Bernie Sanders could win my undying affection on Tuesday night if he does one thing:

[grantcart]

If, as it is rumored that his top advisers have urged him to withdraw from the race and he is considering doing it after the Wisconsin primary, he steps up to the podium and says,

"They said it couldn't be done and goddamn it they were right".

It would restore all the affection we previously had for him as a great Senator.

If he tries to split hairs and begrudgingly withdraw and talk about "holding Biden accountable" etc he will always be the bitter shadow of another self.

If he goes out on top with a little humor and a strong endorsement then he will be doing a great service.

Unfortunately, up to this point, he is the candidate who never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

I believe the line above is what Larry David would right for him if given the opportunity.

[ucrdem]

1. Wisconsin will be his undoing.

Even if he does well, eventually someone who came out to vote for him will fall gravely ill, and that will be end. He really should pull the plug before Tuesday or he's going to be saddled forever with a reputation no one would want.

[George II]

19. Florida, Arizona, and Illinois were his undoing.

Last edited Sun Apr 5, 2020, 10:03 AM - Edit history (1)

[ucrdem]

35. LOL, oui c'est vrai.

That's true. But if he doesn't pull out before Tuesday he'll have virus victims on his hands and there's no getting around that, downticket races or no. If he calls for supporters to support him, and he is, and they do, some might get sick, and there's no way of finessing it. And when that happens he will disappear from the media.

In other words, conceding on Tuesday will be too late. The damage will already have been done.

[Tarheel_Dem]

48. And Michigan. And Texas. And Minnesota. And etc.....

[ucrdem]

39. That's great to hear, thanks!

I really I hope no one gets sick. But Sanders not simply saying "it's over folks, stay home and stay healthy" is morally indefensible.

[ucrdem]

43. Yes it's also morally indefensible that the elections weren't postponed

or made all mail-in. But they weren't, and irrespective of the downballot races, Sanders encouraging supporters to vote for him, which means for many going to polling places, and also obliges Biden supporters to vote against him, is at this stage of the game morally indefensible.

p.s. I'd put it more plainly but it would get deleted.

[msongs]

2. he can hire larry david to give his withdrawal speech :-) nt

[The Magistrate]

4. Damn, Sir, This Is The Night For Comedy

Your employment of the phrase 'bernie just stands for the liberal, progressive values' is really the key to whole problem. He just stands for them.

Both 'Bernie' and his most devoted supporters are more concerned with the identity they present, to themselves and to others, than anything else.

Sanders in his colossal egotism conflates support for certain policy goals with desire for him to be the leader of a movement to achieve those goals.

This is nonesense.

Even leaving aside the fact that most of those goals are general among Democratic voters and enjoy broad support among Democratic office-holders and Party officials, virtually no one, not even among Sanders' supporters, thinks he can actually achieve them should he come to hold the highest office in the land.

Expressions of support for Sanders are made as a marker of political orientation. Expressing support for Sanders says 'I'm not a moderate, I'm well to the left of most people', and as with most such things, serves to identify a 'cool' group separate from the general run of 'squares'. People doing this do not even particularly want to prevail, in the sense of being in the majority. It is axiomatic that a majority can never be 'cool', the feeling of being 'hip' and part of an 'in-crowd' depends on being outnumbered by the host of the unwashed and unenlightened. The point is not to achieve any political goal, to secure any discrete reform, it is simply to be sure one is perceived as a particular, and special, kind of person.

People who have an actual interest in achieving the goals widespread among Democrats, the goals of all left and progressive and liberal persons in general, recognize readily Sanders is far too flawed as a politician, and as a personality, to make any progress towards their goals. They know Sanders has not achieved any measurable advance towards them in his long Congressional career. They know Sanders' claim to hold patents and copyrights on these goals is nonesense, because they know their own desires pre-date Sanders, and exist in their hearts and minds without the slightest reference to him or influence by him.

In short, while Sanders imagines himself to be the indispensable man, an overwhelming majority of Democratic voters are clear in their minds that Sanders is quite dispensable, and are determined to see him disposed of, as soon as possible.





"From Bernie’s perspective, dropping out of a race once you have no chance of winning is peculiar behavior that can only be explained by the work of a hidden hand. For most politicians, though, it is actually standard operating procedure. Only Sanders seems to think the normal thing to do once voters have made clear they don’t want to nominate you is to continue campaigning anyway."





"When things are not called by their right names, what is said cannot make sense. When what is said does not make sense, what is planned cannot succeed. When plans do not succeed, people become uneasy. When people are uneasy, punishments do not fit crimes. When punishments do not fit crimes, people cannot know where to put hand or foot."

[PatSeg]

21. Wow, you summed that up beautifully

This should be its own op. I think you said what so many of us are feeling.

"They know Sanders' claim to hold patents and copyrights on these goals is nonsense, because they know their own desires pre-date Sanders, and exist in their hearts and minds without the slightest reference to him or influence by him."

I wish Bernie's supporters would realize, it is really less his ideas and policies that we oppose, it is primarily the man himself we are rejecting.

[The Magistrate]

23. Thank You, Ma'am

I expect I will take your advice later today. I shall have to contrive a suitable, yet soothing title. The last header I put up, a short history of why more radical persons on the left tend to aim more fire at center-left parties than they do at real right-wing types, was titled bluntly and vividly, and so served some eager alerter as a scalp....

[PatSeg]

25. You're welcome

I will look for it!

So many of us lifelong liberals are really tired of being attacked by members of our own party. Overnight we've suddenly been labeled "moderates" and "centrists", as if we are the enemy and it is mostly because we do not see their savior as the solution to all our problems. I really don't like others putting a tag on me. It is not a particularly winning strategy, unless one's strategy is to alienate a large percentage of the Democratic party.

[Demsrule86]

32. Wonderful, masterful post...very impressive +1000

[SheltieLover]

44. Well Stated!

K&R

[grantcart]

5. Advocating policies that over promise, under deliver and never get passed is not a progressive value

It is political masturbation that gratifies your pleasure center but doesn't achieve an actual result.

Passing landmark legislation like the ACA, building public trust and expanding its coverage and revising its practice in the actual body politic is how all of our most progressive government programs from Social Security to Medicare have evolved.

It took Canada 20 years to move from provincial hospital coverage to universal coverage. We can accomplish that in 10 years by building on the ACA with a Democratic President and Congress.

And THE most important skill set of any progressive leader is the ability to forge coalitions with people outside your ardent group of supporters.

No one has failed more than Sanders (some may have tied) to establish broad coalitions as a Senator or a candidate.

The label "progressive" is not achieved by self proclamation but by forging winning coalitions and getting legislation passed. That us the only metric that counts and the only value that is meaningful and why President Obama is the most progressive leader over the last 50 years.

[murielm99]

7. Thank you for mentioning Canada.

Brian Schweitzer, former governor of Montana, was the keynote speaker at one of our Governor's Day events in Illinois. He explained the history of the Canadian move to universal coverage. He did it in a way that everyone there could understand. I saw for the first time how building on the ACA could do the same for us.

I hope that Biden has the support of Congress and the will to bring the ACA forward. He was not my first choice, but I believe he will get things done.

[Akakoji]

16. Agreed. We have to build on ACA

It's really the only realistic option.

[grantcart]

31. Welcome to DU

I agree with your opinion that we have to build on the ACA but would point out that this opinion is not the same as the person who you picked as your preferred candidate.

Most people conflate Medicare for All as the same as "Universal Coverage" and they are two completely different concepts

Canada, for example has universal coverage but uses, like the US, a combination of public and private funds to pay for health care premiums. In fact with the addition of the ACA the percentage of public funds for premiums in the US comes very close to the Canadian system although we still don't have 100% universal coverage.

Sanders proposal for MFA would eliminate the ACA and all private insurers and institute a system that is based on 100% federal funds.

[grantcart]

40. I took a day out in 2012 and looked at the history of the health plans of the 26 leading

modern Democracies.

What I found was two key common features:

1) All major and large minor political parties in all other countries, including some very far right nationalist parties support the idea of some kind of universal coverage. The only party among almost 100 parties that does not support it is the Republican Party. Conservative parties in Canada, Australia and Briton all enthusiastically support it.

2) That with the exception of one country all of these actions were gradual. Taking small steps and building public trust and building on success.

In 1947 Saskatchewan, experiencing a stubborn shortage of doctors passed a universal hospitalization act that covered serious conditions that required hospitalization. It gradually grew and it wasn't until 1966 that a true universal health care system was passed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Canada#History

By the way I think that the next best step to expand the ACA is not necessarily adding a public option, although I am fine with that but adding Universal Coverage for Catastrophic coverage, like Saskatchewan had.

That would mean that whenever a hospital case exceed say $ 100,000 that 100% of the costs would be paid for out of a catastrophic fund (that could be created with a very small tax on the top 10%).

It would be universally popular, even rich Republicans would welcome a plan that would pay for illnesses that are catastrophic. And it wouldn't be that costly because in reality most cases that are catastrophic end up being covered by Medicare, we just have to bankrupt the family first.

It wouldn't cost much, would be very popular, would eliminate most bankruptcies due to medical coverage and would expand federal oversight of the medical system.

[BidenBacker]

9. Damn straight

How many years have the Democrats had simultaneous control of the White House and both chambers of Congress in the last 40 years? Like around 4 total???

Pretty hard to get shit done when you never have the power or the numbers to push anything through. It took a minor miracle and a tight flukish window of only a few weeks just to get the ACA barely squeezed through with zero margin.

Republicans are like a ratchet...when they're in power they manage to get their crap passed to the detriment of the country. But when we've had Dems like Clinton and Obama in office Pubbies throw all kinds of wrenches into the works and as a result we spend most of the time fixing all the shit the previous Gopper POTUS screwed up and little time doing what we want. Constantly taking 1/2 step forward and then 2 steps back is not a recipe for success.

The nation needs several Democratic presidential terms in a row with enough seats in Congress to start jamming some liberal policies through and enough time for people to see how much better they work than conservative policies. 40 years of Reaganomics is quite enough.

[Walleye]

11. You could say that Sanders is the main one impeding progress at this point

[PatSeg]

22. Two highly quotable comments in a row

Last edited Sun Apr 5, 2020, 10:07 AM - Edit history (1)

First The Magistrate's and now your's.

Obama and Democrats in congress would have gone for a much more progressive ACA if they could have passed it, one that would have included a public option. They did the best they could with what they had. At the time, I remember how disappointed many Democrats were with the final product and for awhile, Obama was extremely unpopular on both the right and the left, but he did the right thing and eventually people accepted that.

"The label 'progressive' is not achieved by self proclamation." I think that is why so many of us have been offended by Bernie and his supporters. All of a sudden, we are deemed as "moderates" or "centrists", as if WE are the enemies. With all we have suffered after three years of Trump and republican rule, it is a real slap in the face to have anger and outrage directed at us. On what plane of existence is that a winning strategy? I think the Sanders' campaign was pre-programmed to fail miserably, as they attack everyone who does not fall in line with their vision.

[grantcart]

29. thank you for the compliment, I didn't see the Magistrate's post as I was writing mine.

I refer to this

I think the Sanders' campaign was pre-programmed to fail miserably, as they attack everyone who does not fall in line with their vision.

As Sander's unique strategy to add by subtraction. If we only get rid of anyone who doesn't agree 100% with everything we say then we will be so pure that everyone will love us.

Thirty percent of the electorate looks great when there are 8 people running but not so good when there are only two.

Even if you were to accept the flawed proposition that Sanders could beat Trump, Sanders supporters have absolutely no grasp of how it effects down ticket races.

In AZ when Sanders looked hot our great Senatorial candidate, Mark Kelly, was forced to say that he would support Sanders if he were the nominee. There were thousands of ads with Kelly's endorsement that followed a list of Sanders' socialist proposals closing with a clip of clenched jaw Sanders looking into the camera and saying "I will raise taxes".

Our advantage in the polls shrank to MOE. Since Biden became the actual presumptive nominee those ads have stopped and Kelly is back with a 7% advantage. Kelly is likely to energize the Democrats to a point that the state will go for Biden.

Another example is Montana where Bullock absolutely refused to be considered for the Senate, an office he is likely to win. After Super Tuesday when it became obvious that Biden was the nominee Bullock declared his nomination.

So it is clear that Biden is the candidate that can help us control the Senate, and that is the most important hurdle we are facing to pass "progressive" legislation.

[PatSeg]

36. "Sander's unique strategy to add by subtraction"

Perfect description of the Sanders' campaign. In their enthusiasm and arrogance, they failed to see the many flaws of the campaign. I hope a lot of his advisers have alternate career options, as they clearly have no idea how politics work. I think all the huge rallies and many campaign donations blurred their vision. They didn't have as much support as they thought they did.

You gave some excellent examples of how a Sanders' candidacy would adversely affect down ballot races, apparently something that his campaign and supporters didn't deem important. As president, Bernie would probably have been a lame duck from day one and he wouldn't even understand why.

[Clash City Rocker]

30. Yeah. I'm probably more liberal than 75% of the electorate

Last edited Sun Apr 5, 2020, 11:34 AM - Edit history (1)

But I’m labeled a centrist at best, a tool of Wall Street at worst, because I want a candidate who has some chance of getting elected, and who is capable of working with people to get things done.

[PatSeg]

41. Isn't it amazing

how overnight, many of us have become something we never knew we were? I don't think I could have ever been tagged "moderate" before and now many Bernie supporters call Joe Biden "republican lite". Their "my way or the highway" is not a winning formula.

[msongs]

6. gee I didnt know the only person who holds any progressive values is bernie. thanks!

[Celerity]

8. Bern will NEVER, in his life, be the Democratic nominee for President of the United States

He needs to drop out and do it now.

He is risking lives by staying in the race, especially by forcing people to vote in these times of pandemic peril, and also by aiding the Trump/Putin axis that thrives upon a Democratic Party divided. Sanders got ALL he is going to get in terms of concessions when Biden partially adopted his stance on uni tuition. Bernie neither deserves, nor will he be given, much more than that.

He has done tremendous damage over the years with his never ending slag-offs of our Party. He needs to serve out his term and then retire, as his fate is to simply go fade away in an ever lower arc that inevitably leads to the dustbin of history. That is his destiny, and it is as inescapable as the gravity well of a quantum singularity. Some of his stances and programmes are quite good, but he was, is, and always will be a tremendously flawed vessel to carry those idea-waters in.

He is truly an American, rough-hewed, hackneyed version of Corbyn and will go out, much like Jeremy, not with a bang, but the whimper of a defeated erstwhile revolutionary who simply was always bound to fitfully trod upon a footnote-in-history path to nowhere.

[BidenBacker]

10. That's one good thing about British politicians

Even when some of them pronounce shit for policy at least it just sounds so much nicer and more refined when they say it.

[olegramps]

18. If he was the Democratic nominee, it would guarantee to put a Republican in the White House

[Celerity]

24. +1

[The Magistrate]

27. An Example To Take To Heart, Ma'am

Right down to the 'but we won the argument' line....





"When things are not called by their right names, what is said cannot make sense. When what is said does not make sense, what is planned cannot succeed. When plans do not succeed, people become uneasy. When people are uneasy, punishments do not fit crimes. When punishments do not fit crimes, people cannot know where to put hand or foot."

[Walleye]

12. Progressive values? He is standing in the way of progress

[George II]

17. The root of the word " progressive" is "progress".

[BidenBacker]

47. If "pro" is the opposite of "con"

then what is the opposite of "progress"?

Reagan and the GOP turned "liberal" into a bad word so they shamed us into calling ourselves "progressives". Then Bernie and his Bros showed up and said 'no, you're not "progressives", we are'...so I guess a lot of us are back to being "liberals" again. Which is AOK in my book.

[DenverJared]

20. Bernie doesn't have a monopoly on liberal and progressive values

and such values are not defined by unattainable unicorn programs.

[Squinch]

28. What crap.

[Demsrule86]

33. Why would Biden concede to Trump... he has not lost the General but Sanders has

lost the primary...no matter if you support him or not. Are you implying that Biden will lose to Trump.

[ehrnst]

38. If he doesn't have the votes, then how does he actually get those values

(which by the way, are shared by Biden) into actual reality?

[Tarc]

45. That's nice, but, he has no viable path to the delegate threshold

Math, y'know. Hard stuff.

[Hortensis]

13. Not a chance. I'll never forgive him for 2016, nor should anyone.

Trump/Repubs/Russia are the electorate's terrible mistake, and we must not repeat it.

[duforsure]

14. I suspect Bernie is staying

Only to get some of his proposals accepted by Biden. He and others want MFA, and that instead of the ACA. Private insurance companies are losing huge amounts now , and watch as they jack up their rates real soon making large numbers of people drop them . Add all those who have no job now or insurance. MFA is the best choice now and much less costly. Bernie has other issues also he will demand that Biden addresses them , then he'll drop out and support him, and if Biden refuses he'll regret it. If Biden chooses Warren as a VP she will push him more towards MFA , and other progressive issues he's dragging his feet on, or Stacy Abrams , who would also push Biden on doing . Warren might also be asked to head up Corona virus recovery with Stacy as VP , and Warren retaining her Senate seat to protect the numbers needed for Democrats.

[Demsrule86]

34. Biden can't go for MFA...only universal coverage based on the ACA...and that is that.

We need to win.

[BlueMTexpat]

15. I doubt that he'll EVER win

my undying affection.

But this would certainly make a dent in my loathing quotient.

[grantcart]

46. Lol because Sanders couldn't carry his own water. In 48 hours we will have the presumptive nominee.

[handmade34]

26. irredeemable