Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Reticence created an enthuism gap [View all]JCanete
(5,272 posts)47. You really believe that change just happens from inside without a push from the outside to make it
happen. Why? If there's no noise about something, there's no damn pressure to do it. Doing something only pisses off the people who helped you get elected, or finds enemies that were lying dormant. Why fuck with the status-quo when the status quo is how you even got elected? And assuming somebody had that integrity anyway, why would you assume that anybody else would add their voice to it, knowing what it meant for them?
We went a very very very very long time in Washington with almost no mention of money's influence on it from our elected officials. That changed by degrees under Obama, and Occupy Wall Street probably had a part in the level of discourse that the subject got in Obama's campaign against Romney.
I will never cease to be astonished that Democrats want to blame the voices that are out there demanding that our politicians fight for just causes for our losses.
I'm not sure what the point about Sanders and caucuses is. Is it that he is a hardcore liberal who pulled in voters who were not registered dems? That seems like a good thing?
I read your article on the Sanders amendment by the way, and I appreciate you providing it. I have all kinds of problems with that article, not the least of which is the person's willingness to compare money Sanders got from the industry at a national level, 300,000(vs clinton's 2.5? million) to Booker's state level contributions of 350,000. The article does point out that these 13 dems got as much financial backing from the industry as the 30 dems who voted for the bill. That certainly could mean nothing, but the argument that some people who voted for the bill were also big receivers of backing, is not a particularly compelling one...especially when there is a good reason to be suspicious of the games our lawmakers play....maybe its a question of who's turn it is to bite the bullet? As to the quality of the amendment...well fix it...or put forward something better that does the same thing.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
78 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
agreements between Obama and Clinton were almost certainly made to achieve that result, or at least
JCanete
Jan 2017
#3
no, they were not nice, they were assholes . booing her during her convention speech
JI7
Jan 2017
#8
it was more than a few. i'm sure they cheered when trump won. just look at that website
JI7
Jan 2017
#11
that's my point. those types made up many "bernie supporters" although i said their
JI7
Jan 2017
#14
wow...so that was rude. I didn't peddle a rumor. I wasn't referring to a rumor. I'm not even
JCanete
Jan 2017
#21
This is politics. Every cabinet position that is filled is a consideration of politics. Each is
JCanete
Jan 2017
#38
Any version of that kind of talk is not substantiated by any credible information out there..
JHan
Jan 2017
#39
are you saying right now that people don't negotiate things in Washington? You are focusing solely
JCanete
Jan 2017
#42
I don't think you can accept that politics is a reality, and then say all that matters is
JCanete
Jan 2017
#54
Sorry, we remember that Obama had to work very hard to convince her to sign on as SOS
emulatorloo
Jan 2017
#46
Sanders attacked Hillary Clinton and trump directly and accurately quoted Sanders attacks. In the r
Gothmog
Jan 2017
#29
The system is rigged. It really really is Goth. That you are part of the Democratic Establishment
JCanete
Jan 2017
#37
You really believe that change just happens from inside without a push from the outside to make it
JCanete
Jan 2017
#47
That article about Cory's vote shows that it wasn't a "battle of hastings" to fight..
JHan
Jan 2017
#49
Yes, but a fundamental component to knowing you're on the right track with your insider politicians
JCanete
Jan 2017
#53
corporate media has an agenda oh yes, but also the resources to blast it everywhere, in every
JCanete
Jan 2017
#58
Look, I've never felt like Clinton has been leading a charge on any of those things. If she has
JCanete
Jan 2017
#60
we're missing each others...my opinion is that we won't have good candidates if we don't demand that
JCanete
Jan 2017
#62
Oh fuck.. I never said the primary process was rigged by the way. OUR ENTIRE SYTEM IS RIGGED.
JCanete
Jan 2017
#50
what's interesting is that the White Working Class Supported Hillary over Obama in 2008
JI7
Jan 2017
#7
Bernie's not ruthless. But Weaver's incompetent. Went from issues to scorched earth
emulatorloo
Jan 2017
#48
there was massive hacking, or people lied in exit polls and pre-election polls or both
Fast Walker 52
Jan 2017
#40
Don't you get it Josh? Only women are expected to concede and help the man win.
boston bean
Jan 2017
#33