuses Sanders's empty promises and his refusal, over and over, to give a clear answer when asked how he'd fulfill his promises.
Last night I watched a Town Hall with Sanders, moderated by Chuck Todd. A woman asked Sanders how he'd get Mexico to re-negotiate trade deals - no answer. She asked again, pointing out that he hadn't answered - good for her! - and again got no answer. Todd then pressed him - again, no answer.
And this is what many people admire?
Last night I watched a Town Hall with Sanders, moderated by Chuck Todd. A woman asked Sanders how he'd get Mexico to re-negotiate trade deals - no answer. She asked again, pointing out that he hadn't answered - good for her! - and again got no answer. Todd then pressed him - again, no answer.
And this is what many people admire?
25
I did not see the Chuck Todd interview (never watch him) but if you go to Sander's website you will see that his proposals are not without reasoned methods on how to reach them. He specifically says how he is going to finance the various initiatives he is proposing.
Hillary is just promising more of the same. Just like Obama is Republican lite. He has been a huge disappointment. Where is the Public Option? Why has surveillance of American citizens increased under his watch? Why are whistle-blowers arrested? Why are we still at war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and now increasingly in Yemen? Why does this man have a Nobel Peace Prize?
And Hillary promises to continue Obama's policies. There is no excuse for electing Hillary and then complaining because college education still costs too much, that there are still 20 million Americans without health insurance, etc.
Vote Bernie for a change of direction.
Hillary is just promising more of the same. Just like Obama is Republican lite. He has been a huge disappointment. Where is the Public Option? Why has surveillance of American citizens increased under his watch? Why are whistle-blowers arrested? Why are we still at war in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria and now increasingly in Yemen? Why does this man have a Nobel Peace Prize?
And Hillary promises to continue Obama's policies. There is no excuse for electing Hillary and then complaining because college education still costs too much, that there are still 20 million Americans without health insurance, etc.
Vote Bernie for a change of direction.
1
Agreed. Senator Sanders has turned the country and the Democrats left. Bout time. The 'third way' may have brought progress but most of us want solid gains.
A lot of Americans voted tonight. Hillary is no flash in the pan. She has support all over the country. She is the best man for the job. And nobody was holding their nose.
Time to get on with it and retain the Presidency. I do not believe that most Sanders voters will cross over to Il Trumpilini!
The young tonight are passionate and we should all be grateful that they are. But they appear to be busy living, paying rent, and looking for that special someone. We need to keep them engaged! Somebody from the pundit class said tonight that Hillary is looking to find a way to talk to them. Take the lady at her word. They may not be for her but she is for them.
Movement Conservatism is dying. Thank all the God's. Let's make sure we win this time.
A lot of Americans voted tonight. Hillary is no flash in the pan. She has support all over the country. She is the best man for the job. And nobody was holding their nose.
Time to get on with it and retain the Presidency. I do not believe that most Sanders voters will cross over to Il Trumpilini!
The young tonight are passionate and we should all be grateful that they are. But they appear to be busy living, paying rent, and looking for that special someone. We need to keep them engaged! Somebody from the pundit class said tonight that Hillary is looking to find a way to talk to them. Take the lady at her word. They may not be for her but she is for them.
Movement Conservatism is dying. Thank all the God's. Let's make sure we win this time.
25
"[socialism] generally been a failure wherever it’s been broadly applied. "
It seems to be working in Scandinavia and the rest of Europe.
We are the only major country in the entire world where health care is not a right and colleges graduates are paying off student loans well into middle age. And this is because of the fanatical resistance of the wealthiest citizens and cororations to pay their fair share of taxes.
It seems to be working in Scandinavia and the rest of Europe.
We are the only major country in the entire world where health care is not a right and colleges graduates are paying off student loans well into middle age. And this is because of the fanatical resistance of the wealthiest citizens and cororations to pay their fair share of taxes.
209
exactly my thoughts. and it isn't just in Scandinavia. The Sanders program holds sway in just about every one of our Democratic allies in Europe, including the three major powers, Germany, England and France, and also mostly in Canada and Australia/New Zealand.
1
More plutocratic boilerplate, usually found in the Wall Street Journal but now apparently part of the Times lexicon.
1
Student loans extend to the grave. There are seniors having their Social Security checks garnished to pay off student loans, both their own and their children's.
1
"His ideas will shape every part of the party platform, which will give Clinton what she lacks: a clear message."
Good grief. Hilary has been running for President for some 15-20 years, and she still lacks a clear message? That's the saddest indictment of her I've read in the NYTimes. Trump has no problem in the messaging department. She had better settle on something, and soon. This summer and fall will be filled with Republican attacks, and if Hilary is to win, she needs to be able to sell non-Democrats on why she should be President. Something more than just it's her turn.
Good grief. Hilary has been running for President for some 15-20 years, and she still lacks a clear message? That's the saddest indictment of her I've read in the NYTimes. Trump has no problem in the messaging department. She had better settle on something, and soon. This summer and fall will be filled with Republican attacks, and if Hilary is to win, she needs to be able to sell non-Democrats on why she should be President. Something more than just it's her turn.
149
"She Deserves It"
"You Can't Prove Anything Against Her"
"Same Old, Same Old"
..... . . . apparently these slogans are enough for (slightly) more than half of voting Democrats. I'm betting it's a close race between all those fired-up Trumpeters & the Democrats still wanting to compromise with them.
I'll be voting Green.
"You Can't Prove Anything Against Her"
"Same Old, Same Old"
..... . . . apparently these slogans are enough for (slightly) more than half of voting Democrats. I'm betting it's a close race between all those fired-up Trumpeters & the Democrats still wanting to compromise with them.
I'll be voting Green.
1
It's a strange thought to me, that only two terms ago, Americans eagerly embraced an alternative to Secretary Clinton. President Obama, much like Sanders, rose from relative obscurity (though Obama even more so than Sanders, given his shorter resume in national politics) and shocked the nation with a simple premise: If you want real progressive policies, and you want them now, look no further than Barack Obama. The era of Clinton is over.
That, among other powerful messages that he carried, won him the Presidency.
What voters (or under-age observers such as myself at that time) didn't realize was that President Obama was going to become a chip off the old block - a very part of what he sought to show such diversity from. He embraced the establishment when it came running to his side, and he eagerly gobbled up the investment from large industry.
And there, I suppose, is where his narrative breaks from Senator Sanders'.
Like the Rebel Alliance to Obi-Wan Kenobi, the establishment of the Democratic Party has clung to its only hope, Hillary Clinton. In doing so, the massive power of money in politics became realized as media, public leadership, and latent-era Democrats (That is to say, voters who are nostalgic for the Bill Clinton days) created the INEVITABLE Clinton.
Now, we have our progressive hero, calling out to the country to aid him. No corporate or establishment strings attached. And this time, no one is listening.
That, among other powerful messages that he carried, won him the Presidency.
What voters (or under-age observers such as myself at that time) didn't realize was that President Obama was going to become a chip off the old block - a very part of what he sought to show such diversity from. He embraced the establishment when it came running to his side, and he eagerly gobbled up the investment from large industry.
And there, I suppose, is where his narrative breaks from Senator Sanders'.
Like the Rebel Alliance to Obi-Wan Kenobi, the establishment of the Democratic Party has clung to its only hope, Hillary Clinton. In doing so, the massive power of money in politics became realized as media, public leadership, and latent-era Democrats (That is to say, voters who are nostalgic for the Bill Clinton days) created the INEVITABLE Clinton.
Now, we have our progressive hero, calling out to the country to aid him. No corporate or establishment strings attached. And this time, no one is listening.
51
Tim... you are part of the problem.
You've been at this so long you don't understand how bad this economy... this societal plan is on young adults.
NYT, your commentary is shameful and a prescription for all our children to accept indentured servitude as a way of life.
HRC is not a person... like her "husband", her ego knows no bound.
I'm just really sick and sad for the future... my three children will be savaged by a "democratic " party that would rather win than be right.
Go Bernie!
You've been at this so long you don't understand how bad this economy... this societal plan is on young adults.
NYT, your commentary is shameful and a prescription for all our children to accept indentured servitude as a way of life.
HRC is not a person... like her "husband", her ego knows no bound.
I'm just really sick and sad for the future... my three children will be savaged by a "democratic " party that would rather win than be right.
Go Bernie!
62
If current republicans won, the disater that would follow would overwhelm any and all chances your three would have.
1
I, for one, didn't become engaged with any intention of eventually, inevitably compromising my ideals in the name of pragmatism. I will never vote for a candidate that fails to inspire me. If Clinton is the nominee, my vote will be for the Green Party candidate, Jill Stein. I know that I am not alone.
28
DPC,
And thereby open the door for a possible Trump President.
Remember that Nader cost Gore votes in Florida in 2000. Need more be said?
And thereby open the door for a possible Trump President.
Remember that Nader cost Gore votes in Florida in 2000. Need more be said?
1
Agreed, but if you are in a purple state, hold your nose, pull it for HRC, then go outside and vomit. Lucky for me I live in MD so I can do what you said and not affect the outcome.
1
Right DPC. There seem to be a lot of stupid people. If you so as you say:
You could have more people like Alito and Thomas on the SCOTUS instead of Kagan and Sotomayor. You could have no ACA and fewer people covered by health insurance. You could essentially no choice for pregnant women. You could have laws supporting discrimination against LGBT's. You could have a state supported religion. You could have even more inequality. You could have another Great Recession, or perhaps another Great Depression.
And that just scratches the surface.
You could have more people like Alito and Thomas on the SCOTUS instead of Kagan and Sotomayor. You could have no ACA and fewer people covered by health insurance. You could essentially no choice for pregnant women. You could have laws supporting discrimination against LGBT's. You could have a state supported religion. You could have even more inequality. You could have another Great Recession, or perhaps another Great Depression.
And that just scratches the surface.
2
Not a fan of Hillary, but if it's her or anyone currently in government with an (R) following their name I'll be holding my nose and voting for her, though I wish I'd be voting for Bernie.
36
@Rima Regas writes "Clinton, so far, has failed to excite voters."
A funny thing about democracy, is that we count the votes, so we know for a fact where the excitement lies -- with Sec. Clinton.
I agree that she doesn't excite fantasy. What she does excite is the possibility of continuing on our path toward 'making America Great Again' in the way the Democratic Party knows how, as evidenced during the administrations of Pres. Clinton and Pres. Obama.
A funny thing about democracy, is that we count the votes, so we know for a fact where the excitement lies -- with Sec. Clinton.
I agree that she doesn't excite fantasy. What she does excite is the possibility of continuing on our path toward 'making America Great Again' in the way the Democratic Party knows how, as evidenced during the administrations of Pres. Clinton and Pres. Obama.
37
Sure, the party should continue to back someone who freely admitted he wasn't a Democrat and simply was in it for the money and the exposure. What does that say to the people of this country? An opportunist should stay in the race to do what? If Sec Clinton's message got any clearer - one that, if some reporters took the time to either read or listen to is more than just the same 40+ year harangue of Sanders. It is one of leveling the playing field, of equality and one of decent health care, of co-operation with our foreign partners, of decent shot at a decent education - with a date certain as to when the debt for college will end - and I could go on Pulling the party further to the left is one thing. Staying in the race for the sake of ego and money is another. Any of the high minded statements Sanders has made in the past just went out the window with his admission last night that he wasn't really a Democrat, it was all about the money. How Republican of him.
11
I really have to laugh when a Clinton supporter - who took $21 MILLION in speaking fees from Banks and Pharmaceuticals - asserts that Bernie is in it for the money. The $21 million went to Clinton. Any money that goes to the Sander's campaign does not go in his pocket.
All the things you cite Clinton for as positives Bernie does better, and did first. You try insult him as having a 40+ year harangue, what he has is 40 years of consistently voting to help people and stay out of unnecessary wars. Clinton has changed positions more in the last 6 months that Bernie has in the last 40 years.
And as for his party affiliation, he has caucused with the Democrats in congress for 30 years, and he is a democrat with a small "d," meaning he isn't beholden to the party elites as evidenced by how they are doing everything they can to make Clinton their candidate. Bernie is a candidate for "we, the people," Hillary for "we, the establishment."
All the things you cite Clinton for as positives Bernie does better, and did first. You try insult him as having a 40+ year harangue, what he has is 40 years of consistently voting to help people and stay out of unnecessary wars. Clinton has changed positions more in the last 6 months that Bernie has in the last 40 years.
And as for his party affiliation, he has caucused with the Democrats in congress for 30 years, and he is a democrat with a small "d," meaning he isn't beholden to the party elites as evidenced by how they are doing everything they can to make Clinton their candidate. Bernie is a candidate for "we, the people," Hillary for "we, the establishment."
I'm not sure what your bizarre distortion of Bernie Sanders's position is intended to achieve, besides helping Trump's chances in November. If Sanders is not a Democrat, but if so then neither are those persuaded by his message. If you were actually a Democrat, you would want those voters come November, not voting Green or some other third party.
As for exposure, why yes, Sanders did want to run on a big party ticket to get his message out. Apparently a lot of Democratic voters liked that message, too. As for money, do we really want to talk about money? If you were truly a Hillary supporter and not a Republican shill, I would think you would want to avoid the subject, what with Hillary lining her PERSONAL pocket with 6 digit speaking fees with Wall Street firms.
As for exposure, why yes, Sanders did want to run on a big party ticket to get his message out. Apparently a lot of Democratic voters liked that message, too. As for money, do we really want to talk about money? If you were truly a Hillary supporter and not a Republican shill, I would think you would want to avoid the subject, what with Hillary lining her PERSONAL pocket with 6 digit speaking fees with Wall Street firms.
It wasn't the money and connections for HIM personally. Sheesh. Look at how he has been marginalised going as a Democrat. Imagine what it'd have been like as an independent. And all that would've done is peel away votes in the general from Clinton. Is that what you really want? I'm sure Sanders will do his duty and campaign for her, and the party should be grateful to him for every voter he brings into the fold.
I don't know why I bother...
I don't know why I bother...
She won't win. When a nice 74 year old socialist comes up close enough to make her work for it imagine what will happen when Trump turns on her for Benghazi, her husband signing NAFTA and his alpha male garbage against her harping shrillness. Hillary is one of those born on third base and think they hit a whatever the sport metaphor it is people - as far as earning THIS nomination. Trump actually clawed his evil way to the top. She isn't near ready for this. And i am worried.
38
I'm worried too, but I think she's a lot tougher than you give her credit for being. She's almost certainly going to be the first woman ever to become the nominee of one of the major political parties. No one is born in that position. She had to claw her way there over the course of decades, surviving attacks of every conceivable type that would have caused almost anyone else to wither.
1
Trump is much less prepared to assume the presidency. She won't win, indeed, if Democrats allow the choices to make them sit on their hands.
1
Well, Timothy, I guess it's time to resign ourselves. It's later than we think. Surely, Senator Sanders will have converted Wall Street Hillary from her previous neo-liberal, GOP-lite triangulating ways with respect to all things economic and financial. Surely she has already paid off all of her debts to her donor class and we can all now breathe more easily. She most likely also will be ever so much less hawkish on the military and foreign policy scene.
My main concern is will she attract enough voters to not only win the presidency but also guarantee a Democratic majority in the Senate?
Let us all hope so.
With continued GOP control of the House, I fear the "just say no" debacle will continue indefinitely.
But Secretary Clinton does know how the system works. Let us hope that she will not, with her husband's guidance, simply move the Democratic Party, by way of overly generous compromises, ever further down a rightward path.
It would be really good for democracy if the voters, with respect to matters economic and financial, could confront something other than one moderate right-wing major party and a second far-right to radical right-wing party.
Compromise is one things, a regressive sell-out to the donor class is another. I really do think the voters are saying that they oppose oligarchy and plutocracy. Is anyone in power actually listening?
When will US voters ever be confronted with an alternative to the lesser of two evils?
My main concern is will she attract enough voters to not only win the presidency but also guarantee a Democratic majority in the Senate?
Let us all hope so.
With continued GOP control of the House, I fear the "just say no" debacle will continue indefinitely.
But Secretary Clinton does know how the system works. Let us hope that she will not, with her husband's guidance, simply move the Democratic Party, by way of overly generous compromises, ever further down a rightward path.
It would be really good for democracy if the voters, with respect to matters economic and financial, could confront something other than one moderate right-wing major party and a second far-right to radical right-wing party.
Compromise is one things, a regressive sell-out to the donor class is another. I really do think the voters are saying that they oppose oligarchy and plutocracy. Is anyone in power actually listening?
When will US voters ever be confronted with an alternative to the lesser of two evils?
273
Andrew,
You hit the nail on the head in summarizing the gutwrench that is driving the voice of the people now thusly:
"It would be really good for democracy if the voters, with respect to matters economic and financial, could confront something other than one moderate right-wing major party and a second far-right to radical right-wing party.
Compromise is one things, a regressive sell-out to the donor class is another. I really do think the voters are saying that they oppose oligarchy and plutocracy. Is anyone in power actually listening?''
Is anyone in power listening indeed. Those in power are listening and flinging their unlimited reserves of money at drowning out what to them is an annoying cell phone ringing as their symphony of greed plays on.
You hit the nail on the head in summarizing the gutwrench that is driving the voice of the people now thusly:
"It would be really good for democracy if the voters, with respect to matters economic and financial, could confront something other than one moderate right-wing major party and a second far-right to radical right-wing party.
Compromise is one things, a regressive sell-out to the donor class is another. I really do think the voters are saying that they oppose oligarchy and plutocracy. Is anyone in power actually listening?''
Is anyone in power listening indeed. Those in power are listening and flinging their unlimited reserves of money at drowning out what to them is an annoying cell phone ringing as their symphony of greed plays on.
1
Bill and Hill, who've amassed $125 million since leaving the White House, never were Democrats. They've always been to the right of, say, Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Bill signed the NAFTA and thereby lost a million good American jobs, and then took time out from his extra-marital adventures to sign the repeal of Glass-Stegall, laying the foundation for the housing bubble and its collapse, and the Great Recession that inevitably followed.
Hill showed her true colors with her fervent support for G.W.'s vanity war, to say nothing of her fondness for Goldman Sachs.
Ask yourself this: have you ever heard either Clinton speak about reversing Reagan's dismantling of the legal structure of the union movement? Or even to say the word union? Bill's head of the CFTC, Brooksley Bourne, warned all of us about the wild, wild west of derivatives, and his response was to sign legislation forbidding the CFTC from any attempts at their regulation. Have you heard Hill speak a single syllable about resurrecting the Voting Rights Act?
Mr. Belland, you're exactly correct. The Democratic Party died long ago with Paul Wellstone, who was from "The Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party." What we have today are two different versions of the Republican Party.
Bill signed the NAFTA and thereby lost a million good American jobs, and then took time out from his extra-marital adventures to sign the repeal of Glass-Stegall, laying the foundation for the housing bubble and its collapse, and the Great Recession that inevitably followed.
Hill showed her true colors with her fervent support for G.W.'s vanity war, to say nothing of her fondness for Goldman Sachs.
Ask yourself this: have you ever heard either Clinton speak about reversing Reagan's dismantling of the legal structure of the union movement? Or even to say the word union? Bill's head of the CFTC, Brooksley Bourne, warned all of us about the wild, wild west of derivatives, and his response was to sign legislation forbidding the CFTC from any attempts at their regulation. Have you heard Hill speak a single syllable about resurrecting the Voting Rights Act?
Mr. Belland, you're exactly correct. The Democratic Party died long ago with Paul Wellstone, who was from "The Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party." What we have today are two different versions of the Republican Party.
We have a choice that is not evil: Sanders. That we are stupid enough not to see it and to be frightened of change is our tragedy.
1
"Clinton is a far better candidate because of him. More than that, the Democratic Party is paying attention"
No and no.
Hillary is not being pulled to the left. As soon as she gets office she will revert to form, she'll be exactly who she has always been. What she said to win primaries will mean less than nothing, it will be just an insulting memory for the few who bother to remember. Anyway, she has been so all over the place that it isn't clear what ought to be remembered of her "move left."
It will be neocon wars, neolib economics, trade deals, and Wall Street at home all the way. There will be nothing there of any of the ideas Bernie has pushed. Nothing at all.
And the Democratic establishment will pay attention only to getting its insiders back into appointive office.
There is a rush to get on board, even the original neocons like the Kagans rushing over to get their piece of this.
Wall Street will provide the Treasury Sec and the Economic Adviser.
Some neocon will be the National Security Adviser.
The trade deal will fly through and be followed by more of the same.
This will be an Administration of Republican-Lite, tinged with Bush second term "moderation." Cheney will be left out, but that is all we'll lack of a third Bush term.
No, Bernie has not moved Hillary, or the Party, or what they'll do in office. Not one inch.
No and no.
Hillary is not being pulled to the left. As soon as she gets office she will revert to form, she'll be exactly who she has always been. What she said to win primaries will mean less than nothing, it will be just an insulting memory for the few who bother to remember. Anyway, she has been so all over the place that it isn't clear what ought to be remembered of her "move left."
It will be neocon wars, neolib economics, trade deals, and Wall Street at home all the way. There will be nothing there of any of the ideas Bernie has pushed. Nothing at all.
And the Democratic establishment will pay attention only to getting its insiders back into appointive office.
There is a rush to get on board, even the original neocons like the Kagans rushing over to get their piece of this.
Wall Street will provide the Treasury Sec and the Economic Adviser.
Some neocon will be the National Security Adviser.
The trade deal will fly through and be followed by more of the same.
This will be an Administration of Republican-Lite, tinged with Bush second term "moderation." Cheney will be left out, but that is all we'll lack of a third Bush term.
No, Bernie has not moved Hillary, or the Party, or what they'll do in office. Not one inch.
518
How do you know that? Has Hillary been President before? What is so hard about giving her the benefit of the doubt? The system has enormous inertia and no one can change it by waving a magic wand. Hillary may yet move it, however slowly, in the direction Sanders is pointing. What we do know is that Trump will sink the ship.
10
A tad pessimistic but we will see. Harry Reid really is taking on the Koch Kochapus, so the establishment has learned something. If the Democratic establishment does not fight , they die. They just have not quite figured out how to fight tough enough and win. All Democratic candidates to win need to pick up more of Bernie's message without sounding shrill. Hillary always was and still is more liberal than Bill. Will the Democratic establishment go back to a comfy sleep? Not is they don't want to dwindle down continuously. l
1
I agree 100% that we cannot count on Hillary to do anything that Bernie has been championing. The only long-term solution is for Bernie and his supporters to focus their energy on creating a viable third party. Progressives should split from the mainstream Democrats (Republicans should split too). For a huge country like the U.S. to have only two parties borders on a joke. The current system does not work.
4
I believe Sanders is smart enough to encourage his supporters to vote for Clinton if she is the nominee. I believe that he understands the system and works within it.
Clinton worked for Obama as Secretary of State and I believe that Sanders might get a Cabinet position as well. Sanders has spent his life doing whatever he could to support working people and he will continue to do that in whatever role he has.
Sanders would probably NOT want his supporters to refuse to vote at all if they can't vote for him because he knows that's how the Republicans win.
If you remember the way Ralph Nader supporters refused to vote for the Democrat, talk to Sanders supporters about how that turned out...
Clinton worked for Obama as Secretary of State and I believe that Sanders might get a Cabinet position as well. Sanders has spent his life doing whatever he could to support working people and he will continue to do that in whatever role he has.
Sanders would probably NOT want his supporters to refuse to vote at all if they can't vote for him because he knows that's how the Republicans win.
If you remember the way Ralph Nader supporters refused to vote for the Democrat, talk to Sanders supporters about how that turned out...
122
We don't want Sanders to go down in history as a hated Nader. Make him Secretary of Education or Labor or something.
3
I remember 2000. I voted for Nader in 2008.
Ask the Democratic Party about the uninspiring "policy wonk" candidates of Wall Street that they nominated in 2000 and 2004 on the "At Least We're Not Them" platform. Talk to them about how that turned out.
When the Democrats nominate a candidate that represents my interests, I'll vote for that person. I voted for their 2012 nominee, for example, who actually fulfilled his promise -- albeit in a terrible way -- to enact universal healthcare (I didn't hold the Supreme Court's partisanship against him). The problem now is, I have absolutely no reason to believe a word Hillary says. She does not believe in anything except Hillary. In this respect, she is not much different from Donald Trump.
The truth is, I'm really not sure that she would be a better President than he would. Neither of them has ever meant a word they've said on the campaign trail, it seems to me.
Ask the Democratic Party about the uninspiring "policy wonk" candidates of Wall Street that they nominated in 2000 and 2004 on the "At Least We're Not Them" platform. Talk to them about how that turned out.
When the Democrats nominate a candidate that represents my interests, I'll vote for that person. I voted for their 2012 nominee, for example, who actually fulfilled his promise -- albeit in a terrible way -- to enact universal healthcare (I didn't hold the Supreme Court's partisanship against him). The problem now is, I have absolutely no reason to believe a word Hillary says. She does not believe in anything except Hillary. In this respect, she is not much different from Donald Trump.
The truth is, I'm really not sure that she would be a better President than he would. Neither of them has ever meant a word they've said on the campaign trail, it seems to me.
98
If Hillary was worried about losing she should not have run.
I do not owe my vote to Hillary and she has not earned it. Further, I do not trust her. I will not be gutted into voting for a Clinton- any Clinton.
I do not owe my vote to Hillary and she has not earned it. Further, I do not trust her. I will not be gutted into voting for a Clinton- any Clinton.
6
Here's what I'd like. Bernie for Vice President. Actually, I want Hillary to think hard about his success with being a real Democrat. She could do that.
I fear that the calculation of her team will prevent her from doing something so wise.
I suspect Bernie fans of indulging in magic thinking and putting the burden of change on the shoulders of a hero. Nobody can do that. We need to take back Congress and local governments.
I once asked directly, and it is surprising how many Bernie fans didn't bother to vote in 2014. We have met the enemy and he is us.
I fear that the calculation of her team will prevent her from doing something so wise.
I suspect Bernie fans of indulging in magic thinking and putting the burden of change on the shoulders of a hero. Nobody can do that. We need to take back Congress and local governments.
I once asked directly, and it is surprising how many Bernie fans didn't bother to vote in 2014. We have met the enemy and he is us.
160
Of course they didn't vote. No one represented them. I have voted in every election, and I mean even for sewer district treasurer, since 1986. I always felt that not voting was stupid and enabled the far right. I have been a Democrat for 30 years. But this primary fight has shown me that the Democratic Party does not represent my interests, values, goals. I thought Democrats failed because Republicans impeded them. Now I realize they don't win because they don't WANT single payer, publicly funded universities, or noninterventionist foreign policies. So I'm now struggling with whether to vote at all anymore. What difference does it make when you only get candidates preselected by corporate filters?
5
Agreed. Building a campaign on the voters least likely to vote is exciting, but tends not to lead to victory. (Ask Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern and John Anderson and and and...)
For Veep, Clinton -- or for that matter, Sanders should things change radically and he wins the nomination -- will need to look to the future of the party, and choose someone of the next generation of leaders, rather than one from theirs.
A Cabinet position for the non-nominee seems like a good idea (although I expect Clinton, should she lose the nomination, would decline).
For Veep, Clinton -- or for that matter, Sanders should things change radically and he wins the nomination -- will need to look to the future of the party, and choose someone of the next generation of leaders, rather than one from theirs.
A Cabinet position for the non-nominee seems like a good idea (although I expect Clinton, should she lose the nomination, would decline).
1
It will never happen. The Clintons have always been only moderately progressive on economic issues. They are fully paid, if socially liberal, members of the oligarchy.
1
A strong candidate for VP!
3
Here's where uou and fellow pundits are wrong: Barney will mot endorse Hillary. I'd sooner think he'd form a independent campaign.
5
Sanders had already said he has no intention of being a spoiler. He'll likely support HRC, and urge his followers to do the same.
2
Sanders has been a dead-ender since his days in Brooklyn and later as mayor of Burlington. When he abandoned his native Brooklyn after being rejected there he took up in a tiny, rural, and only land-locked New England State, to make his mark as a democratic socialist in a college town simplistic enough in its ways who would welcome his kooky ways. He was eccentric and they loved him as someone loves a mascot.
Now pumped up by idealistic followers who should know better, that is if they were somewhat familiar with Sanders socialist scam he's been peddling for all these years with little results. He's been fooling folks for four decades to no avail. After all his years of failure of his policies his cranky grumpy old man countenance continues to charm the naive, the gullible, the pie-in-the-sky supreme optimists, who are blinded by the long history of the rejection of socialism throughout America's existence.
Never mind the rejection, the dream lives on in the young and Sanders has managed to sell them a fraudulent bill of goods even though he doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of getting anything passed in Congress. He's a Don Quixote antique tilting at windmills, wind power he expects Wall Street moguls to pay for. That's right, kids, he's certifiable.
DD
Manhattan
Now pumped up by idealistic followers who should know better, that is if they were somewhat familiar with Sanders socialist scam he's been peddling for all these years with little results. He's been fooling folks for four decades to no avail. After all his years of failure of his policies his cranky grumpy old man countenance continues to charm the naive, the gullible, the pie-in-the-sky supreme optimists, who are blinded by the long history of the rejection of socialism throughout America's existence.
Never mind the rejection, the dream lives on in the young and Sanders has managed to sell them a fraudulent bill of goods even though he doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of getting anything passed in Congress. He's a Don Quixote antique tilting at windmills, wind power he expects Wall Street moguls to pay for. That's right, kids, he's certifiable.
DD
Manhattan
11
People reject medicare? And social security? And public education? What people reject is lack of universal coverage, poverty, and crippling student loan debt. People reject the LACK of socialism in our democracy.
9
Dear Basil:
It's amazing we NYTimes readers are so fortunate to find the one person who speaks for all the people. And here you are, Basil, come out of Oakland of all places, to speak for All the People. We are blessed.
Unfortunately I have no such power to speak for ALL. I can only speak for myself and perhaps a few in my family and friends at most. Being specific, I would say that "some" people DO reject socialism to the nth degree Sanders is proposing. We liberal Dems do not reject the infusion of Social Security. My parents supported it and FDR religiously. When FDR initiated S.S., not all were eligible and the age limit was set at 65 when the average American lived to the ripe old age of 64. LBJ's Medicare was something I supported, along with President Obama's PPACA, and a myriad of programs to reduce student tuition, increase funding of poverty programs, SNAP, and a host of other great socialistic endeavors.
I support Hillary because of her pragmatic approach to progressive programs. What I don't support is Sanders astronomically budget crippling socialist notions which have no chance of getting passed in a Republican Congress. What is of deeper concern for moi at present is our 20 trillion dollar debt. That needs to take priority first or we face the complete collapse of the programs we currently have in place.
DD
Manhattan
It's amazing we NYTimes readers are so fortunate to find the one person who speaks for all the people. And here you are, Basil, come out of Oakland of all places, to speak for All the People. We are blessed.
Unfortunately I have no such power to speak for ALL. I can only speak for myself and perhaps a few in my family and friends at most. Being specific, I would say that "some" people DO reject socialism to the nth degree Sanders is proposing. We liberal Dems do not reject the infusion of Social Security. My parents supported it and FDR religiously. When FDR initiated S.S., not all were eligible and the age limit was set at 65 when the average American lived to the ripe old age of 64. LBJ's Medicare was something I supported, along with President Obama's PPACA, and a myriad of programs to reduce student tuition, increase funding of poverty programs, SNAP, and a host of other great socialistic endeavors.
I support Hillary because of her pragmatic approach to progressive programs. What I don't support is Sanders astronomically budget crippling socialist notions which have no chance of getting passed in a Republican Congress. What is of deeper concern for moi at present is our 20 trillion dollar debt. That needs to take priority first or we face the complete collapse of the programs we currently have in place.
DD
Manhattan
That's right kids. Don't dream big. Wall St owns us, and you're just another number in their data stream. Don't think anything or anyone can change it.
1
Not so easy. Sanders supporters are angry and heartbroken now. There is no way they will vote for Clinton. This is a lifetime opportunity for the young Americans to stand up and support an Independent Sanders Candidacy. All Republicans who will never vote for Trump and all Democrats who will never vote for Hillary plus all the Independents will vote for Sanders. Let the revolution reach it's logical end. Hillary is not the answer for any problem America faces. She IS the problem.
71
Neither angry nor heartbroken...let us wait for the whole country to vote,let all the states vote. Every vote for Bernie is an expression of his message. Which is that we can no longer be held hostage by big money, be dictated by their terms.
2
We're still stuck with a two-party dictatorship. We are still stuck with an oligarchy that controls Congress. We have no publicly financed voting system. We have no Medicare for all. Not really sure what Hillary will accomplish as president. Under Obama's watch, the rich got richer and the poorer got poorer. At least with Bernie, I knew what he was willing to fight for.
342
Obama has no "base" within the Democratic Party establishment. They feel he lost them the House and eventually the Senate by being focussed on being President and not doing the usual fundraising and hobnobbing. That is why they love Hillary, she is still using the 1996 playbook, Unfortunately for her it is 2016, and the playbook has been trashed long ago, and right now a new one is being scrawled with a crayon by a Donald J Trump, and yes he is just making it up as he is going along.
1
A lot of people understand that and will not vote for twidledee twidledum...
" They feel he lost them the House and eventually the Senate "
Sekhar Sundaram – the voters who didn't bother to show up for the mid-term elections are solely responsible for those losses.
Sekhar Sundaram – the voters who didn't bother to show up for the mid-term elections are solely responsible for those losses.
1
Every penny Clinton is forced to spend on primary ads is one penny less that can be spent defeating Trump. Bernie needs to bow out gracefully if Trump is going to be beaten back, and no lofty principle is going to alter that fact, and nothing is more important.
Were Clinton up against Eisenhower or even Bush I it might be permissable for Sanders to continue to spread his message, but if he stays in this primary and Trump wins, he will never have a day or night when he doesn't wish he hadn't.
Maybe Ralph Nader, the enabler of G.W. Bush, can have a candid word with him.
Were Clinton up against Eisenhower or even Bush I it might be permissable for Sanders to continue to spread his message, but if he stays in this primary and Trump wins, he will never have a day or night when he doesn't wish he hadn't.
Maybe Ralph Nader, the enabler of G.W. Bush, can have a candid word with him.
22
Please test all existing assumptions before you embrace them so hard.
1. Trump wiped out Jeb, Walker, Perry, Christie, Carson, Rubio, who each spent a lot more money than he did. He will handle the Democratic challenger in the same way. No amount of ad money is going to help there. The candidate needs to be strong and that comes by being tested in the primary. Nevermind Sanders, the other Democrats who could have run against Hillary did the party and the nation a grave disservice by not running. Well, Hillary had locked up all the money, so no oxygen, as O'Malley found out.
2. The old Nader story is boring and wrong. Gore lost his home state of Tennessee! He lost Clinton's state of Arkansas bcos he did not get Bill to campaign for him. Nader had nothing to do with that. Hillary and those who believe these myths will suffer the same fate since they make the same mistake of not looking where they should, and instead focus on where they like to look.
Hillary cannot defeat Trump. Bernie might have a chance. Only Trump can defeat Trump right now - he has a rocksteady base which only grows with time. If Bernie ran as an Independent (or Bloomberg does) they can win the anti-Trump and anti-HRC votes and the Presidency, handily.
1. Trump wiped out Jeb, Walker, Perry, Christie, Carson, Rubio, who each spent a lot more money than he did. He will handle the Democratic challenger in the same way. No amount of ad money is going to help there. The candidate needs to be strong and that comes by being tested in the primary. Nevermind Sanders, the other Democrats who could have run against Hillary did the party and the nation a grave disservice by not running. Well, Hillary had locked up all the money, so no oxygen, as O'Malley found out.
2. The old Nader story is boring and wrong. Gore lost his home state of Tennessee! He lost Clinton's state of Arkansas bcos he did not get Bill to campaign for him. Nader had nothing to do with that. Hillary and those who believe these myths will suffer the same fate since they make the same mistake of not looking where they should, and instead focus on where they like to look.
Hillary cannot defeat Trump. Bernie might have a chance. Only Trump can defeat Trump right now - he has a rocksteady base which only grows with time. If Bernie ran as an Independent (or Bloomberg does) they can win the anti-Trump and anti-HRC votes and the Presidency, handily.
6
Trump is a special case whose campaign received enormous free publicity on television because of his entertainment value. Even then, he was not in a head-to-head contest, but rather enjoyed the advantage of owning a significant demographic---non-college white Republicans and hooligans--while his opponents fragmented what would otherwise have been a winning majority. Trump never received the votes of a majority of the voters in any state primary, winning at best only a plurality. He is no juggernaut--if he couldn't win the votes of more than 37% of Republicans, he's hardly the prohibitive favorite in a general election.
The Nader factor isn't subject to debate. Regardless of any other votes Gore lost, had Nader not been in the race, Gore without question would have won Florida, and the election.
It will be difficult for Sanders to do the right thing for the good of his party and for the country; he has become the champion of all of us who embrace the enlightened liberal viewpoint that characterized the majority of Americans for much of its history, and he has proven that those values are still embraced by millions. Nonetheless, the delegate math is incontrovertible: the likelihood of Sanders now overcoming his 2:1 deficit in a proportionate primary race is vanishingly small. From today on, all he can do is to ensure that he will be remembered as the man who made Donald Trump president.
Instead, let him exit gracefully, and he'll be the inspiration for the next FDR.
The Nader factor isn't subject to debate. Regardless of any other votes Gore lost, had Nader not been in the race, Gore without question would have won Florida, and the election.
It will be difficult for Sanders to do the right thing for the good of his party and for the country; he has become the champion of all of us who embrace the enlightened liberal viewpoint that characterized the majority of Americans for much of its history, and he has proven that those values are still embraced by millions. Nonetheless, the delegate math is incontrovertible: the likelihood of Sanders now overcoming his 2:1 deficit in a proportionate primary race is vanishingly small. From today on, all he can do is to ensure that he will be remembered as the man who made Donald Trump president.
Instead, let him exit gracefully, and he'll be the inspiration for the next FDR.
2
If Al Gore had carried the state that sent both him and his father to the $enate, Tennessee, Florida would have been nothing but a weird, Hiaasen-esque footnote. The enablers of the Junior Bush Reign of Error were Gore and Lieberman, genuinely dreadful campaigners, and thev5 on the Supremes
2
Has Bernie been a positive influence on this campaign? Absolutely. We need to discuss his philosophy and political strategies. Is the general voting public ready for him? My guess is probably not. Could he deal with the Republican machine - my guess is probably not. Would I like to see him president of a nation that had a lot of congressional support for his policies? Oh, Yeah. We'd be an awful lot better off.
Personally, I wish he were a lot younger. Then maybe he could capture the entire heart of the Democratic Party. My real problem with Democrats is that the party leadership is a bunch of old farts. Look at all of them. Can you imagine a college kid telling a friend that the Democrats are your salvation and then pointing to someone like Harry Reid? He looks like a corpse. Good luck. Time for rejuvenation....
Personally, I wish he were a lot younger. Then maybe he could capture the entire heart of the Democratic Party. My real problem with Democrats is that the party leadership is a bunch of old farts. Look at all of them. Can you imagine a college kid telling a friend that the Democrats are your salvation and then pointing to someone like Harry Reid? He looks like a corpse. Good luck. Time for rejuvenation....
17
Your logic is amazing. How is Bernie not an old fart? He's been sitting around congress for 30 years and accomplished what? Somehow he inspires 20 year olds but no one else can? This whole Bernie craze has been ridiculous.
3
Thanks for finally recognizing the value of what Sen. Sanders campaign has done for this election cycle. It should be recognized as truly amazing that he’s advanced as far as he’s done considering what he’s been up against. On the Democratic side alone; the party’s tacit support, the 23+ years name recognition HRC has on him, the corporate and political establishment backing she enjoys. Since Sander’s candidacy began on April 30, 2015 he has energized thousands of young people who otherwise would ignore a political process that did not speak for them. He has awakened the passions and support of countless individuals who've heard in his rallies what voters have yearned to hear, a campaign that addresses their importance in involvement in the political process. I marvel at what he has accomplished, how he set the tone of civility, stayed on message and upheld his principles. I am proud to have supported him and know that the way he structured and run his campaign will go down history regardless of the outcome of his candidacy. I don’t think in my lifetime I will see another candidate or campaign like Sen. Sanders. For the past 10 months all the media preferred to report on the antics of Trump 24/7 and now disingenuously asks why is it that the divisive candidate is ahead. Given a fair chance and fair coverage the outcome might have been a lot different and much more palatable.
170
Thank you so much. I just think that "involvement in the political process" going forward is going to be very difficult if by that you mean the ballot box.
Bernie Sanders will have mad a hugely important contribution IF he has inspired his supporters, especially the up and coming generation, to maintain throughout their life times his values for greater equity, universal healthcare, etc, Those supporters must vote to make changes at the local level and congressional levels to support those values. Otherwise he will be a footnote in the history books. It is the sustained endeavor that counts.
84
You speak as if the voters are in this for some fame. Sanders' voters already were for greater equity, universal healthcare, etc. All that happens now is they see that the political process really is rigged, even in presidential elections, and all the way down to dog catcher. That will drive everyone back into apathy. Thanks, DWS!!!
2
"On health care, on banks, on the influence of Wall Street, Sanders has pulled Clinton to the left."
Haven't the Clintons taught you anything about triangulation? Nothing has changed with Mrs. Clinton. Wait and watch. We've all seen it before.
Haven't the Clintons taught you anything about triangulation? Nothing has changed with Mrs. Clinton. Wait and watch. We've all seen it before.
477
The arrow on her logo does point to the right. Just sayin'
2
I can't believe anyone is even making this argument.
2
The Clintons are politicians and bureaucrats. They are a team to help each other enhance and embellish their political goals. If they really truly loved their country they would not have gotten so rich via Clinton Foundation and Wall Street schmoozing. It is a well known fact that their Foundation is not a charity. The Republicans already know this but if Trump is the nominee they will not attack Mrs Clinton as they had planned, she is more Republican than Trump can ever pretend to be.
1
No, Clinton doesn't have to do anything because of Sanders. She can, and will, continue to be what she has said all along. More corporatism, more wars, more quid pro quo. If I can't have Sanders as the Democrat nominee for the general election, I guess I'll need to look to Trump. Trump and Bernie are the only two populists who are running for president. They are America's best chance for the future.
136
If you think Trump is good for anyone but himself, you haven't been paying attention.
126
just sit this election out, that's what i'll do if Sanders loses come nomination time. Better not to cast a vote for either evil than vote one of them in. Let the sheep voters get what they deserve come November.
60
In no way are Trump and Bernie equivalent. I myself would love to see a President Sanders, but the choice isn't just about populism--it is also about responsibility and governance. Neither word fits into Trump's vocabulary set and if you think that Trump will shake things up and build a new world order...you are right, just not in the way you imagine or in the way Sanders would.
113
Clinton is a crook and Trump is also. Both have narcissistic personality disorder. I would hate to vote for either one, but it is conceivable I might feel I have to. If Trump backs off from his racist pitch I might vote for him, because he is less likely to start another war. If Clinton gets in we risk The Big One which would mean the end of everything.
21
You really don't pay attention to all of trump's slander against just about everyone in the world, do you?
3
Trump less likely to start a war? Sorry but Trump and Putin remind me a little too much of Hitler and Stalin in 39. And we know how that ended.
3
I used to enjoy Timothy Egan's columns. As I did Paul Krugman's, Collins', Blow's, etc. Then, without a single exception, as the NYT endorsed Hillary, all of the NYT's columnists fell in line and declared their preference for Hillary over Bernie as well. The NYT was left without a single progressive voice--except for thousands of complaining commenters.
So, now that Egan and company can declare "mission accomplished" and crown Hillary the winner of the Democratic nomination, they want Bernie to keep playing the progressive, the "socialist lite" from the sidelines?
I hope that, instead, with all the fury Bernie can muster, he joins us progressives in denouncing the anti-democratic process that so perverted judgment and opinions as to lead us to the choices we face today. This country is finished.
So, now that Egan and company can declare "mission accomplished" and crown Hillary the winner of the Democratic nomination, they want Bernie to keep playing the progressive, the "socialist lite" from the sidelines?
I hope that, instead, with all the fury Bernie can muster, he joins us progressives in denouncing the anti-democratic process that so perverted judgment and opinions as to lead us to the choices we face today. This country is finished.
531
Yes, it's very disappointing how the NYT has spun this primary. Many facts have been ignored and many arguments have been laughably weak in the Op Eds. It's particularly shocking to discover how a story that was slightly positive to Sanders was edited after being published. One really has to wonder what's going on over there.
7
Revolutions are difficult and destructive, Yiannis P., as we see in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and most of Africa. We simply need to repair OUR democracy that BIG democracy-destroying money masters' republican operatives have wounded over the last 40+ years - not overthrow it. That's what a democracy does.
8
Perhaps we are "finished" but we citizens have a civic duty to make the better choice in November and NOT stay home. Then, we have to roll up our sleeves, force the needed changes in our campaign and electoral systems, and try to prove Yiannis P.'s prediction false.
Make no mistake, all of our problems' solutions go through the path of electoral reform.
Make no mistake, all of our problems' solutions go through the path of electoral reform.
The Democratic platform will have Bernie's imprint. He has never struck me as a person of ego. To influence the direction of the Democratic Party at his age with the label of Socialist is quite a crowning achievement for him. The hilarious SNL sketch with Hillary morphing into Bernie carried the ring of truth. It should be far easier for Millenniums to set aside their pride and rally behind Clinton than for Establishment Republicans to rally behind the vulgar con man Trump.
39
And here is the difference between the parties: the competition keeps the Democrats on their toes, while the competition keeps the Republicans slinging mud.
32
no way- they are one party with two divisions. One taking the express train to corporate hell(Republicans). The other, making local stops on the way, but you can't get off!!!
2
Clinton and her surrogates have been more than willing to sling mud against Sanders with the help of the corporate media. They have openly distorted his Congressional record and tried to marginalize his campaign (limit or hide debates) in the first primaries. Most brazenly, Clinton has pretended to take the same views as Sanders on key issues and she has created fictions about her own record. On basic issues, it is hard/impossible to trust what she will do as president. I can even imagine her equivocating on a fundamental issue such as Social Security. She is skillful at embellishing bad decisions with rhetoric.
2
Mark my words, Hillary will shift rightward as fast as she can once she gets the nomination. Anyone gullible enough to believe that Hillary is anything other than the Goldwater Girl who bragged about how conservative she is on NPR need not leave home without a guardian.
"That’s right. And I feel like my political beliefs are rooted in the conservatism that I was raised with. I don’t recognize this new brand of Republicanism that is afoot now, which I consider to be very reactionary, not conservative in many respects. I am very proud that I was a Goldwater girl."
http://usuncut.com/politics/npr-interview-hillary-clinton-was-proud-of-h...
Does not square with the shape shifter we hear on the 2016 campaign trail.
"That’s right. And I feel like my political beliefs are rooted in the conservatism that I was raised with. I don’t recognize this new brand of Republicanism that is afoot now, which I consider to be very reactionary, not conservative in many respects. I am very proud that I was a Goldwater girl."
http://usuncut.com/politics/npr-interview-hillary-clinton-was-proud-of-h...
Does not square with the shape shifter we hear on the 2016 campaign trail.
292
EVERY Democratic Presidential nominee moves rightward for the general election -- just as most Republicans move leftwards.
In primaries, you try to get out the base, in the general you try to win the middle.
It's been that way for a very long time.
Any Democrat who thinks that Clinton on her worst day will not be light years better than any Republican in the country is delusional.
Feel the Bern absolutely, but vote for the better option on election day, which will be the Democrat. That's it's not your favourite Democrat should not be an excuse to give the country to Trump or Cruz.
Vote like it will be the last time, or it just may be.
In primaries, you try to get out the base, in the general you try to win the middle.
It's been that way for a very long time.
Any Democrat who thinks that Clinton on her worst day will not be light years better than any Republican in the country is delusional.
Feel the Bern absolutely, but vote for the better option on election day, which will be the Democrat. That's it's not your favourite Democrat should not be an excuse to give the country to Trump or Cruz.
Vote like it will be the last time, or it just may be.
4
Hillary was scared enough during this primary purpose to know better. Plus ,the Supreme Court, Social security, the VA and all needed social programs will be destroyed without a democratic president to veto the horrors of the 1% GOP.
1
Remember Goldwater was supported by the John Birch Society. The same John Birch Society that was supported by the Koch brothers' father. He raised them on it and they have taken it further. We are on the brink of fascism, and I don't even know if Hillary sees it.
1
A big day for the Clinton campaign, no doubt, but Sanders is down - not out. He will stay in the contest through the convention. Sanders cares about this country. If he can't give his supporters the opportunity to vote for him in the general election, he'll do his best to represent his national constituency by influencing the democratic party platform. And when the time comes, if he is not the democratic nominee, he will rally his enthusiastic supporters around HRC.
111
How many of them will actually vote? I've been voting (Dem) since Carter, I 'm a Sanders supporter, and so down at the mouth I'm almost willing to vote for the hidden Dem inside of Trump instead of the hidden Republican inside of Clinton.
you keep saying that because of Bernie, Hillary's policies will now favor the working and middle class. Wishful thinking. For all of her political career, Hillary waits for the more brave to take a stand and speak for the people and their needs or changing perspectives. Then once she sees that the people are responding favorably, she changes her tune and jumps on board.
That may be okay for a politicians to do in Congress, but as President, you need to a leader, not a follower. You need to be brave, have good foresight, a vision, a CORE. Where is her core, her principles? besides following what has worked in the past (her husband, Obama, now Bernie)
This lack of a core makes us ambivalent towards her, maybe even distrust her. Young people are not just going to flock to her because she adopts the principles that Bernie has. We are a lot more perceptive than that.
That may be okay for a politicians to do in Congress, but as President, you need to a leader, not a follower. You need to be brave, have good foresight, a vision, a CORE. Where is her core, her principles? besides following what has worked in the past (her husband, Obama, now Bernie)
This lack of a core makes us ambivalent towards her, maybe even distrust her. Young people are not just going to flock to her because she adopts the principles that Bernie has. We are a lot more perceptive than that.
257
Ms. Clinton need Bernie to be Veep on her ticket. It is her only hope if she wants to be President.
1
Work for and vote for progressive candidates to Congress. The only bulwark we can erect is a strong and deep bench of real progressives. It is time to turn the ship around. She won't and can't but a strong, progressive Congress can start the process. Show them they can win without corporate money.
Get rid of Wasserman-Schultz. She is a disaster who leads the way to failed elections.
Get rid of Wasserman-Schultz. She is a disaster who leads the way to failed elections.
2
Bernie Sanders is the conscience of the Democratic Party. We need more people like him in our political systems. If Hillary wins the presidency (and I sure hope she will), she should appoint Senator Sanders to lead the Treasury Department.
47
HRC will appoint a Wal Streeter to head Treasury, it's the least she owes them.
2
Bernie is the conscience but the democratic party is no longer a functioning machine, it is beholden to one family, the Clintons. The party itself is an oligarch. As much as the Republicans were to be blamed as obstructionists, the democrats were also part of the do-nothing congress we witnessed all these years. They allowed poverty, starvation, inequality, injustice, wars, social and criminal injustice, racism, xenophobia to happen in THEIR watch. So did Mr Obama. His daughters' gowns alone cost tens of thousands of dollars, one semester worth of college tuition.
3
I find it hard to believe that so many voted for HRC today - a woman I find to be a loathsome mediocrity. She touts her "experience" but her judgement in making her "Hard Choices" has been disastrous - as in her vote for invading Iraq and her influencing the intervention in Libya - that turned a successful, well-off, secular country into a failed state, teeming with terrorists. And her comment and the cackle that followed when she said of the brutal murder of Libya's Gaddafi, "We came, we saw, he died," was hateful and revolting.
If HRC wins the nomination I'll find it so easy to vote for Jill Stein in November. And by the way, NYT, have you never heard of Jill Stein and the Green Party?
If HRC wins the nomination I'll find it so easy to vote for Jill Stein in November. And by the way, NYT, have you never heard of Jill Stein and the Green Party?
181
Agree with first paragraph but we can't be sure how she'll fare v trump. The risk is too great. Even a few votes can change history, as we saw in 2000.
4
Yes. And I remember Ralph Nader, who I still blame for GWB, for Iraq, for ISIS, for the horror that is the Middle East. What a different world if Al Gore had become the President he was elected to be. And would have been without the Supreme Court stealing the election had it not been for Nader.
19
Your state voted for Trump last night and he carried Florida. A vote for the Green Party would effectively be a vote for Trump or whoever is the GOP candidate. Please reconsider.
14
As usual. Egan talks sense. The Democrats, Clinton, all of us owe Sanders a lot. He should keynote the Democrat Convention.
89
Egan talks sense? He talks Establishment! That is it, kiddo! The NYT has relinquished any but the most inocuous criticism to the comments section,w here in fact, a lot of people, think they are diallogying, but so few are visible to the WHOLE publc! Regarding this EGAN character, if we were to look at numbers, and go by what is to be the delegates role, we are very close. MADAME Secretary prides herself on 'having more votes than any candidate'. Well, duh, yeah, because there are only two candidates on the Dem side. If it were the same as the Repubs, it would be a different story. But does the media ever even comment on that point?? You tell me , buddies ...Doe sth media ever really discuss forms of governemnt and human values and show that EVERY other place on earth has easier and less costly solutions for the basics of a life in a modern society? NO! it does ,not. It does the oppoiste, and then we read the print, which follows suit for the masses...
We must let Bernie get his media across, not in rants but in educating the viewer and to defending useless criciticism to him.
We must let Bernie get his media across, not in rants but in educating the viewer and to defending useless criciticism to him.
4
Are you joking? I can't imagine why Sanders would want to keynote that convention. It's clear that any impact he's had moving Clinton leftward to match him in the primaries will be utterly forgotten in her administration. It's all politics as usual now except for the wild-card of Trumpism.
3
No offense to you, but that's hilarious. Give the keynote address? Sanders should form another party.
I"ll join.
I"ll join.
3
I expected more from Frank than the standard American conflation of socialism and social democracy.
Socialism most generally refers to public ownership of major industries and indeed is a failure. The postwar British Labour government of Clement Attlee is a classic example of socialism.
Social democracy is a set of programs seeking to ameliorate the inequities and inequalities of capitalism. All wealthy democracies include social democratic programs: In the U.S., unemployment insurance, social security and medicare.
European social democracies go far further in giving guarantees of employment, income, education, co-management of enterprises, housing, leisure etc.
Sweden has an intensely capitalist economy withing an advanced social democratic society.
Bernie's proposals barely scratch the surface of modern social democracy.
He should dig deeper into education, the five week vacation, child benefits, housing and carry the message of how avoidable is mass incarceration and poverty in the U.S.
An organization called the Swedish Institute publishes studies of Swedish social democracy in action. Bernie should propose the entire egalitarian range of tested programs because the U.S. is becoming Third World in social protection.
Socialism most generally refers to public ownership of major industries and indeed is a failure. The postwar British Labour government of Clement Attlee is a classic example of socialism.
Social democracy is a set of programs seeking to ameliorate the inequities and inequalities of capitalism. All wealthy democracies include social democratic programs: In the U.S., unemployment insurance, social security and medicare.
European social democracies go far further in giving guarantees of employment, income, education, co-management of enterprises, housing, leisure etc.
Sweden has an intensely capitalist economy withing an advanced social democratic society.
Bernie's proposals barely scratch the surface of modern social democracy.
He should dig deeper into education, the five week vacation, child benefits, housing and carry the message of how avoidable is mass incarceration and poverty in the U.S.
An organization called the Swedish Institute publishes studies of Swedish social democracy in action. Bernie should propose the entire egalitarian range of tested programs because the U.S. is becoming Third World in social protection.
344
Social democratic nations also have very low corporate taxes and raise most of their tax revenues from consumers, through income taxes and VATs. Bernie is going about the social-democrat thing all wrong.
1
Thank you. You said much better than I ever could.
1
As an American living in Sweden for many years, i have seen first-hand the benefits of the social democratic system here. At first i was skeptical of the bigger role of government, but with time i really began to appreciate the safety net. Income tax is around 30% for the great majority (the middle-class). For that, we get:
*Highly subsidized medical care: doctors visits cost $30, specialists $35. If you spend over $120 during a 12 month period, then all medical care is free after that.
*Paid sick leave: If you get sick and can't work, the first day there is no compensation but after that you get 80% of your ordinary wage. This applies to all jobs, no matter how "menial" they may be.
*Paid leave if your kid gets sick from day one
*A minimum wage of $15/hr.
*6 weeks paid vacation, again regardless of occupation.
*Strong rights for employees; employers can fire people but not without due and thorough investigation into causes and looking into other possible solutions like replacement within the company etc.
*Unemployment benefits at 80% of your last job's wage
and so much more.
The social climate here is comparatively very good and ranks among the top countries in the world in the Happiness Index.
It is really time for the US to join the rest of the industrialized world and guarantee basic living conditions for all citizens.
*Highly subsidized medical care: doctors visits cost $30, specialists $35. If you spend over $120 during a 12 month period, then all medical care is free after that.
*Paid sick leave: If you get sick and can't work, the first day there is no compensation but after that you get 80% of your ordinary wage. This applies to all jobs, no matter how "menial" they may be.
*Paid leave if your kid gets sick from day one
*A minimum wage of $15/hr.
*6 weeks paid vacation, again regardless of occupation.
*Strong rights for employees; employers can fire people but not without due and thorough investigation into causes and looking into other possible solutions like replacement within the company etc.
*Unemployment benefits at 80% of your last job's wage
and so much more.
The social climate here is comparatively very good and ranks among the top countries in the world in the Happiness Index.
It is really time for the US to join the rest of the industrialized world and guarantee basic living conditions for all citizens.
4
It's at least some compensation to know that Bernie is not going anywhere after the election. If Hillary wins and tries to revive the old Clinton Triangulation Two-Step, she's got Bernie looking over one shoulder and Elizabeth Warren over the other, not to mention a whole new wing of the party out there.
And in anyone ever needed watching...
And in anyone ever needed watching...
203
Florida has a more mature voter demographic, where as Sanders appeals to a much younger crowd. Sanders has tapped in to the ire of a group that has massive debt, poor career choices, and has not ben exposed to the rigor of several years of 8 to 5 demands, or the possibility of being drafted to fight in some miserable sand trap or rice paddy.
Sanders is an attack dog set loose on the Wall Street culture, most of whom are hard working people charged with keeping your retirement funds from failing. They do get paid well if they they are good at it, and they are resented for it. His mantra is the big banks are evil and have to be broken up. It sells well with those who do not understand how the street works. They believe what Sander tells them, their money is being taken by by people who buy off the government so they can get away with it.
These young people do not understand the jobs they hope to get will have to be financed by some investment bank. They think as Sanders tells them, the rich can be taxed to pay for it. Even those great research jobs like oceanic exploration have to be financed and it takes the rich to do it.
Sander supporters think their ideas are better than those of us who have already tried them and they make rude remarks about our support for HRC. Not dialogue, just snide comments, and libelous remarks about her. They lose credibility doing so.
The odds are HRC will be the next president, and she will need a lot of support to counter the GOP slander.
Sanders is an attack dog set loose on the Wall Street culture, most of whom are hard working people charged with keeping your retirement funds from failing. They do get paid well if they they are good at it, and they are resented for it. His mantra is the big banks are evil and have to be broken up. It sells well with those who do not understand how the street works. They believe what Sander tells them, their money is being taken by by people who buy off the government so they can get away with it.
These young people do not understand the jobs they hope to get will have to be financed by some investment bank. They think as Sanders tells them, the rich can be taxed to pay for it. Even those great research jobs like oceanic exploration have to be financed and it takes the rich to do it.
Sander supporters think their ideas are better than those of us who have already tried them and they make rude remarks about our support for HRC. Not dialogue, just snide comments, and libelous remarks about her. They lose credibility doing so.
The odds are HRC will be the next president, and she will need a lot of support to counter the GOP slander.
41
Florida may have the more mature voters but they lack intelligence as far as i'm concerned. Just older sheep in my book.
4
Retirement funds? Boy, wouldn't that be a nice thing to have. Unfortunately, the jobs we little peasant Millennials are thrown don't really have those anymore. Or paid leave. Or vacation days. Or living wages. Or any sort of job security whatsoever. And that's all thanks to your friendly next-door neighbors on Wall Street, those indefatigable "hard workers".
You know what's hard work? Raising children when both parents have to work and half your income goes to rent and childcare alone. You know what's hard work? Going to work with a tooth abscess you can't afford to get fixed ("Keep shopping," says Hillary "Fighting For Us" Clinton).
It's insulting to listen to the older folks who ruined the country by voting for The Party lecture us on "how the world works". Apparently you can call us stupid, naive, entitled, and whiny and still get to be indignant that we're "snide" and "rude" to Goldman Sachs's cherished marionette. This attitude of "having your cake and eating it too" is understandable, of course. That's how Boomers have been running the country for a few decades.
Dismount from that horse. It's entirely too tall.
You know what's hard work? Raising children when both parents have to work and half your income goes to rent and childcare alone. You know what's hard work? Going to work with a tooth abscess you can't afford to get fixed ("Keep shopping," says Hillary "Fighting For Us" Clinton).
It's insulting to listen to the older folks who ruined the country by voting for The Party lecture us on "how the world works". Apparently you can call us stupid, naive, entitled, and whiny and still get to be indignant that we're "snide" and "rude" to Goldman Sachs's cherished marionette. This attitude of "having your cake and eating it too" is understandable, of course. That's how Boomers have been running the country for a few decades.
Dismount from that horse. It's entirely too tall.
14
@David Underwood--Go see "The Big Short" and tell me that is how The Street conducted business when you were young. Look at the tuition charged by public higher education in California and tell me you had to pay those rates when you went to college (you know we had nearly tuition free higher education back then). Tell me you bought medical insurance when you were young. I bet you did not before you had a job because medical bills could not wipe you out like they can today.
Stop criticizing the youth. When you were young you got most of what Sanders is asking we provide today. As you grew older, the have and have nots have grown.
It's time for people who reap the benefits of Medicare, Social Security, a pension (remember those), free tuition, etc., to think a minute about their children and grandchildren. You got yours. It's time you think about someone else.
Stop criticizing the youth. When you were young you got most of what Sanders is asking we provide today. As you grew older, the have and have nots have grown.
It's time for people who reap the benefits of Medicare, Social Security, a pension (remember those), free tuition, etc., to think a minute about their children and grandchildren. You got yours. It's time you think about someone else.
6
"Yes, it’s inevitable. Try to shrug off that Clinton fatigue. Hold your nose, if you have to. "
It's a pretty sad state of affairs when you keep being told that the best you can hope for is holding your nose and either voting for one kind of rot or another and that, either way, Congress will be locked up and under the control of the plutocrats, via the GOP. It is also a sad state of affairs when the rot extends to the DNC and the way it set things up for this primary.
While the rest of the left-leaning pundit class will follow Egan and urge voters to hold their noses, what will likely continue to happen is that voter disillusionment will not go away and voter turnout will remain low, in spite of the specter of a Trump presidency may or may not change that.
Moreover, the white Blue collar vote may decide its fate is better served by Trump, with his promises of trade wars and "grab, grab, grab..."
Sanders didn't "recently join" the Democratic party, he's always been a part of it as a member of that caucus, though from the outside, as an independent. When the Democrats had a majority, Sanders was given committees to chair, vice-chair, etc. So to call him a new democrat is reductionist and less than an honest description.
Clinton, so far, has failed to excite voters. If that continues to be the case, it doesn't bode well for November. The other side will more than make up for it, especially if the RNC strips Trump of an earned win.
---
www.rimaregas.com
It's a pretty sad state of affairs when you keep being told that the best you can hope for is holding your nose and either voting for one kind of rot or another and that, either way, Congress will be locked up and under the control of the plutocrats, via the GOP. It is also a sad state of affairs when the rot extends to the DNC and the way it set things up for this primary.
While the rest of the left-leaning pundit class will follow Egan and urge voters to hold their noses, what will likely continue to happen is that voter disillusionment will not go away and voter turnout will remain low, in spite of the specter of a Trump presidency may or may not change that.
Moreover, the white Blue collar vote may decide its fate is better served by Trump, with his promises of trade wars and "grab, grab, grab..."
Sanders didn't "recently join" the Democratic party, he's always been a part of it as a member of that caucus, though from the outside, as an independent. When the Democrats had a majority, Sanders was given committees to chair, vice-chair, etc. So to call him a new democrat is reductionist and less than an honest description.
Clinton, so far, has failed to excite voters. If that continues to be the case, it doesn't bode well for November. The other side will more than make up for it, especially if the RNC strips Trump of an earned win.
---
www.rimaregas.com
239
If Rima is saying that there's no important difference between the Republicans' getting the Presidency (and therefore control of Congress and the Supreme Court) and Democrats getting it (and therefore being able to block Republican goals), she is badly deceived. It is like the difference between not getting what you want, and being enslaved. I hope that's rhetorical exaggeration, but it's not too much exaggerated. A fully Republican government will give taxes back to the billionaires, cut food stamps and Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid, underfund essential science, institute abstinence-only prayer-virginity, spend more on the military, sell off some of our national parks, and that's only part.
388
Thomas,
Last time I checked, they've already done all those things by doing nothing. The distance between worse and worser isn't very long, when you consider all the things in Thomas Edsall's column today, and add to that the very large white precariat that has been largely ignored in the mainstream media over the last two to three years. Those are the angry white voters on both sides of our politics.
Steven Salaita's new opinion piece nails much of the conundrum impoverished voters face in the putrid political environment we are mired in. If Sanders' candidacy was meant to break the cycle, then the story hasn't ended just yet. But if he fails to do what he set out to achieve, what comes next is as important and how he deals with it will be as crucial as having attempted this.
I highly recommend reading this piece. I, for one, am mulling my next blog post.
http://www.salon.com/2016/03/06/vote_for_hillary_be_a_sucker_its_ok_to_r...
Last time I checked, they've already done all those things by doing nothing. The distance between worse and worser isn't very long, when you consider all the things in Thomas Edsall's column today, and add to that the very large white precariat that has been largely ignored in the mainstream media over the last two to three years. Those are the angry white voters on both sides of our politics.
Steven Salaita's new opinion piece nails much of the conundrum impoverished voters face in the putrid political environment we are mired in. If Sanders' candidacy was meant to break the cycle, then the story hasn't ended just yet. But if he fails to do what he set out to achieve, what comes next is as important and how he deals with it will be as crucial as having attempted this.
I highly recommend reading this piece. I, for one, am mulling my next blog post.
http://www.salon.com/2016/03/06/vote_for_hillary_be_a_sucker_its_ok_to_r...
24
Thomas,
On who wins, what I am saying is that short of the Democrats winning back the Senate or House to start, we are doomed to four more years of what we have now. That, along with the corruption of the DNC and the sense it has given voters that the game is rigged, is what is continuing to keep voters away from the polls, in addition to gerrymandering and voter suppression laws. This comes at a time when the DNC can least afford it, with a front-runner who just isn't getting out the vote. Sanders, wherever the rules allowed him to win, did have the effect of high turnout.
Low Dem turnout means Dem loss. There is no way of getting around that.
On who wins, what I am saying is that short of the Democrats winning back the Senate or House to start, we are doomed to four more years of what we have now. That, along with the corruption of the DNC and the sense it has given voters that the game is rigged, is what is continuing to keep voters away from the polls, in addition to gerrymandering and voter suppression laws. This comes at a time when the DNC can least afford it, with a front-runner who just isn't getting out the vote. Sanders, wherever the rules allowed him to win, did have the effect of high turnout.
Low Dem turnout means Dem loss. There is no way of getting around that.
56