Sanders campaign plans clash with political realities

[webfact]

Sanders campaign plans clash with political realities
By LISA LERER and CATHERINE LUCEY

PORTSMOUTH, N.H. (AP) — Bernie Sanders promises voters a "political revolution" that will fundamentally remake the American economy and its education and health care systems.

"That's what our campaign is about. It is thinking big," Sanders said during a debate last month in Charleston, South Carolina. "We are going to have a government that works for all of us, and not just big campaign contributors."

Often left unsaid by Sanders, but increasingly at the center of Hillary Clinton's arguments against her rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, is that the political reality of achieving such goals is likely to be a whole lot more complicated.

It would require Sanders not only to win the White House, but to sweep a wave of Democratic lawmakers into office along with him. While Democrats may be able to gain the four or five seats necessary to win back control of the Senate in November, they need 30 seats to recapture power in the House.

But even with majorities in both houses of Congress, Sanders would face challenges. Clinton's advisers often point out how difficult it was for President Barack Obama to convince a Democratic-led Congress to support the Affordable Care Act in 2010. Sanders' plan — called "Medicare for All" — would go significantly further by establishing a national health care system run entirely by the government.

Sanders also wants to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour, break up the biggest Wall Street banks, pour $1 trillion into the country's infrastructure, expand Social Security benefits and make college free at all public universities by raising taxes on Wall Street. All of those ideas are nearly uniformly opposed by Republicans and would face strident opposition in Congress.

Many of those plans would require tax increases on corporations, wealthy taxpayers and middle-class families — a difficult political sell for lawmakers of both parties.

Campaigning at a union hall in Las Vegas on Saturday, former President Bill Clinton called Sanders' ideas politically unviable, giving the realities of divided government and ability of the Senate minority to block proposals that lack the support of 60 members.

"You can't get 60 votes!" he exclaimed. "Why, when we've got all this gridlock, would we waste any time trying to do something we know we can't do when there's so much we can do to get the show on the road? Don't go down a blind alley."

Sanders does frequently acknowledge that it will take more than just winning the White House to accomplish his goals.

"No president can walk in there and make changes unless millions of people become engaged in the political process in a way that we have not seen for a very, very long time," he told more than a thousand supporters gathered in a community college gymnasium in Portsmouth, New Hampshire on Sunday.

He casts his "revolution" in a long line of social movements that have reshaped American society, citing the progress made by civil rights activists, feminists and gay rights advocates. He argues that if voters line up behind him and fight for his plans, their collective power can overcome political intransigency, big campaign donors and special interests.

"Every day the media asks: 'Your ideas are so ambitious, how are you going to get them done?'" he said. "We will get them done because people are going to demand that we get them done."

Clinton has tried to counter that message with promises to tell voters exactly what she'd do and how she'd do it if elected. Since launching her campaign in April, she's rolled out dozens of policy plans, tackling issues from autism to the Islamic State.

"I'm not making promises I can't keep," she said during Thursday's Democratic debate. She added: "Let's go down a path where we can actually tell people what we will do. A progressive is someone who makes progress."

Clinton's ideas are also sure to face opposition from congressional Republicans. And should the GOP nominee become the next president, their promises to roll back the work of the President Barack Obama's administration will face the same challenges from Democrats eager to protect his legacy.

But in a Democratic primary traditionally powered by the most liberal voters — pragmatism has been less appealing than big promises. Sanders' aspiration message has struck a chord with progressive Democrats and younger voters, boosting him to a near-win in Iowa and a sizable lead in New Hampshire, which casts the first primary ballots on Tuesday.

"I want to give him a shot," said Nick Ayoub, 22, of Cambridge, Mass. "You're never going to know if you don't try."

Derek Scalia, 33, of Keene, New Hampshire, said he knows that campaign promises don't always come true, but he likes Sanders' vision.

"Bernie is the only one that's talking about health care as a fundamental human right," Scalia said. "Every industrialized country in the world offers universal health care."


-- (c) Associated Press 2016-02-08

[Hayduke]

From time to time it almost seems as if Bernie is unaware of his role in this political lakorn.

He’s only on stage to present and perpetuate the illusion that the HC person is somehow ‘earning’ the Democratic nomination through a competitive and open vetting process. He’s a bit player and will be disposed of as soon as his job as sparring partner is finished. If her majesty is feeling benevolent he may end up as under secretary of national parks or as some other sort of titled, yet meaningless court lackey.

Because the truth is that the HC coronation has long since been bought and paid for by her Wall Street investors and corporate shareholders. She’s hasn’t been having friendly folksy chats with the power brokers all this time; she’s been conducting sales seminars. It’s…”Here’s what my presidency will cost you and here’s what I’ll guarantee you as a return on your investments”. These are the....promises...she intends to keep.

The stakes are far too high to let some eccentric old socialist get in the way. We’re talking insane amounts of money and power here and no effort will be spared by HC’s platinum card customers to get what they’ve paid for.

Sorry Bernie, but you’re toast. You may land a lucky punch here and there but ultimately the queen bee’s money and army of drones will bury you.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Hayduke

[lannarebirth]

From time to time it almost seems as if Bernie is unaware of his role in this political lakorn.

He’s only on stage to present and perpetuate the illusion that the HC person is somehow ‘earning’ the Democratic nomination through a competitive and open vetting process. He’s a bit player and will be disposed of as soon as his job as sparring partner is finished. If her majesty is feeling benevolent he may end up as under secretary of national parks or as some other sort of titled, yet meaningless court lackey.

Because the truth is that the HC coronation has long since been bought and paid for by her Wall Street investors and corporate shareholders. She’s hasn’t been having friendly folksy chats with the power brokers all this time; she’s been conducting sales seminars. It’s…”Here’s what my presidency will cost you and here’s what I’ll guarantee you as a return on your investments”. These are the....promises...she intends to keep.

The stakes are far too high to let some eccentric old socialist get in the way. We’re talking insane amounts of money and power here and no effort will be spared by HC’s platinum card customers to get what they’ve paid for.

Sorry Bernie, but you’re toast. You may land a lucky punch here and there but ultimately the queen bee’s money and army of drones will bury you.

I think you've got a point and there really is a huge machine that stands in the way of whatever Bernie might accomplish. Here's the thing though. I don't think if Bernie falls away, his voters are natural Clinton voters. I can only speak for myself but I'd vote for almost anyone before I'd vote for Hillary Clinton. What's known about her is that she is both incompetent AND dishonest. She's no better than ANY of the Republican choices and worse than one or two. As I say you may be right, but I won't be attending her coronation.

Edited February 8, 2016 by lannarebirth

[Ulic]

I too like Bernie and his vision. That said he is unelectible and even if he were elected could never push his adjenda through. Just the facts of life in the US.

[lannarebirth]

I too like Bernie and his vision. That said he is unelectible and even if he were elected could never push his adjenda through. Just the facts of life in the US.

Worst case scenario if he were elected. America would stop going further in the wrong direction. That, regardless if he can move her in the right direction. Goldman Sachs backing Clinton and Cruz. It's all the same to them and frankly, it's the same to you too.

[Publicus]

After the lefty Democratic party caucuses in Iowa and the same-same primary vote in New Hampshire lies the rest of the Democratic party in primaries or caucuses state by state. This includes the Democrats of South Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Missouri among so many other states where Bernie is, well, a socialist, and where voters have real everyday concerns.

Bernie speaks for the rising majority of the Democratic party and the country, however, it's just not their time yet. Coming soon yes and for sure in whatever shape, form, extent.

In the meantime HR Clinton has the comprehensive approach and the broad experience to take the country forward. Bernie Sanders is locked in as the domestic issues candidate only. So it's a reach to try to feel the Bern as commander in chief.

[HerbalEd]

Sanders has been in the political game and a senator for many years. So he is far from being naive about the political process and what's involved with achieving political goals.

[lannarebirth]

After the lefty Democratic party caucuses in Iowa and the same-same primary vote in New Hampshire lies the rest of the Democratic party in primaries or caucuses state by state. This includes the Democrats of South Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Missouri among so many other states where Bernie is, well, a socialist, and where voters have real everyday concerns. Bernie speaks for the rising majority of the Democratic party and the country, however, it's just not their time yet. Coming soon yes and for sure in whatever shape, form, extent. In the meantime HR Clinton has the comprehensive approach and the broad experience to take the country forward. Bernie Sanders is locked in as the domestic issues candidate only. So it's a reach to try to feel the Bern as commander in chief.

I think it's pretty presumptuous to assume that if Bernie were to fall away that his supporters would then move to Hillary Clinton. Be careful what you wish for.

[strapper1]

Sanders has been in the political game and a senator for many years. So he is far from being naive about the political process and what's involved with achieving political goals.

H R Clinton well say whatever she thinks the people want to hear, whether or not she believes or not. Do not be fooled by her, she is a wolf in sheeps clothing, she is not a progressive as she claims to be. Heck, she would be more successful campaigning as a republican , which she truly is. Her sweetheart deals and obscene speakers fees from wall street should disqualify her, and Bernie needs to really get on her a lot more about her speaking fees, because she doesn't like it. She is very uncomfortable about the big money she took from Goldman Sachs, and does not want it brought up anymore! Hound her to death on that topic and just watch her squirm!

[fvw53]

Sanders has been in the political game and a senator for many years. So he is far from being naive about the political process and what's involved with achieving political goals.

H R Clinton well say whatever she thinks the people want to hear, whether or not she believes or not. Do not be fooled by her, she is a wolf in sheeps clothing, she is not a progressive as she claims to be. Heck, she would be more successful campaigning as a republican , which she truly is. Her sweetheart deals and obscene speakers fees from wall street should disqualify her, and Bernie needs to really get on her a lot more about her speaking fees, because she doesn't like it. She is very uncomfortable about the big money she took from Goldman Sachs, and does not want it brought up anymore! Hound her to death on that topic and just watch her squirm!

I think he would have been better calling himself a "social democrat" rather than a "democratic socialist" : both cover the same political agenda but the term "socialist" is associated with "communist" for too many people...

In the UK the social democrat brand is called "Labour" and the US favourite ally was Tony Blair

[Pinot]

I'd love to se Bernie get the nomination.

That said, I still think it will be "Madame President."

Either way it's going to be a Democratic walk-in after this brutal fight to go hard right by the Republicans. There isn't an electable Republican candidate.

[KarenBravo]

HR Clinton?

Better a vote to HR Puffnstuff.

[lannarebirth]

I'd love to se Bernie get the nomination.

That said, I still think it will be "Madame President."

Either way it's going to be a Democratic walk-in after this brutal fight to go hard right by the Republicans. There isn't an electable Republican candidate.

I agree with you that there isn't an electable Republican candidate. My only caveat would be "unless Hillary wins the nomination". I think she's DOA against a Kasich but maybe not against a Cruz who is basically the same as her. At least Goldman Sachs thinks so. That's where they are laying their bets. Either one is fine with them because they are both basically the same.

[hawker9000]

After the lefty Democratic party caucuses in Iowa and the same-same primary vote in New Hampshire lies the rest of the Democratic party in primaries or caucuses state by state. This includes the Democrats of South Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Missouri among so many other states where Bernie is, well, a socialist, and where voters have real everyday concerns. Bernie speaks for the rising majority of the Democratic party and the country, however, it's just not their time yet. Coming soon yes and for sure in whatever shape, form, extent. In the meantime HR Clinton has the comprehensive approach and the broad experience to take the country forward. Bernie Sanders is locked in as the domestic issues candidate only. So it's a reach to try to feel the Bern as commander in chief.

I think it's pretty presumptuous to assume that if Bernie were to fall away that his supporters would then move to Hillary Clinton. Be careful what you wish for.

I suspect most would feel disillusioned and just stay home on election day, the prospect of which will force HRC to have to adopt a great deal of his rhetoric. ... As if she doesn't have enough baggage already. Edited February 8, 2016 by hawker9000

[lannarebirth]

After the lefty Democratic party caucuses in Iowa and the same-same primary vote in New Hampshire lies the rest of the Democratic party in primaries or caucuses state by state. This includes the Democrats of South Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Missouri among so many other states where Bernie is, well, a socialist, and where voters have real everyday concerns. Bernie speaks for the rising majority of the Democratic party and the country, however, it's just not their time yet. Coming soon yes and for sure in whatever shape, form, extent. In the meantime HR Clinton has the comprehensive approach and the broad experience to take the country forward. Bernie Sanders is locked in as the domestic issues candidate only. So it's a reach to try to feel the Bern as commander in chief.

I think it's pretty presumptuous to assume that if Bernie were to fall away that his supporters would then move to Hillary Clinton. Be careful what you wish for.

I suspect most would feel disillusioned and just stay home on election day.

That's what I think too. Then the Republican wins, whoever that is, but they'll be more or less the same as Hillary. This is probably the last chance America has to stop moving in the wrong direction.

[quandow]

Thank goodness most people posting here will not vote. The doom, "gloom, despair and agony on me" is exactly what the Wall Street machine wants you to suffer under, and you are sadly perpetuating this attitude. Senator Sanders has rocketed beyond anyone's wildest dreams because he not only speaks truth but has a 30 year voting record to back it up. Clinton has a history of treachery, lies and selling her political "loyalty" to the highest bidder, particularly those outside the U.S.

#feelthebern

[up2u2]

If this is truly the case it isn't Bernie's political agenda that is broken it is the American political system that is irreparably broken. Do the American People have to resign themselves to the fact that the government has been taken over and is controlled by Corporate America. That their President will always act in the best interests of Corporate America not the people who elect their representative. An American President is just a 'figure head' of no importance and the government is controlled by the wealthy elite and wealthy Corporations?

Probably the saddest statement I have heard come out of America.

A broken health, education, criminal justice and fair wealth distribution system , crumbling infrastructure, caught up in never ending wars, totally controlled by Corporate America through their political arm the Republican Party and to a lessor degree the Democratic Party.

I suppose all great civilisations lose their way and implode on themselves. It is such a shame a once great Nation dying of a self inflicted cancer. It may be true, the greedy have taken over and it has reached the point of no return.

[Basil B]

Wants to model America on the Britain...

A national health and welfare system for all, sounds great until you work out what it costs, very few Americans are going to be up for double taxation, 20% or more of what you earn and 20% of what you spend.

[Thaidream]

The greedy have taken over and they are going to be difficult to get out but it can be done. Bernie Sanders is the only candidate I have ever heard hit the nail right on the head and that is why he strikes a real chord with the average American and especially the young of the United States. His use of the term revolution is exactly what must happen. If he can get elected- he would turn Washington politics on its side. The right person, and I think he is the right one, can mobilize millions to march on Washington once his agenda is set. I wonder how a recalcitrant Congress would handle that. Even if he is not elected- he has opened the door to a growing debate that will eventually grow stronger and stronger. Americans are fed up- it's not about foreign policy which greedy politicians use constantly to hide their own greedy agenda- it's about making an America a place where everyone can live and exist with dignity and to do this greed will have to be contained; the wealthy will have to have a huge tax increase; and the politicians will all need to be changed under a new election law. The current status quo is unsustainable. Truth is on the march-it cannot be stopped.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Thaidream

[CWMcMurray]

Trump vs Hilary ...

I'm having nightmares already

No matter the outcome... America looses

[Jingthing]

Wants to model America on the Britain...

A national health and welfare system for all, sounds great until you work out what it costs, very few Americans are going to be up for double taxation, 20% or more of what you earn and 20% of what you spend.

It would be much cheaper per head and cover everyone, like Canada.

[elgordo38]

I like you Bernie but your way to late to the party. When you open the treasury vault to finance all your great ideas sadly you will only find an I.O.U. laying on the floor. To many Wimpy governments have drained the treasury. You sadly will be the donkey and every other politician in the USA will be trying to pin the tail on you for decades of mismanagement. Every time governments change hands the outgoing administration has royally FD things up and you will claim to be the new savior. I have seen this movie before and the debt clock keeps climbing.

[Thaidream]

Off course Americans are going to be taxed more- but there won't be any insurance companies charging huge premiums every month- so this money will be used for health and education. Those who are unemployed or indigent will not pay anything. Right now Americans pay for Medicare through a tax so the system is in place. Regarding education- you increase the tax on the wealthy from a top range of 30% to 60%. If you make 5 Million every year you give half to the government and you're still wealthy. In addition, you eliminate the legal mechanisms that allow huge companies to park their profits offshore and pay no taxes. This can be done without any real increased loss to the average person. Wealth has to be redistributed

[Thaidream]

Elgordo does make a good point- the actual treasury is empty and filled with IOU's. The politicians have even raided the Social Security Trust Fund which was supposed to be untouchable and they have the gall to continue to deny senior citizens with increases in their monthly pension and to deny overseas expats the right to use Medicare which they have paid into for years. It's probably too late for us but I hope my children and grandchildren will see some change in their lives. I keep saying it is unsustainable and I base this on World history. All great civilizations- once corrupted- fall by the wayside and a new order emerges. I just hope the new one is better than the old one.

[up2u2]

If you can fund the most expensive health care system in the developed world you can sure fund a 'one payer' system it is much cheaper to fund and will give better outcomes as the payer dictates the benchmarks. Conservative estimates would see a family yearly premium being reduced by $5500 per year. Also a persons health insurance is not dictated to by an employer.

The Social Security Fund is fully funded and has cash assets of 2.78 trillion dollars. You may be referring to the Disability Insurance Fund. The total cash assets of Social Security will not be exhausted until 2089. US citizens are in fact paying to far forward to the over all funds under management this was corrected in 2010 to gradually draw down the over payments into the system.

[Thaidream]

America has definitely been taken over by Corporations and Conglomerates all in the name of globalization. I remember after World War II when my father came home to Ohio and he needed a home and a car. He went to the local banker who he knew and the banker knew who he was. They provided funds at a reasonable rate and the economy grew. then as the years went by those banks were merged and bought by other banks/speculators who developed financial instruments such as derivatives and sold mortgages many to overseas investors. Your city banker disappeared with your mortgage to someplace you never heard of and someone you didn't know. At the same time the US became involved in war after war funded by the American taxpayer and all sorts of monies that were to be held in trust such as Social Security, first on the basis that Communism was everywhere and we have to fight it; then there were rogue governments out there that had to be contained and now we have terrorists behind every door. All this war makes those who are wealthy much more wealthy and drains America's treasury more and more. The military budget is over $630 Billion and the politicians want to increase it more.

In addition, America's great Industrial base disappeared- moved offshore by greedy companies who wanted to lower labor costs. American doesn't make much anymore.Look at the I-phone- US technology made in China at a fraction of the price Of course, the politicians helped out by providing a tax code that favors offshore companies and the concentration of wealth in 1% of the population.The US tax code is almost 80K pages long and most people cannot understand how to do their own taxes. Add in some horrid trade deals such as the North America Trade act as well as this new one that President Obama is trying to push and you have why we have reached this point today. When you have Company CEo's making millions of dollars each year and the lowest level employee working for minimum wage- something is radically wrong and you need a radical response. Like one of the posters said- a once great Nation being gutted by the greedy while its citizens are headed for Third World status.

[KarenBravo]

Sorry, but, some of your conclusions are just plain wrong.

If companies hadn't moved offshore for the cheap labour, they would have gone bust. Foreign companies with a product that is just as good, if not better as the American model but substantially cheaper would have caused American companies to fail. This is what happened to the British motorcycle industry.

It really doesn't matter that manufacturing has gone. We can buy physical things more efficiently and cheaper from overseas. The British coal mining industry is a good example of this. Closing a never-ending black-hole that lost millions. Cheaper to buy it from Poland and Australia.

You underestimate the Service industries, how much they make and the employment that it creates. Britain's Service sector comprises 78% of GDP.

With regard to the inequitable wealth distribution and corporate interests, I agree with you.

Edited February 8, 2016 by KarenBravo

[blazes]

Sorry, but, some of your conclusions are just plain wrong.

If companies hadn't moved offshore for the cheap labour, they would have gone bust. Foreign companies with a product that is just as good, if not better as the American model but substantially cheaper would have caused American companies to fail. This is what happened to the British motorcycle industry.

It really doesn't matter that manufacturing has gone. We can buy physical things more efficiently and cheaper from overseas. The British coal mining industry is a good example of this. Closing a never-ending black-hole that lost millions. Cheaper to buy it from Poland and Australia.

You underestimate the Service industries, how much they make and the employment that it creates. Britain's Service sector comprises 78% of GDP.

With regard to the inequitable wealth distribution and corporate interests, I agree with you.

Service industries create no wealth (unless they are called Starbucks or Macdonalds or Walmart and then it is wealth for the share-holders)....but note how these service industries create no jobs much above $10 per hour.

Maybe if you are in management you will do a bit better. But basically, a man or woman has to work at 3 jobs paying $25k per annum to make as much as the one lost manufacturing job making $75k.

If you are working at 3 jobs, you can be sure you are not one of those "consumers" on whom the GDP growth depends.

[KarenBravo]

Starbucks and MacDonalds?

What about banking, insurance, IT etc.

Britains 78% of GDP isn't made up of lots of burger joints and coffee shops.

[Credo]

The service sector requires a reasonably well-educated and skilled work force. The current cost of higher education precludes that for the majority of people nowadays. Until/unless some effort is made to reduce the cost of education, then we will be facing a greater disparity in income as well as a greater divide between the classes and less upward mobility.