The legacy of Bernie Bros will be…

This topic contains 90 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  Andrew 7 months, 1 week ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 91 total)
  • Author
  • #38204


    This whole “fuck the poor” thing you keep repeating is BS. Nobody here on the left is saying that or wanting that. Just another Nina Turner talking point.

    In fact, I think a lot of your talking points are crap. 140 million falling back? I doubt this stat. If so many are so economically distressed, why did they choose social issues over economic issues?

    Saying a majority of Americans are struggling is also BS. Not true. But feel free to keep repeating a falsehood.

    Fear, blame, and shame. KSKD’s favorite talking point of all.

    FEAR: Fear of Trump getting elected should have been more than enough motivation for any Bernie Bot to walk over hot coals to vote for Hillary. Everyone knew there was at least one SCOTUS spot awarded to the winner. Replacing a conservative with a liberal would have been a coup for any Bernie Bot. But no. Because Clinton didn’t whip out her kneepads and give KSKD the blowjob he expects to win a vote, we now have a solid 5 conservative justices on the court. Everything Bernie Bots support will be undone by the courts.

    BLAME: Bernie Bots are to blame for Clinton losing. Presidential elections are simple to the point it’s choice A or B. The differences between candidates couldn’t have been more stark, as we are seeing real time with everything Trump is doing.

    SHAME: I will shame Bernie Bots the rest of my life. You’re dickheadedness in the election has resulted in so much long term damage to the US I’m not certain we can ever recover.



    Show me the words written here about the plight of Labor.



    Tell us whether “labor” fairs better under GOP or Dem rules.

    If you actually cared about “labor” you would have done everything possible to make sure Trump lost.



    Missing: “Clinton is a neoliberal, from a long line of neoliberals, who happened to be the people who aren’t doing well for the majority of Americans. Neoliberal policies resulted in more Americans being at the poverty level.”

    Again – Democrats have been in complete control of Congress + White House for barely two years since 1994. And those two years were at the height of the financial crisis. Can’t put “neoliberal policies” into place if you aren’t in control most of the time – just like Bernie can’t put his policies into place if he’s not in control most of the time. But using your logic, we should blame him anyway, right?

    Republicans have had the House all but four years since 1994 and have had the Congress and WH for more than six years. They, not Democrats, have actually had the chance to put their policies into place.



    Ok you two, I have a little bit of time, so maybe I’ll try this another way:

    We, us, here are gonna largely be OK. The majority of us are in that third or so, maybe quarter, of the nation that isn’t in severe economic trouble. To us, this is major pain in social aspects, and it’s ugly economically, but not necessarily life changing.

    We can definitely say it’s better with Clinton. I could have said that, you all could too, mostly.

    Taken from that perspective, you make sense!

    But, what you completely fail to internalize is the perspective of someone who is in severe trouble. They aren’t seeing a doctor, can’t feed the kids, pay rent, and all that.

    Those things are true CLINTON OR TRUMP.

    They may be more true with TRUMP, and some of them see that, maybe a lot of them do. For sure, a bunch that I talked to do.

    Know what the number one thing said to me is?

    ANYONE BUT THE ESTABLISHMENT. Didn’t do shit for us our whole lives.

    Some variation on that.

    Know what the number two thing is?

    TRUMP will shake it up, and we need that.

    The key thing to understand is:

    Being better off isn’t necessarily BETTER. Large numbers of people heard that clown Trump shine them on about jobs, trade, other things.

    NO TPP was absolutely huge in the rust belt, for example, and so was re doing NAFTA. What did the left offer?

    Fuck, Obama was gung ho on TPP, get it done! While Clinton was trying to sell people on her opposition to “the current version” of TPP. It’s a load! Not even clear. Total sell job, but obvious.

    We lost on that shit alone, in those key States. Go visit there, ask some folks. I have. Trust me, they know she didn’t even visit, and thought that clown show was as laughable as watching Clinton get loaded into that van, side of beef, private position style was!

    Jesus, we sucked. No joke. I hate to say it.

    Amidst that kind of garbage, hey could not connect an actual BETTER, as in net gain, economic future to that Dem party vote. This is big. Real big. We lost potential voters here. Stay homes. Didn’t bother.

    And yeah, I know. Fuck them right? Well, here we are, and we have to live with Trump too. Seems to me, doing the work to attract those people, you know, actually represent them would work wonders for our lack of progress.

    How the fuck can we even have it if we aren’t actually about it? One does wonder.

    A whole lot of them went ahead and took the deal anyway, but they don’t like it. That wasn’t a positive vote. It was a coping vote.

    What fucked us on this, from the perspective of not having a mad carnival barker bigot for a President, is way too damn many didn’t take the deal. And yeah, that’s not a huge number, but it’s a growing one. And that, plus stay homes, those people we didn’t motivate, who don’t believe, who aren’t out there getting after it all add up to tepid, at best, performance and that 1000 seats down.

    And what is gonna fuck us, is they still are not going to take the deal, because the deal just sucks, and if it’s gonna suck, maybe it needs to really suck hard for everyone.

    That’s no joke. It’s real, and it’s out there, and it’s not trivial, nor shrinking. Say what you want, bitch all you want, it’s there, and no amount of that shit helps one lick. They just don’t care about that. They care about them, and theirs, and want something new, something that speaks to them, as they damn well should, being denied for decades now.

    In a lot of places, turnout was no where near capacity. Good levels, as a controversial election can do, but what could change a lot of things is no voters actually voting.

    Bernie turned a ton of those people out. The primaries, being closed, blunted how that all worked, but the numbers, the organizing, a whole lot of it was there.

    Positive politics.

    Explicit common, public good.

    The entire discussion here has been “yeah, but those stupid fucks could hurt less.”


    Our party doesn’t get this. I think it’s the money, and I also think it’s a sense of entitlement. Like, the GOP is bad, so fuck everything, vote for not as bad.

    I just put why that doesn’t fly so well anymore, and it’s a numbers game, flat out, and it’s also the idea of positive politics now being out there.

    Bernie did that, and I’m very glad he did.

    Now we have some choices to make.

    I think trying to sell people in real trouble, on the idea of being in less, but still trouble, while a few of us see real progress, and they might, some day, maybe, if, if, if, is a very hard sell.

    I don’t think that gets us what we need to really change things.

    And it hasn’t. Down a lot of seats, and lack of real change drives a lot of that.

    Now, those excuses…

    Yeah, the GOP has had the upper hand for quite some time. Totally get it. But the one time Dems got handed some real juice, it was tepid. Bankers didn’t get punished. The ACA is shit, compared to what is needed. And I could go on.

    I don’t want to hear a word about why, blah, blah, blah.

    You don’t have to sell me on all of that. I get it, but what you all need to really understand is way too many folks don’t give a fuck, they just want better, and they want something to vote for, explicit, aimed at them.

    We either figure out how to deliver that, or this will get ugly as hell, because we just won’t have the juice needed to prevail, and will be lucky as hell to have it enough to blunt some of the worst to come.

    If we botch it badly enough, Trump gets a two fer. That’s no real joke, and if it’s not him, it’s fucking Pence.

    Your perspective on this is out of touch. “Worse off” means very different things when put into the context of a potential future.

    Increasing numbers of people fucked isn’t a gain. It’s a decline, and being in the decline, seeing that no matter what it’s gonna continue to be a decline, does not make for a positive vote, and it just may mean a protest, negative, desperate, or even fuck you vote.

    And again, perspective is everything here.

    Say, just for shits and giggles, under Trump, we see another 40 million fall into poverty and or below, and under Clinton only 10 or maybe 15 million.

    Ok, if you aren’t in that ugly group, that’s a win right! But, if you are?

    Who gives a fuck! It’s still a major decline, and it’s still a dim future, being in that group means there isn’t anything to gain, only how much is lost.

    See the difference?

    And that is what happened. It’s not the Russians. It’s not fake news.

    It’s a numbers game. As the number of people fucked increases, that percentage that won’t have it does too, and now we are at the point where those numbers exceed election margins, and it’s a problem.

    Nobody gives a real fuck what we think. Seriously. As a demographic group, we aren’t in the mess, we aren’t in the real pain.

    And that’s why blame and shame fall so damn flat, and that’s why I won’t have one lick of it.

    Those people pissed off, acting out, organizing, running for office, doing all that they are doing, have every right to do all that stuff. It’s the political process and they don’t owe you, me, any of us the time of day.

    We can’t tell them what to do. I do not believe we can shame and fear and blame enough of them into some sort of compliance either.

    What we can do is attract them. And to do that, means a change in how Dems do things, and what being a Democrat actually means.

    So I’m there, all in on that shit.

    When I read things like, “I thought Clinton’s vision was best for the nation, where it needs to go.”


    No it’s actually not. It’s a less worse vision, but not a good vision, not something that is going to be a net gain for the majority of people who have been denied that since how long now?

    Too fucking long.

    So you can keep saying that shit. And it’s fine. Won’t tell you what to do.

    But don’t expect it to be heard or even respected by me. Old news, failed politics, not better, just less works, very highly expensive. And it sure as fuck isn’t going to work like you think it might either.

    That cost has accumulated to the point where doing that crap makes no future sense.

    There will be a new caucus after the mid-terms. People all over the place are organizing to make real change, and that means backing explicit good, net gain, actually reduce poverty type stuff.

    And they mean it.

    Think of it this way. They now are invested, gonna take the heat, gonna feel the worst from the ass in charge right now. Best make it worth it, and yes, that’s very high on the list of, “why?” answers I got.

    Last thing you should know.

    I really give a shit about this, have had hundreds of conversations now. Know people all over the damn place who also really give a shit.

    This won’t go away. The game is changing as you read this, and it’s going to be rough.

    The outcome could be pretty good, or very, very bad.

    It is very, very simple:

    The left either wins together, or loses together. And a win is gonna need to be about a net progress, gain, for all Americans, or we are gonna go down, divided, impotent.

    What’s worth what?



    And if an outside perspective helps, go look at the UK right now.

    Labour there is organizing in exactly the same wsy, and on very similar lines, with a few EU specifics, like Brexit and soverginty, national agency needed to diverge from Brussels and the neoliberal, austerity policy there. Looks a lot like ours.

    Scale helps, so it is somewhat quicker, like winning a big State is here, and how parliment works is in play too.

    May is on the ropes, resignations happening, wheeling and dealing to hold a government together kest they be forced into a genersl ekection labour would have a field day with, easily handing Corbyn the title of PM.

    (Sidebar: and isnt that cool? I wish!)

    System and scake differences aside, the overall thrust and strategy is basically what we are seeing here. As are the motivations.

    When I compare notes wirh my friends in the EU, Brits have a strong alignment with our struggle.

    One of the more interesting things said, that kind of sticks with me is our relative youth as a nation.

    Many outside the US are watching with great interest. It has been expressed as a sort of coming of age time. Generational shift, real trouble driving identity and really basic policy foundations.

    Who are we?

    Yeah, in a lot of ways, that is the debate. It is a lot of why the peimary discussion continues.

    Bernie vs Trump in that establishment referendum election = Bernie win, no real contest.

    He would have had a very potent slice of the anti establishment vote, and would have seated a cabinet very different from the norms.

    Building on that for explicit, common, public good, would have been just as hard as it is right now, under the mad carnival barking bigot, and as it would have been under Clinton, though that scenario may well have been helped by a better social base and for sure with the lack of bat shit global relations.

    And that is importsnt to note.

    It is hard period.

    The kind of hard, costs, risks vary, but the work doesn’t so much. Not at that basic economic identity level.

    Get angry!

    I am. No doubt. I hate this clown, and flat out fear the more competent Pence. Ugly. Impeach, don’t impeach. Different kinds of shitty either way.

    The left just needs seats right now, and a lot of them.

    Problem there is of course all I wrote. This does not go away. So we are hobbled at a time when we should and need to not be.

    In all fairness, just winning, blue no matter who does bring the potential to prevent some of the worst, potentially making other things more plausible.

    But too many are not on board, and it bouls down to basic economic identity, and repeated, teoud performance. Garbage like Dems actualky helping Trump with bi partisan votes? Why the fuck does anyone believe that makes sense?

    At least the GOP groked that. Stood firm, ultra firm on the ACA. Remarkable.


    Tell me another one. No joke.

    Anyway, that’s it. Real mess. Hard choices.

    High potentials though. If those choices make general sense for the left. All of it, not just the club, which is quite small now, mind you.



    Sounds like the “people” you are talking to are the kind that vote against their own best interests.

    60% of something is better than 100% of nothing. Looks to me like you Bernie Bots prefer a nothing burger.

    I’m a numbers guy, and I take the 60% anytime over nothing. Hopefully you don’t play poker.



    Missing: “But, what you completely fail to internalize is the perspective of someone who is in severe trouble. They aren’t seeing a doctor, can’t feed the kids, pay rent, and all that.

    Those things are true CLINTON OR TRUMP.”

    No, I “internalize” it just fine. I just don’t agree with them that it’s the SAME under a Clinton or a Trump.

    “They may be more true with TRUMP, and some of them see that, maybe a lot of them do. For sure, a bunch that I talked to do.

    Know what the number one thing said to me is?

    ANYONE BUT THE ESTABLISHMENT. Didn’t do shit for us our whole lives.”

    Well, that is an emotion-based response, not a logical response. Obama for example helped millions of people with Obamacare as well the 2009 stimulus that gave temporary tax breaks to millions of Americans, including the bottom earners. How many of these people claiming the government “didn’t do shit for us” even understand that?

    Further, it’s very sad that people blame the government for not doing “shit for us.” What ever happened to “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country????” Today, it seems too many people just want the government to do things for them. People who really need it – OF COURSE. Obamacare gave Medicaid insurance to millions of people who may never have had it (like my brother, who finally got live-saving surgery after decades of being insured and scraping by and just going to the ER and not being able to pay the bill whenever he got very sick). I know quite a few people who are working and got insurance maybe for the first time thanks to Obamacare – people barely making it.

    (You? Yes, I understand you weren’t helped by the ACA – it could have and should have been improved to help more people, but once Republicans took over, that was just not going to happen. The fact that it didn’t help you doesn’t mean it didn’t help millions of others, some of whom may not even be here today – like my brother – except for the ACA.)

    People who blame “the establishment” for not doing anything for them and want to vote for any non-establishment candidate are just poorly informed about how politics and government works. Gee, the Democrats had the White House and Congress for all of two years since 1994 – TIMES UP! If you couldn’t fix all my problems in two years, too bad – let’s get someone “anti-establishment” in there like Bernie Sanders who promises the moon to everyone – sure sounds good, why not? Why even bother to give the Democrats a chance to do it?



    Probably going to get ugly.


    Andy Brown

    It is already.



    Bernie Bots are basically modern day anarchists. They’d rather burn it down than achieve any sort of real gain.






    Who rhe fuck are you kidding?



    Careful, little bit too much of your entitlement is showing, people might tell.

    Clearly, you guys have no real idea what an anarchist is.

    I will add that to the list.



    Let me seriously understand this back-and-forth better. By most economic indices, Americans are better off in the past few years. So let’s stick with economics for a moment.

    And if you’re anti-capitalist, then no matter what I say will matter. For those who haven’t gone peak socialist (which is what Democrat leadership appears to be flirting with), this is for you.

    Fewer illegal aliens means all working class people (of whom I count myself) are safer from crime. This translates to lower costs for courts, insurance and law enforcement.

    American citizens can also expect to have higher wages due to less competition from people who cut in line and aren’t even supposed to be here, plus we also have more energy independence and unemployment is at serious new lows. This means less federal and state assistance, another economic plus.

    On top of that, the un-affordable ACA is being dismantled, with now a real opportunity looking forward of consumer choice and lower rates. I’m no fan of health insurance companies and many working class citizens were priced out of health insurance due to Obamacare.

    And given a recent SCOTUS decision, union workers who disagree with where some of their dues money goes will now also have a choice if they choose not to fund groups antithetical to their beliefs.

    Can you guys start to see how hewing consistently far left hasn’t been the best strategy? The public doesn’t seem to be with you. Now that executive orders are being reversed, wouldn’t it have been better to negotiate during the prior administration’s term, instead of petulantly trying to over ride the will of the people? Instead, you’ve lost more than 1,000 seats nationally and are now looking at a conservative SCOTUS.

    I never thought I’d say this, but Harry Reid’s decision on senate votes is perhaps the best thing he ever did for the nation. Thanks, Harry.



    I am not anti capitalist.

    Just want to clarify that. Nothing that appears here from me is anywhere near peak socialist, nor extreme left.

    A mixed, well managed economic policy incorporates markets, market rules, and public works of various kinds, ranging from self funded (users payl like the Post Office is, tax funded like fire nearly always is, etc.

    Democrat Socialists generally fall into the mixed model, and in the EU would be well aligned with social Democrats.

    New Deal type Democrats have considerable overlap, as do progressives.

    Anarchists, communists, and the like are not really part of the party reform, pro labor discussion happening in the US, serving largely as provocative, distractions, toxic.

    Herb, if you are to understand this better, the best way, in my opinion, is to draw the lines along pro corporate, neo liberal vs basically New Deal types struggling with party identity, and the root of all that is a steady increase in the percentage of people in poverty.

    Your statement, “no doubt better off economically”, is not one I would agree with, as only a minority of Americans can actually make that claim.

    The most common reason given for that scenario is income inequality, and or increases in productivity has not actuslly made it cheaper to live, given income and cost, risk exposure.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 91 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.