Sanders transforms into contender, still pitches revolution

[Jingthing]

I am hoping that some of Sanders ideas on education and health care can be integrated into the Clinton campaign agenda. Compromised of course. That's politics. But the Sanders movement deserves something for it's success, which was short of winning, but still impressive, and yes Clinton will want a significant percentage of Sanders supporters to help defeat the vile monster. Those who are ideological purists, too bad, that's not the real world, in the USA, or anywhere.

This is why Bernie is asking for some of his supporters to be on committee to draft platform... So far no agreement to allow this

I hope DNC will reconsider

He will get some input for sure.

But if the convention becomes a major battle about Israel with the Sander's people pushing too much, it's a gift to the vile monster.

Sanders supporters insist they are seeking real change, not an embarrassing row. But a DNC source, who citing the party’s policy of neutrality toward candidates would not speak on record, expressed concern that Sanders, the ultimate outsider, may not care about the party’s image or the need for a smooth convention. “He doesn’t owe the party anything and he’s not going to run again,” the source said.

Sanders’ supporters believe he can make it happen, and that there might be a real chance the word “occupation” will be included in the Democratic platform.

“Inshallah,” said Zogby. God willing.

http://forward.com/news/national/341332/will-bernie-sanders-ignite-israel-feud-at-democratic-convention/

Edited June 4, 2016 by Jingthing

[NumbNut]

I am hoping that some of Sanders ideas on education and health care can be integrated into the Clinton campaign agenda. Compromised of course. That's politics. But the Sanders movement deserves something for it's success, which was short of winning, but still impressive, and yes Clinton will want a significant percentage of Sanders supporters to help defeat the vile monster. Those who are ideological purists, too bad, that's not the real world, in the USA, or anywhere.

I know where you're coming from Jings, but I feel education (and universal health care to as you mention) are just too important to compromise on. Solidarity, brothers!

Nothing lifts people out of poverty more affectively then an education that is appropriate for the individual involved. As up2 has mentioned in previous posts, if an individual reaches his potential your entire country benefits. This is not a zero sum game, far from it! EVERYONE wins.

You say ideological purists aren't from the real world, maybe true in some respects, but can't we dream? Can't we try for the stars? Can't we hope for a better future for all of us, black white and brindle, and not just for the 1%ers?

Everyone wins in a true meritocracy

[Jingthing]

Rather half a loaf than nothing. That works for any party or ideology.

Edited June 4, 2016 by Jingthing

[ttthailand]

There actually was a lot of political debate between Clinton and Sanders over education costs. Clinton, as is her style, favored a more moderate approach as she does not believe what Sanders favors has any REALISTIC chance of being passed into law. That was really the core of that contest. Clinton won. More votes by far. More delegates by far. The democratic party has spoken. Our nominee to run against the vile monster is going to be: Hillary Rodham Clinton.

what are you and others like you afraid of ? Why can't you wait until the end of the race and not jump to conclusions ? Hillary could get indicted, hit by a bus, or perhaps Bernie will beat her by a HUGE margin in the next few states. It's not over until fat Hillary sings and that will be at the convention and not before.

[Boon Mee]

NO WONDER SANDERNISTAS WANT FREE STUFF

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/06/no-wonder-sandernistas-want-free-stuff.php

"What do we want?" "We want more free stuff, Now!"

[Jingthing]

Because if you don't see that Hillary Clinton will definitely be the nominee, it's unhealthy DENIAL. Best to accept the situation and make the most of it.

[Usernames]

Because if you don't see that Hillary Clinton will definitely be the nominee, it's unhealthy DENIAL. Best to accept the situation and make the most of it.

You make Hillary sound like the Borg Queen. I think you're finally on to something.

[Jingthing]

Because if you don't see that Hillary Clinton will definitely be the nominee, it's unhealthy DENIAL. Best to accept the situation and make the most of it.

You make Hillary sound like the Borg Queen. I think you're finally on to something.

No. It's numbers. Hillary is easily on track to get the numbers even without even ONE super delegate. So that super delegate crutch complaint (it's so unfair! ) has basically become irrelevant.

Sander's people believe in the will of the people? Great. Hillary Clinton has already gotten MILLIONS of more votes than Sanders and there is ZERO chance Sanders will have a majority at the end of this. In other words ... GET OVER IT.

Edited June 4, 2016 by Jingthing

[jmd8800]

Another example of American politics today. No discussions. Everything is binary. For or against. Yes or no. Red / Blue. Socialist / Capitalist. rugged individualism or we are all in this together. Nobody can take the ball and run with it to see where it takes us.

Bernie says free education.

Right wing says NO. (I used right wing saying NO as it is more common..but the left dos this as well.)

End of story. No discussion about how to make education affordable. No discussion to find a resolve to the problem.

Some states do as Texas does and have Tuition Equalization Grants, which are piped directly into private schools and private schools only. They are a grant, not a loan and serve to lower costs for any qualifying student. Not sure I actually like the idea of taxpayers subsidizing private schools in such a direct manner. BTW, an enormous part of the problem in tuition is the skyrocketing level of faculty salaries. If the kids want some of their money back, they ought to ask the guys at the lectern.

Your point is well taken. And a good example of starting a discussion rather than just saying yes or no.

I read somewhere that over the last 30 years university costs have gone up 1100+ percent in the last 30 years. You mention those at the lectern, but I'd venture to say the increase in costs has more to do with administration overload and building new buildings. I know So Cal had a huge building boom on univ /college campuses in the last 20 years. I doubt that was really needed because student enrollment didn't increase on par with the building boom. Professors (those at the lectern) are paid quite well if they are 'rock star' status, but there are fewer and fewer of them. Universities are relying on adjunct professors a lot more today. Low salary, no benefits etc.

Not long ago one of the champion issues of the Republican party was the use of school vouchers. Some of the proposed ideas would have allowed using the vouchers at private institutions.I agree with you on subsidizing private schools.

Funds for new buildings in some states are usually raised through sources different than faculty wages, and in some cases the building funds can only be used for building thus creating more facilities than are necessary. BTW in Texas, you can go online and see the salary of every person working at a public university. It's part of the line item budgeting. Where I once taught, non-tenured Sr. Lecturers now get $75,000 per year. Tenured faculty average around $160,000 per year. Less than 20 years ago, Sr. Lecturers received about $38,000/year and tenured faculty around $76,000. So, they have doubled while the salaries of students and their parents have stagnated or declined.

That is awesome that the state publishes salary and hopefully all other details in the running of state institutions. Transparency is clearly needed in the absence of trust. Transparency helps voter make decisions. After Bush/Cheney 'secrecy' gov't .... Obama promised to change that ..but effectively Obama made it worse.

$160,000 is a lot more than I would have guessed. One of my childhood friends is the upper parts of Ohio State Univ. medical field and makes a little over $100K

My father retired as a research professor in the field of education and his salary was $36,000 per year (plus healthcare and retirement benefits) in 1982. He wrote or co-authored several books but royalties were not big then even if the books were successful. By contrast to his salary a local successful GP doctor's son told me his father made a little less than $80,000 per year in 1982. This is in the midwest.

As for buildings I think what happens is usually a combination of taxpayer dollars and money from an endowment and that endowment usually has some strings attached.

[Boon Mee]

I am hoping that some of Sanders ideas on education and health care can be integrated into the Clinton campaign agenda. Compromised of course. That's politics. But the Sanders movement deserves something for it's success, which was short of winning, but still impressive, and yes Clinton will want a significant percentage of Sanders supporters to help defeat the vile monster. Those who are ideological purists, too bad, that's not the real world, in the USA, or anywhere.

Living in a dream world there Jing.

Let me be the first to congratulate you on changing that horrible avatar you've had for too long!

Even Crooked Hillary is an improvement over that last one!

[ttthailand]

Because if you don't see that Hillary Clinton will definitely be the nominee, it's unhealthy DENIAL. Best to accept the situation and make the most of it.

You make Hillary sound like the Borg Queen. I think you're finally on to something.

No. It's numbers. Hillary is easily on track to get the numbers even without even ONE super delegate. So that super delegate crutch complaint (it's so unfair! ) has basically become irrelevant.

Sander's people believe in the will of the people? Great. Hillary Clinton has already gotten MILLIONS of more votes than Sanders and there is ZERO chance Sanders will have a majority at the end of this. In other words ... GET OVER IT.

Hillary will get enough delegates without super delegates to win, now you are dreaming !!!

And as far as the vote, don't forget about all the caucuses that Bernie won. There is no vote count added to the figure you speak of from the Caucuses. In addition, what about all the votes that were deleted or not counted in many states ? And lastly, don't forget that California, the largest state has not voted yet and Bernie has just pulled ahead in the polls.

Don't believe the media as they have been pushing for Hillary since the beginning. Bernie is going to win the nomination and the Clinton camp knows it and is trying everything possible to get him to quit before he wins.

Talking about numbers, if Bernie wins Calf. with 60% he will gain over 200 delegates more than Hillary in just that one state.... There is still time and I don't give up so easy.... Go Bernie !

Edited June 4, 2016 by ttthailand

[Usernames]

Some states do as Texas does and have Tuition Equalization Grants, which are piped directly into private schools and private schools only. They are a grant, not a loan and serve to lower costs for any qualifying student. Not sure I actually like the idea of taxpayers subsidizing private schools in such a direct manner. BTW, an enormous part of the problem in tuition is the skyrocketing level of faculty salaries. If the kids want some of their money back, they ought to ask the guys at the lectern.

Your point is well taken. And a good example of starting a discussion rather than just saying yes or no.

I read somewhere that over the last 30 years university costs have gone up 1100+ percent in the last 30 years. You mention those at the lectern, but I'd venture to say the increase in costs has more to do with administration overload and building new buildings. I know So Cal had a huge building boom on univ /college campuses in the last 20 years. I doubt that was really needed because student enrollment didn't increase on par with the building boom. Professors (those at the lectern) are paid quite well if they are 'rock star' status, but there are fewer and fewer of them. Universities are relying on adjunct professors a lot more today. Low salary, no benefits etc.

Not long ago one of the champion issues of the Republican party was the use of school vouchers. Some of the proposed ideas would have allowed using the vouchers at private institutions.I agree with you on subsidizing private schools.

Funds for new buildings in some states are usually raised through sources different than faculty wages, and in some cases the building funds can only be used for building thus creating more facilities than are necessary. BTW in Texas, you can go online and see the salary of every person working at a public university. It's part of the line item budgeting. Where I once taught, non-tenured Sr. Lecturers now get $75,000 per year. Tenured faculty average around $160,000 per year. Less than 20 years ago, Sr. Lecturers received about $38,000/year and tenured faculty around $76,000. So, they have doubled while the salaries of students and their parents have stagnated or declined.

That is awesome that the state publishes salary and hopefully all other details in the running of state institutions. Transparency is clearly needed in the absence of trust. Transparency helps voter make decisions. After Bush/Cheney 'secrecy' gov't .... Obama promised to change that ..but effectively Obama made it worse.

$160,000 is a lot more than I would have guessed. One of my childhood friends is the upper parts of Ohio State Univ. medical field and makes a little over $100K

My father retired as a research professor in the field of education and his salary was $36,000 per year (plus healthcare and retirement benefits) in 1982. He wrote or co-authored several books but royalties were not big then even if the books were successful. By contrast to his salary a local successful GP doctor's son told me his father made a little less than $80,000 per year in 1982. This is in the midwest.

As for buildings I think what happens is usually a combination of taxpayer dollars and money from an endowment and that endowment usually has some strings attached.

You can take a look, here. Back in the 70s and 80s, you had to go to the library and get the state budget printout. Things are easier today. https://salaries.texastribune.org/

[up2u2]

You can take a look, here. Back in the 70s and 80s, you had to go to the library and get the state budget printout. Things are easier today. https://salaries.texastribune.org/

A coach of a school football team is paid $5M salary. You seriously have to be kidding me. No wonder America is going to xxxx.

[ttthailand]

Wrong.

Clinton will indeed have enough delegates after California to be nominated even without even one super delegate.

without super delegates Clinton still needs to get over 600 out of the remaining 900 delegates to win without super delegates.... And Bernie is ahead in some of the Calf. polls as of today.

I think you are smoking something or are part of the paid Hillary supporters ....

[Usernames]

You can take a look, here. Back in the 70s and 80s, you had to go to the library and get the state budget printout. Things are easier today. https://salaries.texastribune.org/

A coach of a school football team is paid $5M salary. You seriously have to be kidding me. No wonder America is going to xxxx.

Throw in the salary for the athletic director and you get $6.7 million.

[NovaBlue05]

Tax payer money should never under any circumstance go to finance private, especially "charter" or religious based/sponsored schools. In fact the right wing has been stealing tax money meant for public education to support their version of schooling for years, while cutting public education budgets. Tax on Wall Street criminals/banksters will pay for free tuition for public university. America and the capitalists need a well educated public, although they don't want a thinking or analytical person. Could be "dangerous" to the system. And before it even starts, liberal arts degrees are important, not just engineering, math etc. America is in dire need of critical thinkers, not taught in schools since the Reagan regime. Oh, teachers make too much money but it is OK for CEO's to acquire great wealth at the expense of the people? Warped logic. BTW, I grew up in a school teacher family. My mother taught school for some 40 years. Cousins taught school, one was married to the President of Stephen F. Austin University in Nacogdoches, Texas. I understand a bit about the importance of teachers.

Blaming teachers for the state of the education system is like blaming your doctor for the mess that the US healthcare system is in. Most do the best they can with the constraints imposed on them by the elected officials. The latter being typically too busy counting ."donations" rather than concerning themselves with the well being of the masses

[NumbNut]

You can take a look, here. Back in the 70s and 80s, you had to go to the library and get the state budget printout. Things are easier today. https://salaries.texastribune.org/

A coach of a school football team is paid $5M salary. You seriously have to be kidding me. No wonder America is going to xxxx.

Throw in the salary for the athletic director and you get $6.7 million.

And that is your problem right there

[jmd8800]

I guess in TX it pays to be a head coach or cardiologist. My experience with US cardiologists was a disaster.

This is the kind of info people need to make reasonable decisions. By these number a high premium is placed on athletics. The few high end cardiologists are probably over paid too.

It does remind me of a time at work when a few guys were talking football. One guy mentioned an exceptional pass some quarterback made and said 'they can pay him millions...seems every time he throws the ball he hits his target'

I said: 'by that measure NASA engineers should be paid millions.... every time they throw a rover up it lands on Mars.'

Most of this depends on where we wish to place our priorities. If we strip out all the crap and focus on educating people who would benefit by post secondary education (not everyone would), I would guess that left and right could come to agreement with a basic plan to subsidize state univ education on a means tested basis.

[sgtsabai]

If, big if apparently for someone, one does the math it is impossible for either Clintons or Bernie to go with the convention with enough pledged delegates to win, it really is that simple. Bernie is the right person, at the right time to do what is best for America. Neither of the other "candidates" should even be in the running as they basically are unqualified. When one starts out wanting a "half loaf" one gets a slice of bread, ah duh. How in hell does one negotiate from weakness? Go for broke, then you have some ground to compromise on. Otherwise you aren't even in the ball game. Look what happen to Obama and his starting with a half loaf, he got nothing. Bernie has accomplished more in Congress than Clinton even tried.... http://www.alternet.org/print/election-2016/sanders-explains-why-he-keeps-going-and-may-just-win-california-tuesday.....

......http://www.alternet.org/print/election-2016/robert-reich-hillary-needs-win-over-bernies-voters-because-trump-menace-society.......

.......http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/06/03/trump-or-clinton-screwed-either-way/

[sgtsabai]

Be forwarned, many of you won't like this but it is revelant to the Bernie campaign. Perhaps, just perhaps it will help bring some understanding as to his popularity among younger people (and old farts like me). I don't always agree with these people, but they have the right idea and on many things they are right. Read and flame away, I'm used to the heat and I don't really give a damn. https://www.popularresistance.org/newsletter-us-democracy-crisis-creates-illegitimate-political-system/

[NovaBlue05]

Bernie has accomplished more in this one campaign than Clinton has in her entire political career

[Boon Mee]

FEEL THE BERN: Sanders chooses two virulently anti-Israel activists to put on the DNC platform committee.

http://betsyspage.blogspot.com/2016/06/cruising-web_3.html

How lovely. Just what the world needs is more Israel-haters, eh?

[SpokaneAl]

Bernie has accomplished more in this one campaign than Clinton has in her entire political career

Really? Other than a laundry list of promises, what has he accomplished exactly? Sounds like hyperbole to me. Edited June 4, 2016 by SpokaneAl

[NovaBlue05]

Bernie has accomplished more in this one campaign than Clinton has in her entire political career

Really? Other than a laundry list of promises, what has he accomplished exactly? Sounds like hyperbole to me.

There are some people who actually believe that raising awareness of how the Govt is screwing the regular people to a previously somewhat disengaged segment of the population serves a more useful purpose than jetting from one corporate fundraiser to another

[jmd8800]

Bernie has accomplished more in this one campaign than Clinton has in her entire political career

Really? Other than a laundry list of promises, what has he accomplished exactly? Sounds like hyperbole to me.

There are some people who actually believe that raising awareness of how the Govt is screwing the regular people to a previously somewhat disengaged segment of the population serves a more useful purpose than jetting from one corporate fundraiser to another

If I remember correctly Social Security was in the cross hairs for trimming or for privatization in the spring of 2011. Along comes the Occupy Movement and we have not had that discussion since. In fact Social Security has some support for expansion now. When Occupy hit the news most people could understand because in each and every family across the US there was someone who had lost a home or a job or was otherwise impacted by Wall St banks behaviors.

Does that mean the Occupy Movement saved Social Security? No. But is does mean that raising awareness helps to further a cause.

I have always maintained that the Occupy Movement accomplished at least one thing: Before Occupy people simply felt they were screwed. After Occupy they knew they were getting screwed. The difference is: When you are screwed there is nothing you can do, where as getting screwed you still have a chance.

[NumbNut]

Bernie has accomplished more in this one campaign than Clinton has in her entire political career

Really? Other than a laundry list of promises, what has he accomplished exactly? Sounds like hyperbole to me.

There are some people who actually believe that raising awareness of how the Govt is screwing the regular people to a previously somewhat disengaged segment of the population serves a more useful purpose than jetting from one corporate fundraiser to another

If I remember correctly Social Security was in the cross hairs for trimming or for privatization in the spring of 2011. Along comes the Occupy Movement and we have not had that discussion since. In fact Social Security has some support for expansion now. When Occupy hit the news most people could understand because in each and every family across the US there was someone who had lost a home or a job or was otherwise impacted by Wall St banks behaviors.

Does that mean the Occupy Movement saved Social Security? No. But is does mean that raising awareness helps to further a cause.

I have always maintained that the Occupy Movement accomplished at least one thing: Before Occupy people simply felt they were screwed. After Occupy they knew they were getting screwed. The difference is: When you are screwed there is nothing you can do, where as getting screwed you still have a chance.

And LIGHT is the best disinfectant known to man.

You can take that to the BANK!

[up2u2]

An AWESOME interview on Bill Maher's show with Nick Hanauer who in simple terms addresses the Right Wing myths regarding increasing the minimum wage. He actually credits Occupy Wall Street movement and McDonalds workers for highlighting the point.

Higher minimum wage means less jobs is just absolute BS with no economic evidence to support it. In reality the reverse is the result. Higher minimum wage, more people with more money to spend companies need more employees to service incresed customers. Also it would take 1M Walmart workers of Social Welfare as they would have a wage that they can fend for themselves saving the taxpayer $6B per year that can be put into tax cuts or health care.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTNXzQZD-wY

[Jingthing]

Agree that was excellent. Hillary needs to get fully on board with that.

[Boon Mee]

Burger joints using kiosks.

Wal Mart switching over to Drones

Yup, that higher minimum wage is working wonders for the unemployed!

[jmd8800]

Burger joints using kiosks.

Wal Mart switching over to Drones

Yup, that higher minimum wage is working wonders for the unemployed!

Higher wages does not create kiosks at burger joints. Nor does it create drones for Wall Mart. Or even Foxconn replacing 60,000 workers with robots.

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/161028/20160526/it-has-begun-apple-supplier-foxconn-replaces-60-000-employees-with-robots.htm

Technology is creating very efficient robots. The main thrust of your argument is higher wages drive employers to use robotics. They would do use robots anyway. Humans take days off. Humans get sick. Humans are just not nearly as efficient as machines.

The real question that should be asked is: What kind of system is going to evolve to 'support' people in the future? What are we going to put in place when robotics is so efficient that humans absolutely cannot compete with robots. (AI included) The global population is exploding. The number of jobs needed to support those people are declining. There comes a breaking point.

So how will billions of people support themselves in the future? Or do this class of people live in Mad Max worlds?

Maybe those sitting on trillions in cash should spread the wealth. And maybe we should develop systems that take into account that money isn't everything.

The right is so wrapped up in 'going back to the good old days' they cannot envision a future. Sheesh

Self driving cars = less taxi drivers, delivery drivers, toll booth operators on toll roads, and a lot of other catagories to mention.

Self correcting software = lees software programmers to maintain software

Computers on Wall St eliminated most of the actual traders needed

AutoCad eliminated 99 of the 100 hours previously needed for drafting

Get the picture? It is going to happen anyway. Why do climbers climb a mountain? Because it is there.