Sanders transforms into contender, still pitches revolution

[sgtsabai]

Agreed on the 2 woman ticket, bad move. I predict Clinton will offer Warren something to shut her up, Warren won't take it. Hopefully, and yes it is a hope, Clinton won't be offering anybody anything as she does not deserve to be the nominee, much less president. She has failed at everything, except protecting those that bought her and Bill.

[Publicus]

Agreed on the 2 woman ticket, bad move. I predict Clinton will offer Warren something to shut her up, Warren won't take it. Hopefully, and yes it is a hope, Clinton won't be offering anybody anything as she does not deserve to be the nominee, much less president. She has failed at everything, except protecting those that bought her and Bill.

HRC won't be offering Sen Warren anything nor would Sen Warren be interested in being an administrator whose boss would be the Potus.

The Massachusetts senator is in her early 60s and she has another two or three terms in the Senate to make her mark.

With 8-10 R incumbent senators up for reelection in Blue or swing states fleeing their party in what looks to be a D wave election year, both Sen Warren and Sen Sanders can be chairperson of whatever standing or select committee they wish, to raise holy hell come January and for the next several years.

A US Senator gets something no other elected official gets, which is a six year term with a committee chair that includes subpoena power, a staff and a budget, so the Senate is a great platform for anyone to have. Neither Liz nor Bernie is going to give that up with HRC as Potus. With the cleanup slugger Chuck Bruiser Schumer of NY as the new D leader in the Senate, come January the Senate is going to start rockin 'n rollin'. It's gonna be the new excellent place to be.

Edited April 22, 2016 by Publicus

[chuckd]

Look up the name Julian Castro as Clinton's choice for VP.

Bernie is toast.

[sgtsabai]

Julian Castro is the scum bag selling peoples homes out from under them. Much to the delight of the right wing, if Clinton is anointed empress by the corporate Democrats, they will lose the Senate, maybe even more seats there, they will lose more seats in the House. These would be won if Bernie was the nominee. Clinton is not only hated by the right wing, the left wing hates her also. Democrats just won't show up to vote because they see no reason, thus all the Senate/House victories will be lost. Clinton may not even be "elected" empress. Her unfavorable rankings rise every day among all voters. If she is the anointed one, there is all the reason in the world to believe she will do all in her power to stop Bernie and Warren from chairing any committee. Bruiser Schumer? That's a joke right? Just another corporate sell out.

[Jingthing]

Of course.

Julian Castro has been mentioned as a strong possibility for HRC's VP for year's now. Duh.

Here is the WAPO's current top 5 potential picks:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/04/22/5-people-hillary-clinton-might-pick-as-her-vice-president/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_fix-clinton-5-1210p%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

[Publicus]

Look up the name Julian Castro as Clinton's choice for VP.

Bernie is toast.

Sec of HUD Julian Castro is close to the Clintons as is his twin Joaquin who is elected to the US House from Texas.

Julian is the former mayor of San Antonio who was moved to HUD a couple of years ago to broaden his experience and to expose him in Washington to national issues, figures, programs and priorities.

He's a youngster who is a central part of the D party future so there has been talk for some time of his being HRC's vp, especially given that the Hispanic vote is the largest 'minority' vote in the country and that it will grow hugely larger over the next decade and after that.

He remains a major possibility to complement the D ticket headed by HRC.

As this poster had noted above, there are a lot of possibilities so no one should get too involved in considering any one or in dismissing any one. Julian Castro is not a news bulletin to a number of us.

Sen Tim Kaine is a new name floated in the public arena just very recently so giving that recent new development is the news here, not the long time story of Julian Castro.

[sgtsabai]

As I said, Castro is a sell out, selling peoples homes out from under them. He just might attract the ill-informed among the Hispanic voters. Being Hispanic, like being black (Obama), doesn't automatically make one a good guy. Clinton isn't there yet and all better hope she never is. Of course the worse alternative is any of the right wing wackos from the batshit crazy Republican side, but only by a very small step.

[Publicus]

I don't think Sanders would entertain any notion of being in the HRC administration. Sanders is a person of principle. He will not compromise those principles. HRC is a morally and ethically bankrupt person in my view. She is 'on the game' to coin a phrase used on the street. Sanders cannot reconcile being in her administration.

I'd be interested to see how he handles the delegates he has acquired along the way. If I were Sanders, I would not purposefully send them to Hillary. I'd make her beg! J/K Honestly, there is a great divide between the two and this a good chance to define a new 3rd party going forward. But if he throws in the towel like candidates have in the past it will be a missed opportunity.

With a 3rd party advancing along moral and ethical lines and representing the people then Warren will have a platform in 4 years.

Screw Jerry Brown. He voted to give fracking all the water they requested during the worst drought in a long time and cutting farmers.

this a good chance to define a new 3rd party going forward.

Not a chance.

Most of Bernie's supporters to include the large numbers he also gets at his rallies are political drifters -- tumbleweed.

They have no political base, no political loyalties, no coherent philosophy or ideology -- they think for instance Bernie is what he says he is, i.e., a socialist.

Bernie is not a socialist and one can only hope Bernie himself knows it.

The great majority of Bernie's supporters have no inclination to organise or set up the structure of a new political party. It is hard work that is detailed and demanding, in your community and in your state, not to mention nationally.

Establishing a new political party requires commitment. Some of his supporters would be open to it and would apply themselves with a dedication. However, they and their efforts would not be enough. Not by a long shot. If some of 'em would be satisfied to have a tiny new, sort of a political party of the way out left they would of course be free to proceed.

Bernie will meanwhile be quite busy in the Senate come January in pursuing his agenda as he's presented it during the campaign. He'll have an unprecedented audience for his notions, values, priorities and no time to try to lead in, or to assist in setting up a new political party.

Bernie's not talking about any such effort and one should doubt he'd actually think along those lines. He's got a full time job in the Senate to change American come January.

[sgtsabai]

Ahem, no desire to organize etc. And just where the hell did Bernie's organization come from, super pacs, DNC, rich folks? I don't think so. Yes Bernie is not a socialist, he says democratic socialist and you know it. He channels FDR and the New Deal, which the Democrat Party has done it's best to destroy. Do you not hear what he says, this is not about him, but starting a political revolution to save our country. Bernie just may be quite busy in the White House but one way or the other, he will be working to continue what he has started which is America's only hope. Oh, I'm not a true believer, but I have hope the revolution which is way past due will be his way, I know the other way and nobody wins and one of the two will surely come this time around.

[boomerangutang]

On a side note: I just got my absentee ballot for California. Their primary is June 7, the most delegate-rich state in the union. There are actually seven names on just the Democratic slate. ....and 34 names (!) for US Senate seats (not Boxer or Feinstein this time) - all parties .

Of the two ballot initiatives, here's Measure W: Shall an ordinance be adopted which (a) bans outdoor cultivation, commercial cultivation and other cannabis activities, ( limits indoor cultivation to 12 plants per parcel in residential and rural areas, © prohibits indoor marijuana cultivation in unpermitted structures and areas used or intended for human occupancy, and (d) allows marijuana cultivation only by qualified patients and primary caregivers and only for medicinal purposes? Yes or No.

It sounds like anti-pot people are trying to weaken the recently-passed legalization allowing pot growing in California. One of the good things about the current law is it enables nearly anyone to grow up to 99 plants. It takes power away from businesses conglomerates, so it bugs the crap out of businesses (including Big Pharma) - who want to corner the market and exclude others from providing products. That's why a related proposal in Ohio lost in a recent election.

Ohio powers-that-be including Kasich, who are against pot but couldn't help acknowledging the majority of Ohioans wanted to grow/smoke pot, worded the Ohio measure to specify only 8 entities could grow the stuff, and the 8 permits would be auctioned off. Ohio residents, who aren't complete dummies, realized the bill was written to pad the wallets of 8 rich entities and therefore forbid regular people from growing pot. The bill was defeated. News reporters thought it was a vote against pot. It wasn't. It was a vote against a few rich people monopolizing pot growing (Trump would have backed that flawed bill also). When Ohio votes again, that stupid provision won't be there, and the bill will pass. No dowtabowtit.

[Boon Mee]

These Socialist Paradises like Venezuela where they cut electricity for 4 hours per day. That is Sanders dream of a Workers Paradise?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36108295

[Credo]

These Socialist Paradises like Venezuela where they cut electricity for 4 hours per day. That is Sanders dream of a Workers Paradise?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36108295

I am pretty sure those electricity cuts are caused by a drought. Something politicians have little control over.

[boomerangutang]

Yea, Sanders seeks power black-outs. He also likes head lice, dirty dishes, dogs barking all night, and kids who yell orders at their parents.

[up2u2]

Yea, Sanders seeks power black-outs. He also likes head lice, dirty dishes, dogs barking all night, and kids who yell orders at their parents.

You forgot Bernie likes a little free commune hippy lovin boomer. How good were the 70's man. lol

[up2u2]

These Socialist Paradises like Venezuela where they cut electricity for 4 hours per day. That is Sanders dream of a Workers Paradise?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36108295

This gets a little tiresome. Bernie is not advocating a Socialist Government so it is pretty foolish to compare Venezuela.

Hardly a 'Worker's Paradise' just a fairer worker representation on wage negotiations and a fairer distribution of productivity gains to the worker who actually generate the profits within a Corporation.

As America clearly demonstrates if a Nation does not have fair worker representation the Middle Class is wiped out and the wealth is concentrated with a few 1% of the population. I can map out what occurs when 99% of a population is impoverished and an elite few 1% control all the wealth if you like. I'll give you a tip it doesn't turn out to well for the greedy few.

[sgtsabai]

As a side note, I believe Calif. will go for Bernie and for Pot, as it should. It is way past time to stop the racist "war on drugs". BTW, I stopped smoking before most started way back in 70 when I almost lost a street fight to the light heavyweight Golden Gloves regional champ. I couldn't stop laughing at him. The 70's were great although I had little use for commune types. I was too busy trying to stop the Nixon regime and the illegal, immoral American War in SE Asia. No HIV, no real worries, and yea plenty of very "free" ladies. As a bouncer in a couple of biker type bars, ladies love outlaws, I did well...lol. I'm sure Bernie remembers well, more than can be said for any of the others and certainly the right wing posters on TV. No Bernie does not advocate a "socialist" government. He advocates a return to the New Deal. Jeez right wingers do a little research, ahem bratbart, faux (not the) news, Limbaugh, O'Reilly etc. are not research. Compare Bernie's policies to those of FDR and you will see what I mean.

[Jingthing]

Bernie lost.

The question now is what (if anything) the many passionate Bernie supports might get out this campaign.

Best of luck because some of of his positions are definitely worthwhile.

[sgtsabai]

Bernie has not lost. The fat lady ain't even warmin' up. One way or the other, Bernie supporters will get what they make. They can and will continue the hard work to put America back on the correct track. The Republicans and Hillary will fight them tooth and nail if she wins. Like I said, it ain't over until it's over. This I guarantee, if Clinton wins those that supported her are going to be very, very disappointed. Think Obama was the Manchurian President, you ain't seen nuttin' yet.

[Jingthing]

On the other hand as expectations are generally low she won't have to do much to beat them. Dudes this will be a classic hold your nose general election. Hillary will be less smelly than Trump or Cruz and most Bernies will come around to that too.

[sgtsabai]

I'm afraid they won't. Hillary's anointment by the corporate DNC will result in a very low Democrat turnout in the general and the loss of the Senate again and still more seats in the house. Maybe even a no coronation of the empress after the general. Many just won't fight the voter suppression to go to the polls to only vote for the Senate/House etc. as they won't vote for Hillary. As I've said, my vote will go to Jill Stein if Clinton is anointed. I'm tired of voting for the lessor of two evils and Clinton barely makes the cut for lessor. Even worse than Obama.

[sgtsabai]

A comparison between the would be empress and Bernie: http://www.foreignpolicy-info.com/

[boomerangutang]

I'm afraid they won't. Hillary's anointment by the corporate DNC will result in a very low Democrat turnout in the general and the loss of the Senate again and still more seats in the house. Maybe even a no coronation of the empress after the general. Many just won't fight the voter suppression to go to the polls to only vote for the Senate/House etc. as they won't vote for Hillary. As I've said, my vote will go to Jill Stein if Clinton is anointed. I'm tired of voting for the lessor of two evils and Clinton barely makes the cut for lessor. Even worse than Obama.

I agree with much of what you opine, but I don't agree with the above. Because of the 3 ring circus this primary cycle has been, a lot of regular voters will vote - people who don't ordinarily get off their 3 ft wide butts. Just because there are some rabid Hillary haters amongst us, doesn't mean everyone thinks she's an ogre. The Dems will get a good turn-out on Nov 8, Most Bernie supporters will vote for HRC, and the Dems will gain Congressional seats. I already voted absentee for California's primary.

And that Clinton poster, above, is in bad taste and not witty. Reps are bereft in the wit dept. which partially explains why none of the popular political satire talking heads are right wingers. They're all lefties.

[sgtsabai]

Many are like you, hence their support for holding their noses and voting for Clinton from the git-go. That and being fooled by her supposed "electability". I just can't see that happening with Bernie supporters or independents. While I don't think they will vote for any of the right wing wackos, Clinton is just right wing, but not a wacko, they just won't show up. Frankly if I was in the states I probably wouldn't either as my state, Texass has enacted a terrible voter suppression law, thank you "gang of 5" now minus one, yea. I will vote absentee as always so I will vote a protest vote against all Republican right wing wackos. Texass lost it's collective mind with election of Bush to any office. Yea, bad taste, but I like it...lol. Clinton is in bad taste and is bad for America and bad for the world. She will immediately renege on all her populist moves to the center.

[sgtsabai]

A bit more of the Bernie Clinton difference: http://www.nationofchange.org/news/2016/04/21/free-college-worked-us-100-years-elite-took-away/ https://theintercept.com/2016/04/14/to-protect-clinton-democrats-wage-war-on-their-own-core-citizens-united-argument/

[sgtsabai]

OK, didn't quite work and I think this is the more important. So you don't have to cut and paste: https://theintercept.com/2016/04/14/to-protect-clinton-democrats-wage-war-on-their-own-core-citizens-united-argument/

[sirineou]

Many are like you, hence their support for holding their noses and voting for Clinton from the git-go. That and being fooled by her supposed "electability". I just can't see that happening with Bernie supporters or independents. While I don't think they will vote for any of the right wing wackos, Clinton is just right wing, but not a wacko, they just won't show up. Frankly if I was in the states I probably wouldn't either as my state, Texass has enacted a terrible voter suppression law, thank you "gang of 5" now minus one, yea. I will vote absentee as always so I will vote a protest vote against all Republican right wing wackos. Texass lost it's collective mind with election of Bush to any office. Yea, bad taste, but I like it...lol. Clinton is in bad taste and is bad for America and bad for the world. She will immediately renege on all her populist moves to the center.

Originally I was of the opinion that in the end if Hillary was the nominee , to prevent Trump , I would Hold my nose and vote for her.

Not any more, It seems that every cycle we are given a Terrible choice and a very very bad choice, and we are told that we cant allow the Very Very Bad choice to win , and we should vote for the Terrible.

The result less and less people voting each election cycle. and the people getting screwed with bad representatives.

If Sanders does not gain the nomination, this general election I am voting for non of the above and let the chips fall where they may. Perhaps if nobody voted they might get the message, but at the very least the could not claim that they were democratically elected and are representing the people.

I dont want the dragon lady going to Washington and saying that she has my support for what she does. NOT ON MY NAME should be the new mantra.

[helpisgood]

OK, didn't quite work and I think this is the more important. So you don't have to cut and paste: https://theintercept.com/2016/04/14/to-protect-clinton-democrats-wage-war-on-their-own-core-citizens-united-argument/

Great article, Sarge! Greenwald, the author, is a smart guy.

I think an important point was made in the quoted dissent from Justice Stevens in the Citizens United case.

Maybe you've seen this before (and I have), but your Greenwald article refers and links to this interview of Eliz. Warren that illustrates the corrupting influence Greenwald is discussing:

[sgtsabai]

Great interview. I had read the transcript. And some people actually think Warren would accept a position from her, give me a break. I don't like the fact that Warren has not come out in support of Bernie, hedging her bets, but accept a position offered by Clinton, oh I think not. Clinton's favorables continue to sink. Ridin' that Clinton train, full speed ahead, I see trouble ahead.

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/print/hillary_clintons_image_among_democrats_reaches_new_low_20160423

http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/190787/clinton-image-among-democrats-new-low.aspx?g_source=ELECTION_2016&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles

[metisdead]

An off topic post was removed.

[helpisgood]

Great interview. I had read the transcript. And some people actually think Warren would accept a position from her, give me a break. I don't like the fact that Warren has not come out in support of Bernie, hedging her bets, but accept a position offered by Clinton, oh I think not. Clinton's favorables continue to sink. Ridin' that Clinton train, full speed ahead, I see trouble ahead. http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/print/hillary_clintons_image_among_democrats_reaches_new_low_20160423 http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/190787/clinton-image-among-democrats-new-low.aspx?g_source=ELECTION_2016&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles

Those Gallup polls are interesting. No surprise that Trump has a low net favorable rating, but Cruz and Clinton have both seriously plunged recently.

As the media pundits have been fond of saying lately, it's looking like we'll have a general election between the two most unfavorable candidates in a long time.

I wonder how that compares with 1968. Nixon had his supporters, but I think those who did not support him felt strongly about it. There was "Tricky Dick" and "The Pink Lady" (I think even Ike couldn't stand him.). Humphrey would probably not normally have been seen so unfavorably, but that riotous convention and the fact that he was more the choice of the party leaders rather than of the well-publicized primaries didn't help him. And then there's the third-party candidate, George Wallace. It's pretty obvious why he would get a significant unfavorable rating.

"Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio?"