Please look closer into Bernie's "Democratic Employee Ownership Funds".
This is an extremely subversive socialistic reform which backflipped here in Sweden, when we realised it was actually a blueprint for turning Sweden into an Eastern-Europe style socialistic plane-economy, where executive power would shift from the elected government to the labour unions.
It's a dark chapter in our history (1980s) and thinking about it makes my skin crawl. It's technically called The Meidner Plan.
The basic concept is that you institute working-class funds which gradually overtake publicly traded companies, by making companies allot new shares, as a new tax. These shares are assembled in massive funds, which are centrally controlled by working-class representatives.
These funds quickly grow into becoming the greatest concentration of capital and power in the country. They appoint 45% of all company Board of Directors, and through that all CEOs. In just a decade, the funds become the largest minority owner in most publicly traded companies in the country. The funds now have executive control over media houses, banks and military industry.
At this point, the funds can easily overtake most government operations. General elections slowly become redundant, because the true power is with those who are elected by the workforce to control these funds.
And this, my friends, is how you create a socialist totalitarian regime, and dismantle general elections, using democratic measures.
Sanders' response to the question of authoritarianism is absolutely, 100% correct. There are lots of things that authoritarian govts do and can do right and better than democracies, at least at times - you acknowledge that reality, at least in part because it acknowledges the complexity of the world we live in. That doesn't mean you don't acknowledge their flaws. Sanders is absolutely correct about Cuba. I have been to Cuba, Even today, it is a much better place to live than most of Latin America. The people enjoy excellent education and medical services. That is just reality. China is doing infinitely more to address climate change and invest in renewable energies than any other country in the world. If technology does eventually save us from the worst ravages of climate change, it may well be because of China. At the same time, as Sanders pointed out, US foreign policy has a long history of overthrowing govts and supporting authoritarianism abroad. The US' unrelenting support of Israel is directly responsible for the increasing abuse of the Palestinians. Sanders is, at least, a candidate willing to engage with reality. That should be a strong positive in his favour.
“When dictatorships, whether it is the Chinese or the Cubans, do something good, you acknowledge that,” Sanders said. “But you don’t have to trade love letters with them.”
The NYTimes authors called this an "arresting" response consistent with his "fervent...ideology." Why? The USSR took huge strides toward gender equality (legal abortion, civil divorce, employment and educational equality) back in the 1920s--would it not have been better to learn something from our enemies, rather than keep American women in bondage for another 50 years thanks to sweeping rejection of anything dreamed up by the commies? China takes bold environmental action (sharply reduced air pollution, vast high-speed rail networks, "Emerald Cities" and other green urban planning) while we go backwards--is there nothing useful we can learn by acknowledging and even studying Chinese policies?
Your editorial line appears to be "Any praise of any aspect of Russian, Chinese, or Cuban policies is to be considered aberrant, arresting, and ideologically fervent--though dozens of articles about how women can now drive in their Saudi paradise are to be encouraged."
So tell me, who is being ideologically fervent here?
1
“When dictatorships, whether it is the Chinese or the Cubans, do something good, you acknowledge that,” Sanders said. “But you don’t have to trade love letters with them.”
The NYTimes authors called this an "arresting" response consistent with his "fervent...ideology." Why? The USSR took huge strides toward toward gender equality (legal abortion, civil divorce, employment and educational equality) back in the 1920s--would it not have been better to learn something from our enemies, rather than keep American women in bondage for another 50 years thanks to sweeping rejection of anything dreamed up by the commies? China takes bold environmental action (sharply reduced air pollution, vast high-speed rail networks, "Emerald Cities" and other green urban planning) while we go backwards--is there nothing useful we can learn by acknowledging and even studying Chinese policies?
Your editorial line appears to be "Any praise of any aspect of Russian, Chinese, or Cuban policies is to be considered aberrant, arresting, and ideologically fervent--though dozens of articles about how women can now drive in their Saudi paradise are to be encouraged."
So tell me, who is being ideologically fervent here?
Republicans are saying that Bernie Sanders is a communist.
Some of Bernie's Democratic opponents are jumping on the bandwagon.
They say the word "socialist", but they want you to hear the word "communist".
Do you think Bernie Sanders is a communist?
I don't.
Listen carefully.
It's important that you do.
1
Sanders is the only candidate who has a vision. Who has a plan and who inspires. All the others just talk about how they are the only ones who can beat the Twitter-In-Chief. But the numbers say otherwise.
When your only plan is attacking Bernie, hoping this will cause his national poll numbers to drop vs Trump, you have no plan. Its hard to believe we could have yet another debate, with the same crew, coming in March. Those who don't get at least 15% of the Super Tuesday vote need to get out of the race. Lets be realistic. When you average 8% of the vote your campaign is a pipe dream. These are only campaigns of obstruction.
The only candidate offering real change is Bernie Sanders. All the rest have to offer are attacks, procrastination and more of the same. People are sick and tired of all of that and want something better.
Feel the Bern!
In Sweden, we have a word in our vocabulary for the kind of socialism promoted by Bernie Sanders. The word is "fondsocialism", and is directly translated into "fund socialism".
Fund socialism is a concept that was pioneered here in Sweden in the 1980s, but only experimentally. It's also known as the Meidner Plan, and it's actually a diabolic blueprint for how you can convert a free market economy into a Yugoslavian-style socialistic plane economy, without using weapons.
It's frighteningly easy, and shows you just how fragile your democracy is. The basic concept is for the state to gradually overtake the stock market, by purchasing shares which are paid for by the companies themselves, e.g. through allotting new shares. These shares are assembled into massive stock funds, controlled by working-class representative (a.k.a. labour unions).
These funds quickly grow into becoming the greatest concentration of capital and power in the country. Labour union representatives take positions in all company boards. At this stage, labour unions control your news outlets, banks and military industry.
The labour unionists controlling these funds have more executive power than the actual government, and general elections slowly become redundant. Welcome to Sovjet.
Sanders has rebranded these funds as "Democratic Employee Ownership Funds". If you didn't get it already, Sanders puts "Democratic" in front of everything which isn't actually democratic (with a lowercase d). Wake up.
Bernie is for sure not my favorite. I don't care what the "polls show. I DO NOT think he can win against tRump. I will, however, vote Blue not matter who because I want tRump GONE.
Bernie's 'Democratic Socialism' is his matador's red cape. It predictably provokes an immediate "Socialism!" attack, which he quickly flips:
"No, it's DEMOCRATIC Socialism"
"What's that?"
"Things you actually want."
"Oh, ok."
9
whenever Bernie mentions a program Biden should ask him where the votes in the senate are for that proposal. Biden should do that forcefully for every grand pronouncement Bernie make.
Bernie has no answer for that question.
5
@bud lemley Does ANY Democratic nominee have an answer?
Well, the coalition of movements that support Sanders have (at least) one. It's called Flip the Senate. Keep in mind that Sanders has inspired and supported young progressives running for office at all levels.
1
Bernie did what he needed to do, especially in his closing statement where despite his reputation for angry tirades, he expressed more hope and optimism than any of the other candidates on stage. Pete's going for the Obama-esque in his phrasing and comportment, but it's Bernie who's got it in his heart.
11
From the Times article fact checking the debate.
"WHAT THE FACTS ARE:
Senator Bernie Sanders mischaracterized studies of the costs of his health care plan, falsely stating that they all say it will save money.
WHAT MR. SANDERS:
“What every study out there, conservative or progressive says: ‘Medicare for all’ will save money.”
False. There have been several analyses of Mr. Sanders’s Medicare for all health care proposal, which would provide every American with generous government-funded health insurance benefits. Those studies have shown a range of potential costs, including several that estimate that the plan would cost substantially more than what the country would otherwise spend on health care.
Mr. Sanders is correct that a recent study published in the medical journal The Lancet showed that his plan would cost $450 billion less in a year than the current health care system. But that study made several assumptions that other economists who have examined the plan have considered unrealistic. Other studies have shown that spending would increase as the plan expands coverage to more Americans, and provides them with expensive new benefits, like long-term care, which few health insurance plans currently cover. This article provides an overview of a few of these studies.
I would like to hear how these candidates would handle the humanitarian crisis in Syria. Why is this question not being asked?
4
I have no clue what Warren is trying to achieve with her non-stop and vicious Bloomberg attacks; you'd think she'd go after the front-runners instead or at least all the B's -- Bernie, Biden, Bloomberg and Buttigieg. It makes no sense and makes her look daft. Where's the focus on her real rivals? On Trump? On Bernie, her doppelganger on most issues!? She's totally ignoring Bernie. Is she trying to show her fighting side? Turn it on Trump, please -- he's an even easier target.
8
Elizabeth Warren would make a great VP.
Bernie Sanders held his own counsel and proved unflappable in the face of some pretty relentless and vituperatve attacks. Biden hissed that Sanders had "thought about" running against Obama in 2012, ignoring the African-American community's recollection that Biden had actually run against Barack in 2008.
The largest change in the dynamic of Bernie Sanders' debate performance was the palpable hostility of the audience to him. The seats were sold by the DNC for $1750-3400 apiece, and Bloomberg has the credit card receipt. Yes, he's not only buying all of the television ad time (even during the debate), he's buying the debate audience, too.
The moderators may have forgotten about Coronavirus and Global Warming, but Bibi Netanyahu took the hit badly when they asked Sanders about that embassy in Jerusalem.
What can you do? You charge a fortune for the tickets but the guy on stage still behaves as if he's speaking for average Americans, downtrodden people and a common sense vision for America at home and in the world.
31
Maybe a few people began to realize last night that most of what Sanders proposes are not plans, but pipe dreams, tied to adolescent fantasies of political revolution. This probably explains why any time he appears on TV at one of his rallies, the assembled people standing behind him always look like the case of the Breakfast Club. They are not going to save us.
4
Do you suppose it ever occurs to Sen. Sanders that being attacked because you’re in front is a lot like what he does when he attacks the affluent or a company that has been successful?
2
I'm a Green, but I am curious about Democratic Party politics. It is the conservative party of the US, and has been the major conservative party since at least the Reagan Era, when the RIP decided that populism was easier for their base. Policies like universal healthcare access and income inequality reduction aren't wild progressive ideas; they are policies that even the UK's Conservative Party endorses, on it's good days.
I understand the social psychology behind fanaticism, but I don't understand why journalists at what purports to be an elite newspaper find it necessary to participate. An honest discussion of the issues under debate last night seems to me to demonstrate that all the Dems are serious about problems that threaten "the country." Human-driven climate change, income maldistribution, access to healthcare, and basic infrastructure are all conservative concerns. It's time to face that fact and move on.
If you want to support conservative policies, then vote Democratic. If want to join a cult, then join the RIP. If you want more radical progressive ideas, you need to look outside those two parties.
6
Man, Putin sure has his fingers in a lot of pies!
2
It's interesting that these columnists report the Democratic debate clown show as if it's important to anything except their jobs.
Our Industrial Entertainment complex demeans these people and the important issues of the day. Game show bobble-heads.
Jingoistic cultural banalities such as "But...socialism!" simply demonstrate the shallowness of America and it's unwillingness to think.
November can't come soon enough.
19
Sanders is the GOAT. A true fighter.
21
The Bernie Sanders show is now going into its latest series of reruns, oldies but not so goodies.
The man is like some misfit Japanese soldier holed up in the caves of the Pacific not having been told that the war ended years ago.
Supporting Castro? Sure, if you want to lose Florida.
Condemning Israel? Way to go if you want to lose the entire over 60 year old Jewish community.
Taking away the private health insurance of 150 million Americans?
A sure political winner.
Running as a Socialist on the Dem ticket since the Socialist party went bust years ago?
Trump is salivating.
This is weirder than fiction.
Coming to a theater near you.
8
@Simon Sez
See graph#2 the alligator graph at: bit.ly/EPI-study
Basically nearly all of America's 160 million work force and their families have endured 48+ years without a raise in an economy that has grown 150%. 90% of the gains flowing to the <1%. 90% of workers have had to endure declining expectations for 48+ years.
This is why Sanders has traction.
A 48 year trend isn't possible w/out complicity from elites in both parties - that would include everyone on that stage but Bernie and perhasp Warren. Almost no candidate has credibility with the promise of improving people's lives. None.
As an aside, the only American I've met in the last 25 years that likes American health insurance system is my mother who has been on Medicare since 1994.
Those 150 million people know their health insurance could be yanked away at a moments notice -or that there is some loop hole the insurer will use to avoid payment leaving them with bills they can't afford. Even the Culinary Workers with good insurance understood that.
You would appear to be the anomaly not Sanders.
27
@Simon Sez
All of these positions are popular with the new young voters we need to overwhelm the electoral college, win the presidency, and take the Senate.
Bernie wins 70% of the vote in rural Vermont because he knows how to talk to rural voters. Rural voters have extra power in the electoral college and they hate establishment Democrats, but like Bernie.
Centrists don't know what they want or how to get it.
Bernie fills stadiums because he has a movement. The only other candidate with a movement is Trump.
Stop ignoring all of the evidence that says Bernie is the one to beat Trump.
20
I appreciated the question what words the candidates live by. The answers were telling; Bloomberg’s “Get it done” and Sanders’s “It always seems impossible until it’s done” were fine but lacked underlying values. Better were biblical ones like Biden’s “golden rule.” But best was Warren’s: “In as much as ye have done it unto the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” To me, that principle distinguishes the Democratic Party and Elizabeth Warren herself. It was a relief to rise above the niggling details of the debate and hear their over-arching views. Living by those words would solve so many problems.
3
Two thoughts have come to me recently. One, why does the Democratic party (or any party) allow as a candidate for the highest elected office anyone who is not and has not been a member of the party? Bernie Sanders only runs as a Democrat every 4 years or whenever the mood strikes him to run for the presidency. Michael Bloomberg comes out of nowhere and decides he's now a Democrat. The same could be said for the Republicans and Donald Trump. Party affiliation shouldn't be a flag of convenience come election time.
Secondly, the entire candidate selection process seems to me to be completely backwards. Instead of the parties molding themselves to fit whichever candidate wins the most delegates, my feeling is that the party should put forward its mission and then the candidates should attempt to garner votes based on how they propose to implement that mission.
There doesn't seem to be a truly consistent party plan. It gets reinvented every election. Just look at the Republicans, they once promoted themselves as being the fiscally responsible party, that has gone out the window.
I also feel that a platform developed by the party and then adopted by the candidates would also lesson the cults of personality that we see develop around some candidates.
3
@Scott Stroud Bernie should be in the Socialist primary, I agree. I wrote my State DP just a while ago on that issue. Look up Democratic Socialist in the dictionary and it means Socialist. He doesn't believe in Capitalism. Well there are some of us that believe that government should be referee, welcome to the Social Democrats.... Amy, Pete and Elizabeth.
@Scott Stroud
Would you like Bernie to run as a independent or on the Green Party ticket.
That would be interesting.
It would fracture the Democratic Party, and enable a Trump victory.
You are going to be surprised to see just how many voters want Sanders, and his ideas
@Lucy Cooke I think he is already to a certain extent fracturing the Democratic party. But my major point is that if the party set its platform which candidates would then have to explain how they were going to enact, then non-party candidates such as Sanders would not run as a Democrats (or Republicans.)
Without the public notice that comes with being a candidate in a major party I don't think Sanders would have the following that he does.
Now if Bernie wants to change the direction that the Democratic party is going that's all well and good. But he should do it as a member of the party not as an every four years I'm running for president so being an independent isn't viable Democrat. If he eventually loses this run at the presidency he will go back to being an independent just like last time.
As my parents used to tell me, in or out make up your mind!
Many of appreciate a candidate whose views are unyielding. Flip-flopping is not a positive attribute. And it's nice to think that someone didn't need to spend decades as a Republican first to "evolve" their positions on what is right and wrong.
4
This debate began like the last one. The panel asking questions were responsible for creating the chaos of finger pointing and sparks flying that produce ratings.
The debate didn't really begin until the candidates were pressed on their agendas and were given the change to address real issues. Pundits were right to say that Sanders would get the most barb thrown his way. The questions at the beginning assured that outcome.
There were only a couple of candidates who acted like leaders. There were only a couple of candidates who were willing to talk about real issues. Sanders wasn't one of them. I'm trying to figure out how one can work on diplomacy, when one is adamant that their way is the only way forward. Seems to me we already have that type of attitude sitting in the chair in the Oval Office.
1
Yes, Sanders is consistent. And people voting for him can't say later that they "didn't know."
2
@R. Vasquez
So your looking for a jello candidate (like Trump) so when they do terrible things, you can disavow them?
That's how we got Trump.
6
@McGloin -I didn't say that. And I never liked Jello, even as a kid.
1
"Unyielding" Another (not) level and unbiased piece on Sanders by Ember. We should expect no less. Which of the four dimensions of Bernie's platform is a good one to 'yield' on? Shall we diminish Bernie's call for racial justice? How about his economic platform? Which goal do you want to come out against Mr. Ember? Is it now not clear that healthcare as a human right is not something to be yielded but rather fought for. it is now clear that even Bernie's plan for addressing the climate crisis may be too little too late. Bernie's social justice planks are already embedded in the platforms DEMS have had for years.
As for Bernie's "world view" (a term often used by those who imagine they have a more sophisticated understanding), Sanders has voted for interventions when the humanitarian need overrode concerns about imperialism and against them when they do not. Will you go on the record saying that this was unwise? - or that his ample record of speaking out on US foreign policy contains an uncanny and often solitary prescience regarding our major missteps? The term "unyielding" is meant to conjure an idea of a man who is inflexible in his governance. You are being misleading. It is his platform that he is rightfully not yielding. When it comes to presiding, Bernie will be quite capable of making political sausage, and Democrats being the political opportunists that they are, will work with him.
25
@Jeffrey
Yes. Warren watered down her Medicare for All proposal and dropped in polls by double digits within the week.
They want Sanders to do the same, but he won't.
6
If we elect Bernie Sanders as the Primary winner and the President, yes NOTHING will get done. The economy will be in a shambles and he'll get blamed. Then I see a rematch in 2024 with Trump. Trump wins...
Are we in a death spiral?
Can't anyone think and let emotions be aside?
4
@Chris Patrick Augustine
Hello. It was Obama's the Centrist that got nothing done, and gave us Trump.
Bernie says he will be the "organizer in chief," and go to the districts of Congress People that oppose his policies to put local pressure on them by talking directly with their constituents. Bernie understands how things really get done.
6
@McGloin
Bernie thinks that he knows how things really get done.
Vermont is not representative of the nation as a whole. I doubt that a majority of Brooklyn supports Bernie, except for your elitist, know-it-all corner of it.
Yeah - let’s re-elect Trump. What a great plan. The best candidate to beat Trump among the voices we have is Bernie.
The more pundits complain about Bernie, the more apt I am to vote for him.
42
Bernie Sanders strikes me as one of those people who’s convinced that he’s right, period. That he has the answers , period. If you don’t agree with him, you’re wrong, period.
This kind of hubris is seldom a trademark of an electable person. In some ways he’s a male version of Hillary...the smartest person in the room, knows it, and wants everyone else to know it. He’s also an ideologue; another trait of an unelectable.
I think that Sanders is much more concerned about convincing people that he’s got it right than in being elected himself. His hard headed “ I am right” approach guarantees four additional years of the creature called Trump.
5
@Patrick alexander
There is no evidence for that, other than Centrist Democrats keep saying it.
Bernie loosens to the people, not the pundits as donors, and that is why he is winning.
7
The reporters never ask whether they are judging Sanders by a different standard.
When Bloomberg says China needs to be worked with and that it has done some good things, that’s ok.
When President Obama gave a nuanced view of Cuban history, that was ok.
What’s particularly disgusting is that everyone who performs being “shocked, just shocked” knows very well that it is our policy towards Cuba that is stuck in the sixties.
They also know that Sanders has far more critical of Putin that President Trump. Is that not important?
Who is looking away from the dictatorial impulses of the Saudi regime: Sanders or others?
It is just so lazy to adopt and stick with the “Eek, socialism, we’re all going to die” framing. How about a little reporting that is genuinely probing?
44
Yes, I get it. The editorial board doesn’t like Sanders. He has his own ideas that don’t align with the preferred Democrat view. And more importantly, he is not Warren.
18
@Rock Winchester
The Editorial board doesn't like Warren either. They want Biden or Bloomberg.
Bernie/Warren!
4
@McGloin it endorsed warren/klobacher. I mean klobacher!
The editorial board literally endorsed Warren (and Klobuchar) for president.
Think about it this way. Bernie has gone on record thousands of times with the same message. He is surging in part because of his unwavering views. To start watering down his message/stump would be detrimental to his bid. The best strategy for him is to stay consistent and unapologetic. And when he faces Trump, the lying beast, he will look strong for his unwillingness to budge.
32
The primary contest reminds me of the old analogy of crabs trying to climb out of a bucket. Just as one is about to crawl out the others pull him back down.
Bernie's case is one where he has used strategy aligned with tactics that go back decades and tactically he's found his moment as well thanks to 48+ years of flat wages which no one else seemed to want to do anything about.
See graph 2 the alligator graph at bit.ly/EPI-study
So as the other dems attempt to pull him back down into the bucket his long term strategy is still likely to pull him out of it.
12
It is simply not believable that Senator Sanders does not know the impact of what he is saying on Cuba. So the question is why is he doing it ? Is it simply that he wants to be outrageous about some things just like Trump ? Is it that he thinks this sort of support would endear him to the American working class voter ? Or is it that he feels this would help energize latino voters in arizona, colorado, nevada in his favor ? Or is he just saying it like it is because he is confident he can win Florida ? There is no knowing what the real reasons are, but we hope and pray that there is a method to his madness !
@R Kapur
His oppenents went and found a statement from forty years ago that said Castro's education initiative was a good thing.
They thought they could get Bernie to denounce himself. Bernie doesn't have anything to apologize for, because he has integrity and character.
Anyone that thinks Saudi Arabia is our ally, but Cuba is our permanent enemy, needs to explain how beheading dissidents, assassinating a journalist from an American paper, causing a humanitarian disaster in Yemen, and being the leading exporter of terrorist propaganda to every continent is not worse than what Cuba does. Saudi citizens did 9/11, not Cubans.
20
@R Kapur Was Jill Biden out of her mind when she went to Cuba and praised the education system?
Sanders' opponents like to dredge up something he said some years ago and hang it on him like an albatross.
He defended himself well--good practise for when he faces the demented ire of Trump and his minions.
1
We the People are sick of politicians that wave in the political winds. We are sick of politicians that care more about what their donors want that what the people want.
Bernie knows that the point isn't to follow the shifting winds, but to be the harbor in the storm.
Bernie keeps trying to do the right thing whether it is popular or not, and that is why must Americans (who are not centrist Democrats) trust him.
Lincoln said that pubic opinion is everything, and those who can change pubic opinion will control the government. Centrist Democrats refuse to try to move pubic opinion. They keep following an illusive target, while Republicans never stop trying to move opinion, 24/7/365.
Trump will promise all things to all people while he governs like a king Centrists will promise to compromise with the Party of Trump.
Bernie actually promises to help workers with the things they need. Bernie will win.
20
As a Vermonter, I can tell you that Bernie's positions actually arise from listening closely to his constituents. He wears them as if they are his, but they are ours. If Bernie voted against certain gun control bills, it's because he was listening to how Vermonters wanted him to vote on those bills. Bernie listens very well to everybody. He just doesn't play fetch for the rich and powerful.
44
@Left out
Exactly.
Bernie knows that gun violence is a symptom of fat larger problems. Bernie focuses on the causes not the symptoms.
Bernie's record on guns makes it easier for Republicans to vote for him.
If you want to beat Trump, Bernie is your man.
7
@Left out
He has gotten almost nothing accomplished in his 30 years representing Vt.
Renaming four post offices is hardly adequate representation of constituents.
The man is living in a parallel universe, stuck in some hippie 60's dreamworld where the Revolution is just around the corner.
Reminds me of the Jehovah's witnesses saying that Armageddon is coming.
Truly pathetic.
And even more so if this non-Dem becomes our nominee.
Not only will he and his hoards of ignoramuses destroy our party but also condemn us to four more years of Trump and the loss of all our power as Dems.
6
@Simon Sez
"Simon says" tell the truth.
Bernie doesn't keep getting re-elected with 70% of the vote (which has to include Republicans and Independents) because he gets nothing accomplished.
Vermont is a rural state. Bernie knows how to talk to rural voters. You have a problem with rural states controlling the electoral college? Bernie is the solution.
5