Bernie Sanders: ‘The Current Model of the Democratic Party Obviously Is Not Working’

B

Bill

Malarkeyville
After pushing back against Hillary Clinton‘s claim about his support for her in 2016, Bernie Sanders criticized the Democratic party at large on Meet the Press this morning.

Clinton has made a point of saying that Sanders is not a Democrat and doesn’t even ID as one.

Sanders told Chuck Todd, “The current model of the Democratic party obviously is not working. Republicans control the House, the Senate, they control the White House, they control two-thirds of the governors’ offices.”

He said Democrats should do more to reach out to independents.

Watch above, via NBC.
 
Bill said:
After pushing back against Hillary Clinton‘s claim about his support for her in 2016, Bernie Sanders criticized the Democratic party at large on Meet the Press this morning.

Clinton has made a point of saying that Sanders is not a Democrat and doesn’t even ID as one.

Sanders told Chuck Todd, “The current model of the Democratic party obviously is not working. Republicans control the House, the Senate, they control the White House, they control two-thirds of the governors’ offices.”

He said Democrats should do more to reach out to independents.

Watch above, via NBC.
Click to expand...
Like what?
"Independents" generally are independent thinkers. Dems want to control as many aspects of people's personal lives as possible.
 
Last edited:
Bill said:
After pushing back against Hillary Clinton‘s claim about his support for her in 2016, Bernie Sanders criticized the Democratic party at large on Meet the Press this morning.

Clinton has made a point of saying that Sanders is not a Democrat and doesn’t even ID as one.

Sanders told Chuck Todd, “The current model of the Democratic party obviously is not working. Republicans control the House, the Senate, they control the White House, they control two-thirds of the governors’ offices.”

He said Democrats should do more to reach out to independents.

Watch above, via NBC.
Click to expand...

Why are democrats listening to someone who rejects the Democratic Party telling them what they should do?

It's not working because democrats didn't elect him president?

What exactly has independents like him ever accomplished?

How do you align and lead a party of independents whose values are all over the place?
 
blackascoal said:
Why are democrats listening to someone who rejects the Democratic Party telling them what they should do?

It's not working because democrats didn't elect him president?

What exactly has independents like him ever accomplished?

How do you align and lead a party of independents whose values are all over the place?
Click to expand...

Independents like him, & YOU have a lot to offer... He addressed being a member of that party in the 1 min video...

As he said, the gop has the house, the senate, the wht house & 2/3 of the governorships in the country~the dem party needs to do something, & being more inviting to indies should certainly be part of the IMHO....
 
blackascoal said:
Why are democrats listening to someone who rejects the Democratic Party telling them what they should do?

It's not working because democrats didn't elect him president?

What exactly has independents like him ever accomplished?

How do you align and lead a party of independents whose values are all over the place?
Click to expand...
Certainly true in my case. I'm for strict gun control, Austrian economics, pro choice, rewarding personal responsibility, penalizing personal irresponsibility, pared down military (especially the army), low taxes, secular govt., tort reform, etc., etc.
 
Bill said:
Independents like him, & YOU have a lot to offer... He addressed being a member of that party in the 1 min video...

As he said, the gop has the house, the senate, the wht house & 2/3 of the governorships in the country~the dem party needs to do something, & being more inviting to indies should certainly be part of the IMHO....
Click to expand...

Here's the lesson of 2016 good brother .. there are only two political parties in the United States. All else is an illusion.

2016 meant that I no longer had the luxury of being independent. Certainly I can, and do, think independently, but I can not be politically effect unless I chose a side .. as imperfect as that side may be.

Attraction to the Democratic Party should come from attraction to the ideals, policies, and successes it espouses .. not because we need independents to win. That sets democrats up for the same ideological failures that now plagues the Republican Party which is now so dependent on racists that they can't get rid of them.

Either stand for something, or fall for anything.
 
aloysious said:
Certainly true in my case. I'm for strict gun control, Austrian economics, pro choice, rewarding personal responsibility, penalizing personal irresponsibility, pared down military (especially the army), low taxes, secular govt., tort reform, etc., etc.
Click to expand...

:0) You would certainly be the model for that argument brother.
 
blackascoal said:
Why are democrats listening to someone who rejects the Democratic Party telling them what they should do?

It's not working because democrats didn't elect him president?

What exactly has independents like him ever accomplished?

How do you align and lead a party of independents whose values are all over the place?
Click to expand...

Because Sanders is right, and because the Democratic party conspired against him, and because the Democratic party is currently the party of losers, like you and your racist family are all losers
 
the reality is many millennials are choosing to remain independent; that doesn't mean they can't be partisan and vote for one party but they clearly aren't just picking a side saying my party ride or die
 
cawacko said:
the reality is many millennials are choosing to remain independent; that doesn't mean they can't be partisan and vote for one party but they clearly aren't just picking a side saying my party ride or die
Click to expand...

When I was their age, I was as politically naïve as they are.

That being said, most of them lean left.
 
blackascoal said:
Here's the lesson of 2016 good brother .. there are only two political parties in the United States. All else is an illusion.

2016 meant that I no longer had the luxury of being independent. Certainly I can, and do, think independently, but I can not be politically effect unless I chose a side .. as imperfect as that side may be.

Attraction to the Democratic Party should come from attraction to the ideals, policies, and successes it espouses .. not because we need independents to win. That sets democrats up for the same ideological failures that now plagues the Republican Party which is now so dependent on racists that they can't get rid of them.

Either stand for something, or fall for anything.
Click to expand...

There are just two effective political parties today, but independents and lesser parties do play a role, if it weren't for Sanders, an independent, the topic of single payer insurance wouldn't even be discussed as a topic today

Third parties have always played a role, actually the innovators of new ideas, which if credible, the major parties quickly absorb.

We just don't have ideological parties as those nations with parliamentary governments do, parties may lean in a certain direction at a given point in time, but as we have seen, even this direction can take a 180 turn
 
archives said:
There are just two effective political parties today, but independents and lesser parties do play a role, if it weren't for Sanders, an independent, the topic of single payer insurance wouldn't even be discussed as a topic today

Third parties have always played a role, actually the innovators of new ideas, which if credible, the major parties quickly absorb.

We just don't have ideological parties as those nations with parliamentary governments do, parties may lean in a certain direction at a given point in time, but as we have seen, even this direction can take a 180 turn
Click to expand...

Much respect for you brother, but the issue of single-payer was discussed before and during the 'debate' over Obamacare. The time to pass SP was then, when democrats controlled the House and I believe the Senate. Democrats and Obama wimped out, choosing the plan crafted by the uber-conservative Heritage Foundation instead.

If 'influencing' the DNC or RNC is what a voter is after, then a 3rd party might make a wise choice. But, if influencing the government is what a voter is after, there are only two parties to choose from.

I say that as someone who spent many years wasting time looking for moral victories instead of political ones.
 
blackascoal said:
Much respect for you brother, but the issue of single-payer was discussed before and during the 'debate' over Obamacare. The time to pass SP was then, when democrats controlled the House and I believe the Senate. Democrats and Obama wimped out, choosing the plan crafted by the uber-conservative Heritage Foundation instead.

If 'influencing' the DNC or RNC is what a voter is after, then a 3rd party might make a wise choice. But, if influencing the government is what a voter is after, there are only two parties to choose from.

I say that as someone who spent many years wasting time looking for moral victories instead of political ones.
Click to expand...
Yep, they trusted they could do it in stages, improve as you go, and they did screw up.
 
blackascoal said:
Much respect for you brother, but the issue of single-payer was discussed before and during the 'debate' over Obamacare. The time to pass SP was then, when democrats controlled the House and I believe the Senate. Democrats and Obama wimped out, choosing the plan crafted by the uber-conservative Heritage Foundation instead.

If 'influencing' the DNC or RNC is what a voter is after, then a 3rd party might make a wise choice. But, if influencing the government is what a voter is after, there are only two parties to choose from.

I say that as someone who spent many years wasting time looking for moral victories instead of political ones.
Click to expand...

That statement really makes one stop and think. A powerful statement. Like it.
 
blackascoal said:
Much respect for you brother, but the issue of single-payer was discussed before and during the 'debate' over Obamacare. The time to pass SP was then, when democrats controlled the House and I believe the Senate. Democrats and Obama wimped out, choosing the plan crafted by the uber-conservative Heritage Foundation instead.

If 'influencing' the DNC or RNC is what a voter is after, then a 3rd party might make a wise choice. But, if influencing the government is what a voter is after, there are only two parties to choose from.

I say that as someone who spent many years wasting time looking for moral victories instead of political ones.
Click to expand...

That statement really makes one stop and think. A powerful statement. Like it.
 
Obama /Clinton era did not talk to middle class, and specifically alienated white guys..

I didn't pay it too much mind under Obama -but when Clinton basically wrote off the white guys vote
( being as I despise her, I paid paid increasingly more attention to the skank) - I have to admit my feeling
became "screw them"... I'm now actively opposed to them as long as they are PC driven cultists
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top