Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out  (Read 428848 times)

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #300 on: June 21, 2017, 11:23:56 PM »
Compared the newbie politicians I have seen so far, trying to take on Corporate Democrats, I really like this one from Washington state, called Sarah Smith. She's eloquent, seems very smart, and has a relevant résumé:

! No longer available

The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

SteveMDFP

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2476
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 583
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #301 on: June 22, 2017, 12:22:52 AM »
The most expensive bi-election ever held has been decided - and Corporate Democrats lost another one.


In a Georgia district that Trump won by 1%, a well educated slice of the South, a Corporate Democrat with unbelievably deep pockets lost by 3.8%.
Jon Ossoff's campaign mimicked Clinton's in a number of ways, lots and lots and lots of money. He ran against Trump, not for anything in particular, and had a very good team on the ground. He was far ahead with the write in votes, up in the polls - but he lost the election.


I'm sure local TV executives appreciated the free spending campaign more than many of the locals who put up with a constant barrage of push polls and robo-calls. This race wouldn't be news if the CD's hadn't decided to make it a referendum on Trumps first months in office - and then thrown >$25M at it.


Perhaps if a Democratic candidate explained to voters how electing him would make their lives better. Perhaps if he could point to a positive progressive platform that would benefit local businesses, labor, and infrastructure. Perhaps if he'd gotten his message from Bernie, rather than from Nancy?


This bi-election means very little, but after loss, after loss, after loss, the Democrats and their financial backers must sooner or later realize that it's not bad Russians, not bad polling, not even bad media that are causing them to lose elections that they think they should have won. The problem is positioning themselves as "Republican Lite", all the tax breaks for the wealthy, all the increases in military spending, all the proxy wars, drone assassinations and wars for oil. And all without the Bush's stench, Trump's idiocy, or Reagan's vapid inanity.


They don't run on their platform because if they did people might notice how little it differs from the platform that the evil Republican's espouse.


Terry

I don't see any basis for declaring Ossoff a "Corporate Democrat." Look at his personal background and policy positions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Ossoff

He never worked for a large corporation.  He's produced documentaries about government corrumption.  His policy positions aren't as progressive as some democrats, but a more progressive stance would have fared worse in this heavily-Republican district.

It's misleading to say that his campaign spending dwarfed his opponent's.  If you include "supe-PACs" and independent expenditures (which dwarf the formal campaign funding on both sides), the Republican had a very decisive edge in funding:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/20/us/politics/georgia-6th-most-expensive-house-election.html

Two apparent prominent factors in his loss seem to be that he doesn't live in the district he ran for, and the Republican candidate emphasized how he's on the same side as Nancy Pelosi. 

He did far better than any Democrat has ever done in this district.  Corporate backing or pro-corporate policies weren't a significant part of this candidate's posture.

One point that's brought into clearer focus in this race is the relative insignificance of formal campaign funding, in comparison to far larger independent spending.

It looks to me that he might have won the race if he'd done a better job currying favor with deep-pocket corporations.

Martin Gisser

  • Guest
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #302 on: June 23, 2017, 01:18:05 PM »
Those that won't watch Dore will simply cut themselves off from cutting edge progressive/liberal thoughts on where we are & how we can get to where we need to be.
From here (Germany) I've seen enough cutting edge progressive/liberal thought since I started watching last year: Long before Obama and Merkel used the wørd Fake News I called Fakebook a stupidity amplifier. Librol progressives eagerly embracing/spreading any stupid propaganda lie about Obama or Hillary, spread by Republican/rightwing/Russian bots and trolls.

I thought my observations were perhaps statistically biased by looking mostly at FB librols... But then, the Dore show confirmed it is a general phenomenon.

Sorry, dear librols, if you need a left Rush Limbaugh, then please check at least your facts before engaging in political suicide. (In a 2 party system you need to work differently to a more mature multi-party democracy like Germany.)
« Last Edit: June 23, 2017, 01:33:42 PM by Martin Gisser »

Martin Gisser

  • Guest
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #303 on: June 23, 2017, 01:35:32 PM »
P.S.:
The cutting edge progressive/liberal thought I watched since last year made me a Hillary defender, for I always checked the stuff and the sources. But I'm fed up with that. The reason I refuse to donate my clicks and neurons to the Dore show is the volume of suspicious and occasionally even obviously false (even to me German!) stuff he tells. (Example: Hillary selling Plutonium to Russia. LOL or weep?)

I prefer straight-forward transparent news, where you don't constantly feel an urge to double check stuff. Like Rachel Maddow's excellent synopses and interviews. For polit entertainment I find Bill Maher superbly dwarfing Dore's echo chamber.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2017, 01:40:45 PM by Martin Gisser »

Jim Pettit

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1175
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #304 on: June 23, 2017, 04:14:45 PM »
The single most profound takeaway from the GA-6 election is that the GOP was forced to spend tens of millions of dollars (and perhaps more in dark money) to protect a seat in a reliably red district in a reliably red state that had been held for decades by a Republican, even though they were running a candidate with national recognition against a no-name Democratic challenger no one had heard of six months ago. That doesn't mean the Democrats don't need both better leaders and better candidates; there's much blame to be passed around on the left side of the aisle. But just as it's wrong to say that Ossoff ran only an an anti-Trump message--he discussed far more than that--it's wrong to infer anything about any future elections from this week's results.

pileus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 536
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #305 on: June 23, 2017, 06:11:41 PM »
The most expensive bi-election ever held has been decided - and Corporate Democrats lost another one.


In a Georgia district that Trump won by 1%, a well educated slice of the South, a Corporate Democrat with unbelievably deep pockets lost by 3.8%.
Jon Ossoff's campaign mimicked Clinton's in a number of ways, lots and lots and lots of money. He ran against Trump, not for anything in particular, and had a very good team on the ground. He was far ahead with the write in votes, up in the polls - but he lost the election.


I'm sure local TV executives appreciated the free spending campaign more than many of the locals who put up with a constant barrage of push polls and robo-calls. This race wouldn't be news if the CD's hadn't decided to make it a referendum on Trumps first months in office - and then thrown >$25M at it.


Perhaps if a Democratic candidate explained to voters how electing him would make their lives better. Perhaps if he could point to a positive progressive platform that would benefit local businesses, labor, and infrastructure. Perhaps if he'd gotten his message from Bernie, rather than from Nancy?


This bi-election means very little, but after loss, after loss, after loss, the Democrats and their financial backers must sooner or later realize that it's not bad Russians, not bad polling, not even bad media that are causing them to lose elections that they think they should have won. The problem is positioning themselves as "Republican Lite", all the tax breaks for the wealthy, all the increases in military spending, all the proxy wars, drone assassinations and wars for oil. And all without the Bush's stench, Trump's idiocy, or Reagan's vapid inanity.


They don't run on their platform because if they did people might notice how little it differs from the platform that the evil Republican's espouse.


Terry

This post demonstrates a deep ignorance of district level American politics, and clearly you did not follow this specific race closely.  GA-6 is a very red district, and it would have been a completely shocking upset had it shifted blue.  It went +23 red in Nov 2016, and Ossof managed to to cut that margin by 19 points, losing by 4.  That is absolutely incredible based on the demographics and party affiliation of the district, and it portends well for roughly 60-70 other districts that are less red across the US.  Also, Ossof did not make this race a referendum on Trump.  He hardly mentioned him. But clearly you weren't paying attention.

Honestly, it appears you ignored the specific dynamics of this special election and just wanted another chance to use your "Corporate Democrat" conjuring words.  Does a genie appear and grant you three wishes if you say this phrase with a certain frequency?

The biggest mistake that Dems can make is to swing hard left towards the policies and approach of a failed independent/leftist candidate like Bernie Sanders.  That is so far out of touch with the bulk of the American electorate, and would lock in Republican rule for a generation.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #306 on: June 23, 2017, 09:00:35 PM »


This post demonstrates a deep ignorance of district level American politics,
Undoubtedly true - I only lived in the country for 41 years, and of that 41 years I was only keenly aware of American politics after the assassination of JFK.


and clearly you did not follow this specific race closely.
True again, I wouldn't have followed it at all if it hadn't been for people on this thread explaining how important the Democratic victory would be.


  GA-6 is a very red district, and it would have been a completely shocking upset had it shifted blue.  It went +23 red in Nov 2016,
Trump won the district by 1% in November, this was a winnable race which is why the Democrats spent so heavily on it.


and Ossof managed to to cut that margin by 19 points, losing by 4.
Trump won by 1% in November, Ossoff lost by 4% in June. This is not trending in the direction you claim that it is.


That is absolutely incredible based on the demographics and party affiliation of the district, and it portends well for roughly 60-70 other districts that are less red across the US.  Also, Ossof did not make this race a referendum on Trump.  He hardly mentioned him. But clearly you weren't paying attention.

Honestly, it appears you ignored the specific dynamics of this special election
Actually I read what CNN, MSNBC, 360.Org and others wrote about the election results. These are hardly Berniecrat supporters.


and just wanted another chance to use your "Corporate Democrat" conjuring words.  Does a genie appear and grant you three wishes if you say this phrase with a certain frequency?

The biggest mistake that Dems can make is to swing hard left towards the policies and approach of a failed independent/leftist candidate like Bernie Sanders.  That is so far out of touch with the bulk of the American electorate, and would lock in Republican rule for a generation.

Apparently Saunders is the most popular politician in the country. Hillary ran away from Bernie's message, as did Ossoff (I understand you're upset, but he spells it with 2 f's). They both lost.


We can run more Pelosi/Clinton/Ossoff campaigns in 2018, but should expect similar results. The message I've been hearing is that the Democrats plan to run very hard against the Russians in 2018, and expect to win based on Trump's Russian connections.
If the investigations drag on for another year and a half this might gain traction, but that's a Ken Starr type investigation & we do remember how well that kept Bill Clinton from his second term.


The Mercury Sun has an article on Ossoff's fundraising.
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/06/16/jon-ossoff-georgia-congress-donations-california/


The Millenial Review's take is that centrist politics won't work.
http://millennial-review.com/2017/06/20/jon-ossoff-loss-proves-progressives-way-forward/


ZeroHedge claims Ossoff had a 7 to 1 spending advantage.
http://millennial-review.com/2017/06/20/jon-ossoff-loss-proves-progressives-way-forward/


This election proved little other than that simply throwing money at a campaign is no longer enough to win. The internet may be responsible for this change.
Democrats need to distance themselves from Republicans. Centrists in both parties are being crushed, and since the Republicans have been more radical since at least the time of Nixon, they
EDIT
are winning fewer more & fewer more races.
Terry
« Last Edit: June 24, 2017, 08:23:33 AM by TerryM »

SteveMDFP

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2476
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 583
  • Likes Given: 42
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #307 on: June 24, 2017, 01:28:49 AM »


This post demonstrates a deep ignorance of district level American politics, and clearly you did not follow this specific race closely.  GA-6 is a very red district, and it would have been a completely shocking upset had it shifted blue.  It went +23 red in Nov 2016, and Ossof managed to to cut that margin by 19 points, losing by 4.  That is absolutely incredible based on the demographics and party affiliation of the district, and it portends well for roughly 60-70 other districts that are less red across the US.  Also, Ossof did not make this race a referendum on Trump.  He hardly mentioned him. But clearly you weren't paying attention.

Honestly, it appears you ignored the specific dynamics of this special election and just wanted another chance to use your "Corporate Democrat" conjuring words.  Does a genie appear and grant you three wishes if you say this phrase with a certain frequency?

The biggest mistake that Dems can make is to swing hard left towards the policies and approach of a failed independent/leftist candidate like Bernie Sanders.  That is so far out of touch with the bulk of the American electorate, and would lock in Republican rule for a generation.

+1

AbruptSLR

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 19703
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2268
  • Likes Given: 286
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #308 on: June 24, 2017, 02:46:48 AM »
If you want to help Trump, promote removal of Pelosi as Minority Leader:

“Donald Trump is praying that the Democrats are stupid enough get rid of Nancy Pelosi”

http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/donald-trump-democrats-nancy-pelosi/3590/

“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6774
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1047
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #309 on: June 24, 2017, 07:03:38 AM »
"The biggest mistake that Dems can make is to swing hard left towards the policies and approach of a failed independent/leftist candidate like Bernie Sanders.  That is so far out of touch with the bulk of the American electorate, and would lock in Republican rule for a generation."

Some think so. They will do what they have to do.

I do not. And I will do what I have to do.

sidd


Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #310 on: June 24, 2017, 10:22:54 AM »
The biggest mistake that Dems can make is to swing hard left towards the policies and approach of a failed independent/leftist candidate like Bernie Sanders.  That is so far out of touch with the bulk of the American electorate, and would lock in Republican rule for a generation.

Basically, what you're saying, is that the Democratic Party needs to remain Republican-lite, because there's no way in hell you're going to get voters to vote and win elections with ideas like universal health care, free college, Wall Street regulation and an end to the wars. But then what do the Republicans do? Why, they become even more extreme in order to differentiate themselves from the 'Democrats'. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

And of course, a losing strategy for the American people. But that's exactly how (the money of) the 1% and their lackeys on both aisles want it to be. The role of Democrats is to be weak and lose to Republicans.

Look, it starts with idea(l)s and a vision, after that comes the strategy. You don't adapt your idea(l)s and vision to the strategy, because you then lose control, and in the end yourself. You have to stand for something. And that's the problem of the Democratic Party. The only thing it stands for is getting that donor money and 'we're not Trump'.

I've seen a clip from the Ossoff campaign. It's empty, totally empty. Some good-looking guy in a suit spouting vague Republican talking points. God forbid he would say something to actually inspire working people.

But okay, according to mathematical logic, this all means that at some point the Democrats will stop losing and start winning seats. Let's see what happens. This can't go on indefinitely. Or can it?
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #311 on: June 24, 2017, 10:31:59 AM »
"The biggest mistake that Dems can make is to swing hard left towards the policies and approach of a failed independent/leftist candidate like Bernie Sanders.  That is so far out of touch with the bulk of the American electorate, and would lock in Republican rule for a generation."

Some think so. They will do what they have to do.

I do not. And I will do what I have to do.

sidd


sidd
At the present we've all apparently reverted from posting facts to posting opinions. Not necessarily a bad thing, unless we expect others to step into line.


Some see Pelosi, Perez, and the present DNC as our answer going forward. I, and others, disagree & offer the Wiki for the DNC/Funding section as an example. It confirms that the results have been less than stunning since Wasserman-Schultz re-allowed lobbyist donations.


I've written polemics espousing my view that whatever party brings the president's party down will need to distance themselves from the Republican Party. I could be wrong, don't think I am, but it's nothing but one man's opinion.


If the Democrats do take the 2020 election, I'd like to see the government change, and I'd like it to change in meaningful ways. Living now in Canada I realize just how wonderful universal health care is, studies show it to be the most popular option in the United States, yet neither party is for it. Why?
Everyone here understands the importance of climate change. why aren't Democrats wearing Polar Bear hats and marching on Washington? What if Democrats campaigned to halt all subsidies for fossil fuels?
I believe the worst Democrat is better than the best Republican, and I also believe that most American voters are in favor of many programs that neither party will touch because their corporate sponsors would be damaged. If we must live under a corpocracy I'd prefer that the Democrats run it, but I'd much prefer a representative democracy.


This won't be a polite discussion held behind closed doors. This is a Civil War within the party. It won't be short and it won't be without casualties. - unfortunately


Terry

pileus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 536
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #312 on: June 26, 2017, 10:29:26 PM »
The biggest mistake that Dems can make is to swing hard left towards the policies and approach of a failed independent/leftist candidate like Bernie Sanders.  That is so far out of touch with the bulk of the American electorate, and would lock in Republican rule for a generation.

Basically, what you're saying, is that the Democratic Party needs to remain Republican-lite, because there's no way in hell you're going to get voters to vote and win elections with ideas like universal health care, free college, Wall Street regulation and an end to the wars. But then what do the Republicans do? Why, they become even more extreme in order to differentiate themselves from the 'Democrats'. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

And of course, a losing strategy for the American people. But that's exactly how (the money of) the 1% and their lackeys on both aisles want it to be. The role of Democrats is to be weak and lose to Republicans.

Look, it starts with idea(l)s and a vision, after that comes the strategy. You don't adapt your idea(l)s and vision to the strategy, because you then lose control, and in the end yourself. You have to stand for something. And that's the problem of the Democratic Party. The only thing it stands for is getting that donor money and 'we're not Trump'.

I've seen a clip from the Ossoff campaign. It's empty, totally empty. Some good-looking guy in a suit spouting vague Republican talking points. God forbid he would say something to actually inspire working people.

But okay, according to mathematical logic, this all means that at some point the Democrats will stop losing and start winning seats. Let's see what happens. This can't go on indefinitely. Or can it?

The results of the off-cycle Congressional elections since Nov 8 2016 strongly imply that Democrats will take a majority of House seats in 2018, without swinging to a Sanders style platform.  Sorry if those facts conflict with your opinion based desire for leftist purity. 

The American electorate, especially in the swing states that typically determine the Electoral College, is not amenable to a hard left/socialist-style agenda.  And for the record, I don't see "socialist" as a pejorative term.  It's just not a realistic read of the aggregate American electorate to believe that it would be successful at a national level.  Sanders' attempt at this was rejected in the Democratic primary, the voting bloc that would be most willing to entertain anything approaching a leftist policy agenda.  It should be a clue that it would not play well more broadly.

pileus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 536
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #313 on: June 26, 2017, 10:44:50 PM »
If you want to help Trump, promote removal of Pelosi as Minority Leader:

“Donald Trump is praying that the Democrats are stupid enough get rid of Nancy Pelosi”

http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/donald-trump-democrats-nancy-pelosi/3590/

There are valid points on both sides of this question.  Pelosi historically has done an excellent job in whipping votes and getting the Democratic caucus in line.  She was vital in the efforts with respect to Obamacare.  She does a pretty good job in serving as a foil to Trump and an agitator.

But there is also a need to build the next generation of Democratic leadership and bring a different type of energy to the table.  The largest generation by population will soon be the Millennials, and the host of current and future problems we face as a nation demands a deep bench of capable leaders. 

It's actually a problem for both Republicans and Democrats that the preponderance of leadership is in their 70s to late 80s.  There needs to be a focus on building Democratic leadership that is not only capable, but that is more in tune with and representative of the current and future electorate.

With age comes wisdom, but the future belongs to the young.  And I guess the middle aged to some extent.  :-)

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #314 on: June 26, 2017, 11:13:49 PM »
The results of the off-cycle Congressional elections since Nov 8 2016 strongly imply that Democrats will take a majority of House seats in 2018, without swinging to a Sanders style platform.  Sorry if those facts conflict with your opinion based desire for leftist purity.
'Strongly imply' of course isn't a fact yet, but even so, I don't mind facts conflicting with my opinion-based desire for purity. Change has always come because of unreasonable people (George Bernard Shaw quote). Things will never improve if you're unwilling to raise the bar out of fear.

It was strongly implied that Clinton was going to win easily. Would you like me to post that Rachel Maddow video again where she gloated about all those states Trump never was going to win?

Quote
The American electorate, especially in the swing states that typically determine the Electoral College, is not amenable to a hard left/socialist-style agenda.  And for the record, I don't see "socialist" as a pejorative term.  It's just not a realistic read of the aggregate American electorate to believe that it would be successful at a national level.
I'm not an American, so you could very well be right. But half the US nation makes 30K per year or less, a lot of people can't afford their medical bills, their kids can't take on bonecrushing college debt, the US is waging war in seven countries (with some pushing for war with Russia), while Wall Street folks are stuffing their pockets again, there's no 15 USD minimum wage, infrastructure is going to hell.

At some point something's got to give. And there are a lot of independents who are totally fed up with both parties, with lots of people having given up on voting.

I think if you're honest and convincing, you can get a very long way with a policy-based campaign. Trump happened because of Corporate Democrats and their stupid personality/identity politics. The opposite can happen too. It's very volatile right now (as UK politics is showing).

Quote
Sanders' attempt at this was rejected in the Democratic primary, the voting bloc that would be most willing to entertain anything approaching a leftist policy agenda.  It should be a clue that it would not play well more broadly.

Hmmm, yeah, well, there's the undemocratic superdelegate stuff, and of course, when the mainstream media wasn't ignoring Sanders and his huge rallies to show Trump's empty podium, they were engaged in spreading propaganda. Remember, Sanders came from nowhere, and achieved an awful lot in a short time. It should be a clue that it might play well more broadly.

But, we'll see. If the Corporate Democrats keep the party in this headlock and they don't take the Congress, there may be blood. Perhaps it wouldn't be so bad to have Trump and the Corporate Democrats totally f**k up for a while longer. Maybe that will finally wake up a critical mass.

Quote
Pelosi historically has done an excellent job in whipping votes and getting the Democratic caucus in line.  She was vital in the efforts with respect to Obamacare.  She does a pretty good job in serving as a foil to Trump and an agitator.

Yes, Pelosi is fantastic (as is her plastic surgeon), but when I hear and see her talk, I have to make an effort not to vomit. 100 million dollars I believe she was worth in 2014. That makes her an American superhero or something. I would keep those silly millennials out for a while longer. With their pie in the sky ideals. What you need, is more corporate money to defeat the Republicans. And values, lead with your values.

 ;D
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

pileus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 536
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #315 on: June 26, 2017, 11:15:31 PM »
Jane Sanders, wife of multiple homeowner and failed Presidential primary candidate Bernie Sanders seems to have fallen into legal trouble.  Looks like Saint Bernie, hero of the hard left, has some trouble in his own house to address before he saves the world.

A lengthy piece, and it's far from certain how this will all play out in the courts.

Jane Sanders Lawyers Up

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/22/bernie-sanders-jane-sanders-lawyer-bank-fraud-investigation-burlington-college-215297

Backed by six exhibits and a dozen documents, the four-page letter described how Jane Sanders had “orchestrated” the purchase of 33 acres along Lake Champlain in Burlington, Vermont’s largest city, where her husband had minted his populist political brand as mayor. The deal closed in 2010, when the senator’s wife was president of Burlington College, a tiny, obscure, nontraditional school that always seemed to be struggling for students and funds. The letter alleged that to secure a $10 million loan and execute her grand plan to expand the college, Jane Sanders had falsified and inflated nearly $2 million that she’d claimed donors had pledged to repay the loans.
...
A second letter to federal prosecutors in early 2016 alleged that Senator Sanders’ office had pressured the bank to approve the loan application submitted by Jane Sanders. “Improper pressure by a United States Senator is a serious ethical violation,” the letter asserted.

Again, Sanders avoided publicly commenting on the charges.

That strategy seems to have run its course. The federal investigation has been going on for a year and a half. As recently as April, federal investigators were reviewing records and interviewing participants, according to email traffic and former Burlington College board members who have been contacted by FBI agents. The FBI, it seems, is looking into exactly what Jane Sanders did or didn’t do—and whether her husband Bernie, hero of the progressive left, tried to ease along one of the loans.
...
In 2006, Sanders announced a $6 million plan to expand the campus. That plan never materialized. At the same time, faculty and students began to bridle at Sanders’ leadership style. In the four years since she had taken over, two dozen faculty and staff had left the tiny college. The Student Government Association in late 2008 described a “toxic and disruptive environment on campus.” Nearly half of the students and faculty members signed a petition demanding a meeting about the “crisis in leadership.” Even so, Sanders’ salary rose to $150,000 in 2009, according to college records, as tuition increased by $5,000, to $22,407 in 2011, and enrollment dropped to 156 students.
...
The records showed that Sanders had assured People’s United Bank and the state bonding agency that the college had $2.6 million in pledges to secure the loan. Internal college audits showed that only $676,000 in actual donations came in from 2010 to 2014. Sanders listed two people as having confirmed pledges for more money than they had offered; neither knew their pledges had been used to support the loan. A third donor had offered a $1 million bequest, to be paid upon her death. Instead, the college’s loan application counted it in funds to be paid out over the next few years.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2017, 11:22:19 PM by pileus »

pileus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 536
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #316 on: June 26, 2017, 11:33:40 PM »
Quote
Sanders' attempt at this was rejected in the Democratic primary, the voting bloc that would be most willing to entertain anything approaching a leftist policy agenda.  It should be a clue that it would not play well more broadly.

Hmmm, yeah, well, there's the undemocratic superdelegate stuff, and of course, when the mainstream media wasn't ignoring Sanders and his huge rallies to show Trump's empty podium, they were engaged in spreading propaganda. Remember, Sanders came from nowhere, and achieved an awful lot in a short time. It should be a clue that it might play well more broadly.

But, we'll see. If the Corporate Democrats keep the party in this headlock and they don't take the Congress, there may be blood. Perhaps it wouldn't be so bad to have Trump and the Corporate Democrats totally f**k up for a while longer. Maybe that will finally wake up a critical mass.

Quote
Pelosi historically has done an excellent job in whipping votes and getting the Democratic caucus in line.  She was vital in the efforts with respect to Obamacare.  She does a pretty good job in serving as a foil to Trump and an agitator.

I'm not sure how Dutch or Austrian politics work, but American politics is hardball.  All of this crying "not fair!" and whining about "poor Bernie" being mistreated by the DNC is childish nonsense.  The DNC is a partisan organization engaged in electing Democrats.  Bernie is not a Democrat and he attempted a hostile takeover, which was soundly rejected.  My only beef with the Corporate Democrats at the DNC is that they failed to do MORE to hamper Bernie's candidacy FASTER.  If there really was a "revolution" desired by American voters, Sanders should have attempted an independent bid.  If his ideas and agenda were what the American electorate wanted, then perhaps he would have prevailed.  Personally, I would have had respect for him had he done so, and been more open to his argument.

If Sanders couldn't take the heat brought down by the DNC, imagine how he would have wilted in the general election against the GOP and Fox machines.  It would have been a sad sight to behold.

But we'll never know, because Bernie couldn't even convince enough Democrats to vote for him in the primary. 

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #317 on: June 26, 2017, 11:48:43 PM »
Sanders currently has the most favorable rating of any politician in America.  He would have crushed trump and, had the DNC not made backroom media deals and aligned their insider corporate superdelegates to ALL vote AGAINST him, he would have prevailed in the primary.  Like it or not, the Corporate DNC has destroyed themselves as a viable party.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2017, 05:30:43 PM by jai mitchell »
Haiku of Futures Passed
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #318 on: June 27, 2017, 12:02:21 AM »
I'm not sure how Dutch or Austrian politics work, but American politics is hardball.

No, it's not. It's a duopoly, where both parties vie for the favour of rich donors. It even makes me think sometimes that Democrats are wilfully weak and dumb. That the Democratic Party is only there to quash and usurp progressive voices.

Quote
All of this crying "not fair!" and whining about "poor Bernie" being mistreated by the DNC is childish nonsense.
 

I'm not crying or whining, but the DNC mails were telling. There was way more crying and whining after Clinton lost. The Democratic Party is still simply unwilling to do a post-mortem analysis. First thing they did, was make sure they could still receive unlimited donations. And now they lead with their values, they're not Trump, and Russia, Russia, Russia!

Quote
The DNC is a partisan organization engaged in electing Democrats.  Bernie is not a Democrat and he attempted a hostile takeover, which was soundly rejected.  My only beef with the Corporate Democrats at the DNC is that they failed to do MORE to hamper Bernie's candidacy FASTER.


Okay, so you actually condone the DNC cheating and the Clinton collusion with the mainstream media? Well, at least you're honest.  ;D

Quote
If there really was a "revolution" desired by American voters, Sanders should have attempted an independent bid.  If his ideas and agenda were what the American electorate wanted, then perhaps he would have prevailed.  Personally, I would have had respect for him had he done so, and been more open to his argument.

You have a point there, but the Democratic Part is supposed to be progressive and represent the working man. It hasn't been and hasn't done so for a couple of decades now. It's Republican-lite. If all you care about is winning and beating the other team, I can understand that you care more about strategy than you do about ideas and policy, and simply doing the right thing, for the American people.

It's not the ends that count, but the means whereby you attain those ends.

Quote
If Sanders couldn't take the heat brought down by the DNC, imagine how he would have wilted in the general election against the GOP and Fox machines.  It would have been a sad sight to behold.

Still a lot better than that horrible Clinton who threw away millions on ads about Trump's personality (a new record, I believe). I mean, as a sight to behold.

Strategically, Clinton's loss to Trump may have been the best thing to happen, but that's something that will have to be decided in the long term. Trump, the GOP and the Corporate Democrats are all integral parts of the oligarchic system, and that entire system needs to change if we are to have any chance at solving things like AGW.

Quote
But we'll never know, because Bernie couldn't even convince enough Democrats to vote for him in the primary.

It says more about registered Democrats (again, ignoring the superdelegate and Pied Piper stuff) that they would prefer a horrible candidate like Hillary Clinton over a candidate like Sanders who had actual ideas that appealed to the working man, and could inspire crowds.

I guess that for some people politics is just like sports. Go, Blue team.

If only it were a winning strategy, it would make sense. But it's not. It's a stupid strategy based on emotions like fear, arrogance and hatred of the perceived other (and greed), which is why the world now has Trump anyway. Thanks for that.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

pileus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 536
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #319 on: June 27, 2017, 12:08:25 AM »
"The biggest mistake that Dems can make is to swing hard left towards the policies and approach of a failed independent/leftist candidate like Bernie Sanders.  That is so far out of touch with the bulk of the American electorate, and would lock in Republican rule for a generation."

Some think so. They will do what they have to do.

I do not. And I will do what I have to do.

sidd

I would love to see the far left create a legitimate third party in the US.  Make the argument and field strong candidates, and see how the electorate responds.

My focus over the next 15 months is working FOR voter registration, and AGAINST Republican voter suppression efforts.  It's a scandal that there are so many barriers to voting in the US, and more specifically in red states since the Supreme Court weakened the Voting Right act four years ago.

And it's a equal scandal that turnout is low relative to other nations.

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3342
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 602
  • Likes Given: 409
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #320 on: June 27, 2017, 01:59:53 AM »
Not sure what you mean by the 'far left' in the US context, since politics is so utterly skewed here.

Presumably you mean someone like Bernie Sanders. But in most other developed countries his 'radical' 'Socialist' 'far left' ideas like universal health care would be acceptable to most people across the political spectrum...in fact proposals to get rid of such 'radical' institutions as socialized health care in the same thing would be vehemently opposed by nearly everyone from nearly all political stripes.

There are a few actual communists and anarchists who one might consider to be something like a 'far left' in some more global perspective. Is that what you were thinking of??

"My focus over the next 15 months is working FOR voter registration, and AGAINST Republican voter suppression efforts. "

Good idea! Are there any particular groups you are working with or could recommend?

And yes, it is a scandal. One of many, but perhaps the one that will finally end any pretense of the USA being any kind of actual democracy.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2017, 02:06:04 AM by wili »
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #321 on: June 27, 2017, 09:35:07 AM »
I would love to see the far left create a legitimate third party in the US.  Make the argument and field strong candidates, and see how the electorate responds.
That's something we've discussed here, and it's still being discussed among progressives. There's this Draft Bernie movement where they try to get Sanders to start that third party. But others, like the Justice Democrats, think that would be too difficult, and that it would be better/easier to 'take over' the Democratic Party and put people in Congress that do not accept corporate money. Not that this is easy, but it's the easier route towards a position where you can actually change things.

I find it very hard to decide what would be best. The American political/electoral system is pretty insane, especially given big money influences and how mainstream media works.

Quote
My focus over the next 15 months is working FOR voter registration, and AGAINST Republican voter suppression efforts.  It's a scandal that there are so many barriers to voting in the US, and more specifically in red states since the Supreme Court weakened the Voting Right act four years ago.
Good for you, this is indeed a scandal. What the oligarchy fears most, is the people actually turning out to vote and then actually voting for someone who isn't part of the system. Trump is an example of that, but as he represents another subset of oligarchs (not the people, of course), they will probably work it out amongst themselves. Someone like Sanders would probably be assassinated, which is why it's important that it becomes a movement with many heads.

Quote
And it's a equal scandal that turnout is low relative to other nations.
It's not difficult to understand why people have lost faith in politics. Obama was a huge blow in that respect. I think a lot, if not most, of Trump voters knew/know that Trump will not serve their interests either.

The Jimmy Dore Show was in a bit of a slump, but a lot of good videos have been posted lately:

Julian Assange Explains Why The Democrats Are Doomed
! No longer available
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #322 on: June 27, 2017, 09:52:40 AM »
I think the guy from Secular Talk is very watchable as well:

Bill Maher: Dems Should Be More Like Bernie & 'Have Some Balls'
! No longer available

And here's another good one:

Nancy Pelosi: You Can't Replace Me, Big Donors Love Me!
! No longer available
« Last Edit: June 27, 2017, 10:02:39 AM by Neven »
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #323 on: June 27, 2017, 10:48:21 AM »
If this guy doesn't beat that witch Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, there really is no hope left for the US (people in Florida, please vote for him):

! No longer available
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #324 on: June 27, 2017, 01:46:25 PM »
If this guy doesn't beat that witch Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, there really is no hope left for the US (people in Florida, please vote for him):

! No longer available
A very good link!!
Jimmy seems subdued from the last time I watched him, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's interesting how rapidly the Dems are now backing away from Russiagate, couldn't be that there never was any there, there?
Before the Ossoff debacle some planned to ride Russia triumphantly through the 2018 campaign. Many are now having second thoughts. We need a win in 2018, and Russiagate isn't a winning strategy. People know that Hillary lost to a guy with half of her money, a lousy screen presence, and a platform that most don't approve of. He was/is despised - it's just that Hillary was even worse.
When a guy can raise $4M by talking about the issues, at an average of <$18 / donation, we no longer need the deep pockets that the DNC can deliver. Once we're free from the ties these deep pockets demand we can campaign for things that people care about, not the things that the oligarchs care about.


If running as Republicans lite was a winning strategy we'd be in power now.


Terry

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #325 on: June 27, 2017, 05:35:15 PM »
P.S.:
The cutting edge progressive/liberal thought I watched since last year made me a Hillary defender, for I always checked the stuff and the sources. But I'm fed up with that. The reason I refuse to donate my clicks and neurons to the Dore show is the volume of suspicious and occasionally even obviously false (even to me German!) stuff he tells. (Example: Hillary selling Plutonium to Russia. LOL or weep?)

I prefer straight-forward transparent news, where you don't constantly feel an urge to double check stuff. Like Rachel Maddow's excellent synopses and interviews. For polit entertainment I find Bill Maher superbly dwarfing Dore's echo chamber.

M.G.

1. the english term is 'Liberal'
2.  Jimmy dore was not reporting on selling plutonium to russia, he was reporting on old reporting done by the New York times about how the clinton's made hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations by Russian Banks to the Clinton Foundation when they were selling U.S. URANIUM mining interests to the russian bankers.

see:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal
By JO BECKER and MIKE McINTIREAPRIL 23, 2015

Quote
And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.


Haiku of Futures Passed
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

pileus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 536
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #326 on: June 27, 2017, 06:06:15 PM »
Sanders currently has the most favorable rating of any politician in America.  He would have crushed trump and, had the DNC not made backroom media deals and aligned their insider corporate superdelegates to ALL vote AGAINST him, he would have prevailed in the primary.  Like it or not, the Corporate DNC has destroyed themselves as a viable party.

Sanders would have been eviscerated in the general election.  He would have been attacked relentlessly and comprehensively by the GOP operation and their media apparatus. 

Given factual evidence of Sanders' poor performance in the Dem primary, it is likely Dem turnout would have been depressed in the General with Sanders as the nominee.  While Sanders would have done well in more liberal states like California and Vermont, it is likely Trump would have run up even larger margins in states like Florida and Texas.  Trump may have even won the popular vote. 

Not sure where you are getting your information, but the Corporate Democrat controlled Democratic Party is on track to take a large number of House seats in the 2018 election.  Current projections vary in the range of 25-80.  This remains a viable party. 

Where we perhaps might have some agreement is that there is a vacuum of leadership currently in the Party.  There needs to be one or several figures that step up and take the Democratic Party forward to fight for both moderate and progressive agendas.  I of course do not see Bernie Sanders as that unifying force, but he certainly deserves a voice given his appeal to many on the left.

pileus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 536
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #327 on: June 27, 2017, 06:26:30 PM »
Not sure what you mean by the 'far left' in the US context, since politics is so utterly skewed here.

Presumably you mean someone like Bernie Sanders. But in most other developed countries his 'radical' 'Socialist' 'far left' ideas like universal health care would be acceptable to most people across the political spectrum...in fact proposals to get rid of such 'radical' institutions as socialized health care in the same thing would be vehemently opposed by nearly everyone from nearly all political stripes.

There are a few actual communists and anarchists who one might consider to be something like a 'far left' in some more global perspective. Is that what you were thinking of??

"My focus over the next 15 months is working FOR voter registration, and AGAINST Republican voter suppression efforts. "

Good idea! Are there any particular groups you are working with or could recommend?

And yes, it is a scandal. One of many, but perhaps the one that will finally end any pretense of the USA being any kind of actual democracy.

Yes, Bernie is far left with respect to the American political spectrum.  There of course fringe figures even farther left and, as you suggest, anarchists, but as a visible and widely known figure it is not controversial to call Bernie far left.

In terms of activism and groups, my first level of support is to legal groups such as the ACLU and the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund.  While obviously not involved in the voter suppression fight, it's important to support groups like the CSLDF given the current all out assault against climate scientists (I in fact have pledged part of my estate to the CSLDF).

A few political groups that I support:

flippable - This group is rightfully focused on state level elections, where Republicans have dominated in recent years.

https://www.flippable.org/our-plan/

Let America Vote - This is Jason Kander's organization, focused on combating voter suppression.

https://www.letamericavote.org/about/

There are other worthy organizations, but these are a few that align with my interests and capacity to help.

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #328 on: June 27, 2017, 06:27:04 PM »
Sanders currently has the most favorable rating of any politician in America.  He would have crushed trump and, had the DNC not made backroom media deals and aligned their insider corporate superdelegates to ALL vote AGAINST him, he would have prevailed in the primary.  Like it or not, the Corporate DNC has destroyed themselves as a viable party.

Sanders would have been eviscerated in the general election.  He would have been attacked relentlessly and comprehensively by the GOP operation and their media apparatus. 

Given factual evidence of Sanders' poor performance in the Dem primary, it is likely Dem turnout would have been depressed in the General with Sanders as the nominee. 

bleh,  the primary strategy of a red-state firewall and closed primaries destroyed the Democratic party.  Sanders won West Virginia handily and eastern Pennsylvania counties with the exact SAME demographics flipped to Clinton by 10 points.  This is because sanders polled +10 points BETTER than Clinton against trump. 

To claim dem turnout would have been depressed by Sanders, who was filling stadiums when the ACTUAL dem turnout was crap, with many former Obama voters voting FOR trump is revisionist nonesense and shows a complete lack of understanding of what happened and therefore you can assert more nonesense about what might happen in the future.

Sanders would have won against trump by over 15 points, easily. 
Haiku of Futures Passed
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

Martin Gisser

  • Guest
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #329 on: June 27, 2017, 06:33:30 PM »
P.S.:
The cutting edge progressive/liberal thought I watched since last year made me a Hillary defender, for I always checked the stuff and the sources. But I'm fed up with that. The reason I refuse to donate my clicks and neurons to the Dore show is the volume of suspicious and occasionally even obviously false (even to me German!) stuff he tells. (Example: Hillary selling Plutonium to Russia. LOL or weep?)

I prefer straight-forward transparent news, where you don't constantly feel an urge to double check stuff. Like Rachel Maddow's excellent synopses and interviews. For polit entertainment I find Bill Maher superbly dwarfing Dore's echo chamber.

M.G.

1. the english term is 'Liberal'
2.  Jimmy dore was not reporting on selling plutonium to russia, he was reporting on old reporting done by the New York times about how the clinton's made hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations by Russian Banks to the Clinton Foundation when they were selling U.S. URANIUM mining interests to the russian bankers.

see:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal
By JO BECKER and MIKE McINTIREAPRIL 23, 2015

Quote
And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.
1.) I use the Republican coined term "librol" to denote the left side of the U.S. polit clown theater. (Just like I learned to love GWB's wørd "nucular"...)

2.) That NYTimes article is a fantastic example for my German fist-rule: "Do not trust any source that spreads anti climate science propaganda".

They explicitly quote Peter Schweizer's infamous book of anti Hillary propaganda lies, then not yet in print and later mostly spread by Breitbart and Russian infowar bots and trolls, ... - and some kids in Macedonia (the kids infected the Berners it seems) PLUS, the D polit suicide squad...

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #330 on: June 27, 2017, 07:05:12 PM »
Just like climate science, the desire for something to be true, or not, doesn't mean it is (or isn't):

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/apr/26/peter-schweizer/fact-checking-clinton-cash-author-claim-about-bill/

Quote
Our ruling

Schweizer said, "Of the 13 (Bill) Clinton speeches that fetched $500,000 or more, only two occurred during the years his wife was not secretary of state."

We're not checking Schweizer's suggestion that the increased speaking fees were part of a plan to curry favor in his wife's State Department. But on the specific numbers, Schweitzer is correct.

Hillary Clinton’s financial disclosure forms from 2001 through the end of 2012 confirm Schweizer’s claim. We rate it True.
Haiku of Futures Passed
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

pileus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 536
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #331 on: June 27, 2017, 07:32:24 PM »
Sanders would have won against trump by over 15 points, easily.

Martin Gisser

  • Guest
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #332 on: June 27, 2017, 08:11:14 PM »
Just like climate science, the desire for something to be true, or not, doesn't mean it is (or isn't):
...
Just like good anti climate science propaganda contains some kernels of cherry picked truths...

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #333 on: June 27, 2017, 08:33:46 PM »
Just like climate science, the desire for something to be true, or not, doesn't mean it is (or isn't):

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/apr/26/peter-schweizer/fact-checking-clinton-cash-author-claim-about-bill/

Quote
Our ruling

Schweizer said, "Of the 13 (Bill) Clinton speeches that fetched $500,000 or more, only two occurred during the years his wife was not secretary of state."

We're not checking Schweizer's suggestion that the increased speaking fees were part of a plan to curry favor in his wife's State Department. But on the specific numbers, Schweitzer is correct.

Hillary Clinton’s financial disclosure forms from 2001 through the end of 2012 confirm Schweizer’s claim. We rate it True.
Jai
I'm not familiar with Schweizer or Punditfact, but I've long been curious about the tens of millions that various Ukrainian leaders were donating to The Clinton Foundation while they were begging for billions from the WMF. I suppose it's all quite legal, but it certainly left a stench in the air.
When the VP's son, Hunter Biden was given a seat on the board of a Ukrainian oil and gas conglomerate just as Poroshenko was sworn in it also raised more than a few eyebrows. This kind of thing used to be the provenance of Republican insiders, if Democrats were involved they at least had the decency to hide their tracks. Billy Carter may have lent his name to some really bad beer, but this smells worse than Billy Beer after it was left out all night.
Terry

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #334 on: June 27, 2017, 09:18:40 PM »
Haiku of Futures Passed
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #335 on: June 27, 2017, 10:22:58 PM »
It's impossible to say whether Sanders would've beaten Trump. Timing is also crucial in these matters. Just a few months ago general opinion was that Jeremy Corbyn was causing the Labour Party to self-destruct, but then suddenly the tables turned completely. So maybe Trump and his GOP cronies would have activated that old McCarthyite gene in the American DNA and attack Sanders on that, but I think the reaction to that would've been a massive turn-out of young voters. Don't forget how disliked Trump was. Only Clinton was able to beat him when it came to unpopularity.

And Sanders would've talked about the issues, not about how horrible a person Trump was. Issues like minimum wage, health care for all, Wall Street regulation, affordable or free college, and let's not forget climate policy (something Sanders talks about all the time, unlike Corporate Democrats who only pay lip service). These are the things that a very large part of the population care about, as it they have a massive impact on their lives. Sanders talks about the core problem non-stop: oligarchs, the 1%.

A lot of what he said, was used by Trump, but the difference was that Sanders actually meant what he said and promised. And I think that a lot of voters are smart enough to know this difference, including a lot of the people that ended up voting for Trump to stick it up to the establishment and Clinton's arrogance ('I'm With Her', as if she was entitled to people's votes).

I personally think Sanders could have won, and the Democrats should have run with him, because it's better to lose standing up for your ideals and beliefs, than to lose because you thought you picked a cunning strategy, but lost anyway. This has caused the Democratic Party to lose its soul (a long time ago, not just in this election).

Hopefully somebody like Sanders stands up in the years to come. Or many like him would be even better, because a movement with many heads will be more difficult to target.

I'm seeing a lot of younger people that really appeal to me. They're smart and honest, and aren't trying to betray their ideals for political/financial gain. No public and private positions (to please donors). If they can stay that way, there may be hope for the US. And the world.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Martin Gisser

  • Guest
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #336 on: June 27, 2017, 10:55:22 PM »
...
I personally think Sanders could have won, and the Democrats should have run with him, because it's better to lose standing up for your ideals and beliefs, than to lose because you thought you picked a cunning strategy, but lost anyway. This has caused the Democratic Party to lose its soul (a long time ago, not just in this election).

Hopefully somebody like Sanders stands up in the years to come. Or many like him would be even better, because a movement with many heads will be more difficult to target.

I'm seeing a lot of younger people that really appeal to me.
...
Whereas, I've decided to only click this thread if Neven said something... :-)
This is what I suggested to a Fb-Berner last year: Give Hillary a landslide, and then work at Bernie's movement.

We don't have the time for 20th century polit games anymore. Subverting a party like the Tea Party and stuff (back to Reagan) did with the R side of the United States of Fossils polit clowns doesn't cut it anymore. Give your Al Gores a chance.




Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #337 on: June 27, 2017, 11:03:39 PM »
This is what I suggested to a Fb-Berner last year: Give Hillary a landslide, and then work at Bernie's movement.
I guess that was also the reason Sanders rallied for her, to force her to incorporate some of his proposed policies. But I think that if she had become president, there would've been no chance in hell the Bernie movement would've gained any momentum. Even if Clinton would probably have served the interests of Wall Street, Silicon Valley and the good old military-industrial complex.

In this sense it's better that Clinton lost, although Trump is a total disaster, of course. Real change. It's there for the taking, but I'm sure the Corporate Democrats will do everything they can to f**k it up. Because there's no way in hell they will let true progressives take the trough away from them.

Quote
Whereas, I've decided to only click this thread if Neven said something... :-)

I hope I'm not disappointing too much.  ;)

I know people want me to be this perfect Arctic sea ice blogger, but I have my own (developing) views as well. I hope to bring all of it together one day.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

Martin Gisser

  • Guest
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #338 on: June 27, 2017, 11:15:34 PM »
Baby Trump is still in the bathwater. (ROTFL...) And who put him there? Hillary or Bernie? (or, God forbid, the Russians)? Divide et impera...

Edit:
I know people want me to be this perfect Arctic sea ice blogger, but I have my own (developing) views as well. I hope to bring all of it together one day.
This is a major reason why we (Homo Sapiens Erectus, who tries to walk his brains upright...) communicate.
« Last Edit: June 27, 2017, 11:32:34 PM by Martin Gisser »

pileus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 536
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 45
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #339 on: June 27, 2017, 11:42:27 PM »
Sanders would have won against trump by over 15 points, easily.

yes.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/mi/michigan_trump_vs_sanders-5744.html

it takes a lot of smarts to respond with a stupid meme.

I actually think the original Willy Wonka was quite entertaining, and Gene Wilder was a brilliant thespian, may he Rest In Peace.

Anyway, you linked to a Michigan state level poll aggregator to buttress your argument that Sanders would have defeated Trump in the General Election by 15 points?  That's an interesting methodology, but fails to support your assertions across the board.  It's quite sloppy.

I'll help you a bit.  The same aggregator has the national level poling at Sanders +10, but the end date for the individual polls was early June, because as we know Sanders was vanquished by Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Primary.  You can clearly see the trend lines of Sanders' erosion and the polling gap closing between Sanders and Trump through April and May.  And this is before any hypothetical General Election matchup where Saint Bernie would have been subjected to an onslaught of media vetting by the MSM, and more viscously by Fox and the GOP Internet and radio media apparatus. 

Ultimately, we will never know the outcome of that matchup because Sanders was unable to defeat Hillary Clinton.  Given the partisan split in the US electorate, there will likely never be a +15 winning margin in the future, especially for a hypothetical candidate as weak and unprepared as Bernie Sanders.

Jim Pettit

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1175
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #340 on: June 29, 2017, 01:44:53 PM »
Sanders would have won against trump by over 15 points, easily.

If the GOP would have sat back after the Dem nominee was chosen and said, "Well, thank goodness Clinton is out of the race; let's just leave Sanders alone and see how well he does", then, yes, maybe. But that's a little far-fetched. The GOP would have turned its formidable power to bear on the "old, crazy, wild-eyed, wild-haired, dandruff-flecked, finger-wagging socialist". (Their words, not mine.)  Sanders would have been eviscerated. He would have been destroyed. And Russia, instead of going after Clinton, would have gone after him just as hard.

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #341 on: June 29, 2017, 07:47:29 PM »
Sanders would have won against trump by over 15 points, easily.

If the GOP would have sat back after the Dem nominee was chosen and said, "Well, thank goodness Clinton is out of the race; let's just leave Sanders alone and see how well he does", then, yes, maybe. But that's a little far-fetched. The GOP would have turned its formidable power to bear on the "old, crazy, wild-eyed, wild-haired, dandruff-flecked, finger-wagging socialist". (Their words, not mine.)  Sanders would have been eviscerated. He would have been destroyed. And Russia, instead of going after Clinton, would have gone after him just as hard.

Those are the same tired arguments that the MSM used to say that Sanders wasn't a viable candidate early on in the primary.  I have very strong personal relationships with extremely conservative folk and they all believed that Sanders was authentic and against the Washington establishment.  In the end it was this position that ultimately defeated Clinton.  The problem with Clinton was that she was the ultimate establishment candidate and, just like all the establishment candidates in the Republican primary, Trump destroyed her.  That kryptonite would not have worked against Sanders who was running an ACTUAL populist campaign.

Trump was elected with a 60% unfavorable opinion.  The reason that Clinton was defeated was because she was not considered trustworthy at the outset and this was a 'change' election.

This is why Sanders is now THE most popular U.S. political figure and he would have CRUSHED the rust-belt states (which he won against clinton), as well as some rural Midwest states where he was polling well ahead of Trump and ESPECIALLY among independents, many of whom stayed home BECAUSE he was not in the general election.

All your arguments forgets to note that nearly 1/2 of all U.S. did not vote in the election and many blue-collar workers said that they voted for Trump because they felt betrayed by Obama.  Sanders spent his entire campaign rallying against the Billionaires and Oligarchs and he was growing in popularity through the entire primary (and afterwards now he continues to grow in popularity). 

Face it, this was a 'change' election and a rebellion against neo-liberal economic policy, similar to 'brexit' and the recent upending of UK by Jeremy Corbyn. 
Haiku of Futures Passed
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

Jim Pettit

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1175
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 41
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #342 on: June 30, 2017, 12:52:24 AM »
Those are the same tired arguments that the MSM used to say that Sanders wasn't a viable candidate early on in the primary.  I have very strong personal relationships with extremely conservative folk and they all believed that Sanders was authentic and against the Washington establishment.  In the end it was this position that ultimately defeated Clinton.  The problem with Clinton was that she was the ultimate establishment candidate and, just like all the establishment candidates in the Republican primary, Trump destroyed her.  That kryptonite would not have worked against Sanders who was running an ACTUAL populist campaign.

Trump was elected with a 60% unfavorable opinion.  The reason that Clinton was defeated was because she was not considered trustworthy at the outset and this was a 'change' election.

This is why Sanders is now THE most popular U.S. political figure and he would have CRUSHED the rust-belt states (which he won against clinton), as well as some rural Midwest states where he was polling well ahead of Trump and ESPECIALLY among independents, many of whom stayed home BECAUSE he was not in the general election.

All your arguments forgets to note that nearly 1/2 of all U.S. did not vote in the election and many blue-collar workers said that they voted for Trump because they felt betrayed by Obama.  Sanders spent his entire campaign rallying against the Billionaires and Oligarchs and he was growing in popularity through the entire primary (and afterwards now he continues to grow in popularity). 

Face it, this was a 'change' election and a rebellion against neo-liberal economic policy, similar to 'brexit' and the recent upending of UK by Jeremy Corbyn.

Had Sanders been the nominee instead of Clinton, his favorability ratings would simply not have stayed high. Period. All the tens of millions of dollars of Koch money brought to bear on Clinton would have been redirected to him, and there would have been wall-to-wall-to-floor-to-ceiling ads attacking his socialist stance, his myopia, his lack of depth on most domestic matters,etc. (Perhaps some think such carpet bombing has no effect on the electorate, but hundreds of millions are spent every election cycle proving otherwise.) In fact, I think had that happened, we'd likely now be sitting around talking about how Hillary is the most popular political figure.

Hillary lost the electoral vote for a number of reasons (keep in mind, she garnered millions more popular votes than did Trump). One of those was definitely because she was not considered trustworthy, a narrative that was amplified by the right and a complicit press, and by Comey, etc. But she also lost for a number of other reasons: because of fake news (Russian and otherwise), because of misogyny, because of election tampering, because of an obsolete electoral college system that says the votes of red state dwellers are worth more than those who live in blue states, because of voter suppression, because of racists who wanted to get even with the Democratic party for making a black man president, because of abjectly stupid Bernie-or-busters who despite every shred of common sense and evidence to the contrary saw Trump as the lesser of two nearly-equal evils, and so on.

Meh...

For the record, I have no great love for the Clintons. I'm glad they're off the world stage, and hope it stays that way (hear me, Chelsea?). But I think the claim that Sanders would have prevailed where Clinton did not is scientifically indefensible. Too bad we'll never know.

jai mitchell

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2357
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 207
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #343 on: June 30, 2017, 06:14:15 AM »
One of those was definitely because she was not considered trustworthy, a narrative that was amplified by the right and a complicit press, and by Comey, etc. But she also lost for a number of other reasons: because of fake news (Russian and otherwise), because of misogyny, because of election tampering. . .

She lost because she is a neoliberal who supported NAFTA and the TPP (which Barack Obama was pushing through and against the will of the democratic party during the entire election).

Haiku of Futures Passed
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6774
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1047
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #344 on: June 30, 2017, 07:08:29 AM »
Re: from the road

I usually am not often left of the mississippi, but i recently put 4-5 kilomiles on the road in more than a dozen states from the hudson to the headwaters of the missouri and across the continental divide into the snake river watershed. As is my wont, I stopped in many small, lost places, talked to many people on the road, and many truckers who travel more than I do. My take is that 2018 is going to be a bust for democrats unless they move substantially left. But I see no signs of that happening yet.

sidd

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6002
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 893
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #345 on: June 30, 2017, 09:45:08 AM »
Re: from the road

I usually am not often left of the mississippi, but i recently put 4-5 kilomiles on the road in more than a dozen states from the hudson to the headwaters of the missouri and across the continental divide into the snake river watershed. As is my wont, I stopped in many small, lost places, talked to many people on the road, and many truckers who travel more than I do. My take is that 2018 is going to be a bust for democrats unless they move substantially left. But I see no signs of that happening yet.

sidd


Hearing progressive noises emanating from small towns & truck stops is unusual to say the least. The DNC's heavy handed takeover from progressive democrats in California is going to lead to either a civil war within the California Democratic Party, or a bifurcation of the National Democratic Party.
Neither option will do much to dislodge Trump in 2020, nor are they likely to wrest many governorship's from Republican hands in 2018.
Personally I think the split needs to be done ASAP. There is never a good time to change the direction of a major party, but there is no way that I can think of to incrementally move to the left when TPTB are so firmly in the hands of their sponsors.
It will hurt badly to lose in 2018 due to internecine skirmishes, but it will be close to catastrophic to lose in 2020 because we haven't rallied around a populist, progressive leader.
A peace candidate that cares deeply about the environment who campaigns for single payer healthcare and debt forgiveness on college loans will beat whoever the GOP backs. If he doesn't deliver the next president will make Trump appear as a statesman.


Terry

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #346 on: June 30, 2017, 02:51:28 PM »
If what Jimmy Dore talks about here, is true, that would be pretty mindblowing:

Clinton’s Top Fundraisers Now Working For Trump

! No longer available
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6774
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1047
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #347 on: July 01, 2017, 06:44:41 AM »
Nice article about the wilderness of the so called democratic intellectuals:

"Rachel Maddow, once the charming spokesperson of a kinder world, crazily unveils tax returns she found in Al Capone’s vault. Keith Olbermann — never charming but at least self-confident — now squats on the floor in promotional photos, swaddled in an American flag. The newer stars of the left — the Louise Mensches and Eric Garlands — are using game theory to outwit invisible Soviet assassins. Elected Democrats are paralyzed. They repeat, over and over, that none of this is normal, commit themselves to the fight, and then roll over, confirming the president’s appointments, praising the beauty of a missile strike, or begging the FBI to save them. Hillary Clinton emerges from the woods to blame Jim Comey, the DNC, and the Russians for her loss ... "

...

"  ... beginning with Bill Clinton, the slim ideological differences that existed between the Democrats and the GOP were replaced with differences of style. Clinton’s “Third Way” promised to be every bit the dupe-servant of war and profit its rivals were, but to do it with the measured confidence of an expert. The New Democrats would destroy the labor movement, but sigh about it. They would frown while they voted to authorize the next war. They would make only the concessions necessary to bolster the flailing engine of finance capital, but they would do it with the latest research in the world. "

...

"The result was an American political movement whose center was a moral void. When John Kerry spoke out against the death penalty, his opposition was based in flawed application — the punishment just wasn’t smart. When he criticized Bush’s handling of the War in Iraq, his position was similar: he would continue the war but be more strategic about it. When Kerry lost, American liberals opined that there were just too many rubes out there. They would have voted better — smarter — if only they had had the right data visualizations in front of them. When Barack Obama won, and then passed the Heritage Foundation’s health care policy while carrying out a drone war responsible for the incineration of children in half a dozen sovereign nations, he did it while remaining the smartest guy in the room. "

...

"Like any superego, managerial liberalism is concerned first and foremost with appearances. This explains why, in the face of so much bad policy, liberals are incessantly talking about decorum. Thus, the vulgarity and impropriety of Donald Trump are more offensive than his policies, the callousness of his collusion with dictators more insulting than the collusion itself (ordinarily, that is done more quietly, and only with governments like Saudi Arabia, which can butcher their own citizens but not threaten American hegemony). Meanwhile, liberal politicians and journalists express frustration with the rude socialists popping up in their Twitter feeds and at their town halls, refusing to respect their elders. It’s all so embarrassing and juvenile, they claim, when what is needed is a sober, adult response to Donald Trump — never mentioning that the adults were all routed at the polls by this Monster from the Id."

Read the whole thing.

https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-blathering-superego-at-the-end-of-history/

sidd

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6774
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1047
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #348 on: July 01, 2017, 07:55:59 PM »
Lee Fang is usually worth reading.  Here he is on a corporate democrat dinosaur laughing about single payer, echoed by corporate republican dinosaur.

https://theintercept.com/2017/07/01/dick-gephardt-single-payer-health-insurance-lobbyists/

sidd

Neven

  • Administrator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9470
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 1333
  • Likes Given: 617
Re: The problem of Corporate Democrats and how to kick them out
« Reply #349 on: July 01, 2017, 08:02:54 PM »
Some more people for your Que se ficieron thread, sidd. My goodness, these people should be in jail for being this smug. Or at the very least all the corporate donor money they've ever received, should be taken away from them.
The enemy is within
Don't confuse me with him

E. Smith