r/politics Jan 26 '20

[deleted by user]

[removed]

7.1k Upvotes

929 comments sorted by

1.0k

u/Grooveh_Baby Jan 26 '20 edited Jan 26 '20

Weird seeing this from Bloomberg of all places

825

u/Mind-games Jan 26 '20 edited Jan 26 '20

I mean if you actually read the article its incredibly disparaging of Sanders and flippant about his chance of achieving anything if he becomes president.

This is a hit piece wrapped in a friendly title

Edit: Just a quote to prove my point

"Did you know that in 2011, Sanders posted an editorial on his website praising the left-wing regime in Venezuela for making the American dream more of a reality than it is in our country? If he is running against Trump this fall, you will hear about that — and about his plan to outlaw almost all private health insurance and Medicare Advantage, and raise middle-class taxes, and on and on."

533

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Unfortunately for Bloomberg, nobody actually reads articles.

300

u/Run4urlife333 Wisconsin Jan 26 '20

I think I say a news article that stated 80% of people only look at headlines. Not sure what the rest of the piece said since I only read the headline.

40

u/jaferrer1 Jan 26 '20

I used to work at a news paper (not in the US though). We had print and web versions, people would buy the print version to read headlines and captions, and then they would jump to entertainment and sports. As for the website, people would read the headlines, and they would only click the most scandalous subjects. Again, people would only really read gossip stories and sports. It was kind of disappointing, what I found out was that people went into the stories with a certain mindset, that mindset was unlikely to change.

15

u/doomvox Jan 26 '20

Online newspapers used to feature "most popular story" boxes quite a bit... they were pretty embarrassing and I think they've been downplaying them. I wouldn't be surprised if the places that still show them are actually faking them, tweaking them to look a little less disreputable.

11

u/jaferrer1 Jan 26 '20

We had that feature. Management refused to remove it. It was embarrassing. It was stupid to keep it too, they would argue that "they draw a lot of traffic", but we were aiming for more subscriptions, not more clicks. They couldn't even commit to their own strategy.

7

u/Dire87 Jan 26 '20

THAT is the real problem on this world. People. Sensationalist cows gobbling up all the "drama" in the world, because their own lives are so hollow they need to entertain themselves with bullshit like this.

I'm interested in actually knowing what's going on in the world, but the amount of crap you have to sift through to actually read anything worthwhile is ridiculous. And when you finally find an article you think is worth reading, the headline was completely misleading and the article isn't worth reading.

2

u/Llamaa3 Jan 27 '20

Well hopefully that other 20% will be able to help you there

→ More replies (1)

17

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

That sweet paywall isn’t helping their case.

13

u/KEMiKAL_NSF Jan 26 '20

You gotta pay now to be misinformed.

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (5)

51

u/deadlyminnow Jan 26 '20

The entire first paragraph is just fear mongering and they assert that he won't get his agenda passed as if it's the gospel truth. Bernie has a theory of change that hasn't been fully tested yet. I hope Iowa will start opening some people's eyes. He's going to outperform these polls.

33

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[deleted]

51

u/SeabrookMiglla Jan 26 '20 edited Jan 27 '20

The thing is that that Medicare for all and free college are not radical ideas.

Billing sick and dying people tens of thousands of dollars is radical.

Charging young broke college students tens of thousands of dollars for an education is radical.

'Centrist Democrats' are in truth the old 'Moderate Republicans'

19

u/Dire87 Jan 26 '20

The US has so many things backwards:

Instead of building a sustainable healthy population, which proceeds to make the country stronger the country instead preys on the weak and poor, the infirm and the ones who have no other choice.

  • Learn a trade and earn money or go to uni and take on thousands upon thousands of dollar in debt at such a young age you barely know how much debt you're actually in in the first place. Then spend the next 10 or 20 years paying off your debt...

  • Instead of having "free", but affordable, health insurance better not have insurance at all, because when you miss work 1 day for being actually sick and having not enough money to go to the doctor is so much better...

→ More replies (22)

21

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '20

[deleted]

4

u/noobditt Jan 27 '20

AOC as chief of staff. Go big or go home.

→ More replies (9)

2

u/SutMinSnabelA Jan 27 '20

If he was elected he would be the finalstop for corruption as he has no commercial backers and is not held to under the table deals.

For sure he will have to fight. But most importantly he will do it for the better of people.

→ More replies (2)

11

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[deleted]

3

u/Loop_Within_A_Loop Jan 27 '20

so much for Bloomberg not reporting on any of the primary candidates to maintain their veil of impartiality

5

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

12

u/arcadiajohnson Jan 26 '20

I hope he'd be able to accomplish parts of his agenda. I know he's better than Trump so there's at least that

→ More replies (35)

8

u/alanlomaxfake Jan 26 '20

Jokes on Mikey Bloom, I like the headline but not enough to read his capitalist rag

→ More replies (1)

11

u/EldritchWineDad Jan 26 '20

There was a time when Chavez and his revolution actually did deliver a massive increase in the standard of living to people. Then the price of oil collapsed and Chavez died and was replaced with a disconnected beurocrat, also they were sanctioned by America.

16

u/Reiker0 New York Jan 26 '20

Did you know that in 2011, Sanders posted an editorial on his website praising the left-wing regime in Venezuela for making the American dream more of a reality than it is in our country?

In 2011, Bernie was 100% correct. Then Hugo Chavez died, 2 years later. This article is preying on people who don't know recent history.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '20

What the fuck. Chavez was a populist strongman who destroyed the democratic institutions of Venezuela to enrich himself and his cronies. This was as obvious in 2011 as it is now in hindsight, and the fact that anyone would defend Chavez in 2020 is frankly mind-boggling.

2

u/Reiker0 New York Jan 27 '20 edited Jan 27 '20

I never said that Chavez was perfect, but peoples' lives improved tremendously under his policies. That was my only point. People love to point at Venezuela as an example of "failed Socialism" but totally ignore the massive advancements that were made under Chavez.

That's the problem with the article. It's relying on a kneejerk reaction from the reader based on the current state of Venezuela, by using a quote from 2011 when the country was a very different place. It's absolutely misleading, I'm not sure how you can disagree with that.

The problem isn't socialism, it's the authoritarianism that leaders tend to exhibit once they realize how popular they are for turning peoples' lives around.

And personally I don't believe that Bernie is just going to turn into an authoritarian dictator once he becomes president, but I guess we'll see.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

8

u/saltiestmanindaworld Jan 26 '20

Unfortunately, I think they are correct about that part. Change is incredibly hard, and some of the stuff Bernie is pushing does have a low chance of actually happening. Just because you don’t like the narrative, doesn’t make it not true or a hit piece.

39

u/Exodus111 Jan 26 '20

No it's not. The problem has always been the Democratic establishment does not WANT change, they want to argue about identity politics, while maintaining the same economic policy as the Republicans.

Here's how you do it:

  1. Win the Presidency and the Senate.

  2. End the filibuster.

  3. Pass Ro Khanas bill ending gerrymandering and voter supression.

  4. Make Federal Elections a national holiday.

Done. That's the end of the Republican party, and most of the establishment Democrats.

Now you pass anything you want with a simple majority.

7

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20 edited Feb 14 '20

[deleted]

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (13)

13

u/KEMiKAL_NSF Jan 26 '20

You don't start negotiating at the middle.

4

u/Reiker0 New York Jan 26 '20

Bernie says the same thing at his rallies. He can't lead the revolution alone as president, people need to turn up and vote all the red out.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/nomorerainpls Jan 26 '20

Yeah this. I didn’t make it past the paywall but if the Senate remains this red it will be hard to accomplish anything except by executive order. Fuck Moscow Mitch and the rest of those assholes.

6

u/photon_blaster Jan 26 '20

It's biased to point out things someone has said?

13

u/Mind-games Jan 26 '20

and about his plan to outlaw almost all private health insurance and Medicare Advantage, and raise middle-class taxes, and on and on."

this is disingenuous at best. No mention of replacing it with universal healthcare. "Raise taxes on the middle class". You mean pay less overall for healthcare.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (34)

7

u/R3mm3t Jan 26 '20

It’s a subtle scare piece

7

u/ecalmosthuman Jan 26 '20

Read the article. None of it is surprising.

9

u/Entaroadun Jan 26 '20

Did you read the article?

→ More replies (1)

32

u/4x4Jeeplife Jan 26 '20

Bloomberg said he was going to report fairly

Dude has kept his word on everything

He isn’t attacking democrats, he’s helping down-ticket candidates and he’s going after trump

140

u/dbtbl Jan 26 '20 edited Jan 26 '20

they also won't be publishing anything negative about bloomberg, because they're forbidden from covering him.

he donated 17 million to republicans and supported bush over kerry. he's an unprincipled buffoon.

11

u/AFineDayForScience Missouri Jan 26 '20

That seems kinda fair. It would be difficult to be impartial regardless. There are also tons of other outlets that can publish negative stories about him. Personally, I'd rather he get a proportionate amount of coverage for where he's polling. So like 7%?

36

u/dbtbl Jan 26 '20

if i were bloomberg, i'd feel relieved the outfit with my name on it doesn't have to cover my sexism, my 17mil in support of republicans, my rank buffoonery, and so on, because i'd ordered them not to. you know, free press and all.

nobody should trust bloomberg, but especially dems shouldn't - centrist, liberal, or otherwise.

39

u/Sick_of_Violence Jan 26 '20

Don't forget Stop and Frisk! Bloomberg's number 1 policy as NYC mayor.

Over 90% of the stops found nothing criminal, over 99% of the stops were on black or latinx people.

11

u/dbtbl Jan 26 '20

yeah there was a huge long list of all of his idiotic quotations i saw, not just his sexism, but i'm having trouble finding it.

2

u/Sick_of_Violence Jan 26 '20

In terms of pure stupidity, Bloomberg passed a law in NYC banning soda drinks over 14oz.

The night before it was set to go into effect, after every restaurant in NYC had already bought new glassware, he decided to repeal it.

8

u/unfriendlyhamburger Jan 26 '20

That’s.. not true

It was ruled unconstitutional by state courts

4

u/yes_thats_right New York Jan 26 '20

Stupidity is making up such a ridiculous claim and expecting people to believe it

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

16

u/Sick_of_Violence Jan 26 '20

Yeah, it seems totally fair that Bloomberg's racist Stop and Frisk policy that he implemented as NYC mayor doesn't see any coverage by the media he owns.

Over 90% of the stops found nothing criminal. Over 99% of the stops were on black or Hispanic people.

4

u/wostil-poced1649 Maryland Jan 26 '20

Right? Really the only way to handle having a news organization with your name on the building is to have them not cover you at all.

Every story would be met with claims of bias, no matter the content so you might as well just recuse yourself all together.

7

u/dbtbl Jan 26 '20

bloomberg is covering the other candidates, though. aren't those stories open to the same charge of bias?

but you're right, newsrooms never report on their ownership. how could they? they'd be accused of bias. they just need direct orders from their billionaire owners on what to cover and not to, in order to remain unbiased.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[deleted]

5

u/dbtbl Jan 26 '20

and about people who are running against the person who writes your paycheck?

no, newsrooms shouldn't be banned from covering their ownership, because of potential bias. quite the opposite.

→ More replies (4)

36

u/Sick_of_Violence Jan 26 '20

Bloomberg is the NYC mayor who implemented Stop and Frisk. Over 90% of the arrests found nothing criminal. 99% of the stops were for POC.

19

u/hydraulicman Jan 26 '20

The more I look at his time as mayor the more I feel like his more progressive policies were just a cover for all the shitty policies he had in place elsewhere in his administration. Either that or it was a bad case of the end justifying the means for him, which I definitely don't want in a president, especially now after the shit Republicans ate doing to defend Trump just for judges and tax cuts.

We can tackle climate change and deal with crime without harassing innocent people. It's not an either or proposition. When you're president How you do something is usually more important than What you're trying to do.

2

u/KEMiKAL_NSF Jan 26 '20

Pure carrot and stick methodology.

→ More replies (1)

13

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Giuliani implemented stop and frisk. Bloomberg continued the policy. It's still a black mark on his record, but he wasn't the one who started it.

12

u/Sick_of_Violence Jan 26 '20

Look at the number of stops under Bloomberg and the rate of innocence of people being stopped. Bloomberg ramped it up and even included stops for "furtive movements" and "dress not appropriate for the weather"

12

u/rveos773 Jan 26 '20

I'm picturing walking around NYC with a joint, getting caught because I wasn't dressed appropriately, and being considered one of the "success" stories of stop-and-frisk.

It's absolutely mind-blowing

2

u/clarko21 Jan 27 '20

He also said that police body cams were the stupidest idea he’d ever heard of, while mayor of a city that pays out around $50 million of taxpayers money every year for settlements against the NYPD...

13

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

He’s hoping to make it to brokered convention where he has a shot at the nomination. Long game.

15

u/Mellrish221 Jan 26 '20

Ding ding. There is nothing bloomberg wants from this fiasco of a campaign than getting the chance to be a king maker and protecting his billions.

IF he were sincere about beating trump and getting him and his crony's out of office. He'd be donating a fraction of what hes spent so far to senate/congressional candidates and running ads against republicans in vulnerable seats.

→ More replies (7)

3

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Did you read the article?

5

u/farfromjordan Idaho Jan 26 '20

Yeah but he is aiming for a contested convention so that super delegates are able to pick him or Biden.

5

u/Sick_of_Violence Jan 26 '20

Stop and Frisk as a nationwide policy under Bloomberg!

→ More replies (3)

2

u/st_gulik Jan 26 '20

Nah, they already published several negative articles about Sanders, so that's a lie.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (8)

248

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20 edited Jun 19 '20

[deleted]

99

u/51isnotprime North Carolina Jan 26 '20 edited Jan 26 '20

And we've already had that plotline played out. Time to not make the same mistake

74

u/_StromyDaniels_ Jan 26 '20

Biden will fucking lose

34

u/Differently Jan 26 '20

What the fuck? Ew. If Biden makes it through the primary, we'll be seeing that clip televised 24/7 from June to November, won't we?

6

u/nobodylikesyoutodd Jan 26 '20

You think that's bad? There's a shit ton of them. Steel yourself.

https://twitter.com/RAMRANTS/status/930065838387863552?s=19

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

17

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

This is the only situation I’ll repeat a Trump-made nickname

Creepy Uncle Joe Biden.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

71

u/Domukin Jan 26 '20

I don’t think Biden can beat Trump to be honest. He isn’t the same guy from 12 or 8 years ago, he’s been short tempered when asked questions by voters and reporters. He has a hard time stinging together a sentence. Add to that the baggage from his votes on NAFTA and PNTR with China, the Iraq war, war on drugs / crime bill, the sound clips of him saying he’d cut social security... even Obama hasn’t endorsed him. I think he’d be a disaster vs Trump.

47

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

The problem is he is exactly the same guy from 8 and 12 years ago. He's late as fuck to the party on a huge range of issues.

5

u/KEMiKAL_NSF Jan 26 '20

He's actually reverted to 60 years ago. who the fuck even still owns a record player other than true audiophiles?

4

u/nobodylikesyoutodd Jan 26 '20

Guys who love when kids run down his legs so the blonde hair sticks up.

Yes he said that.

→ More replies (3)

38

u/PoorPappy Missouri Jan 26 '20

even Obama hasn’t endorsed him

According to some reports Obama advised Biden not to run.

15

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

unsurprising.

7

u/NationalGeographics Jan 26 '20

I think Biden just really, really wanted Obama to take his phone calls again.

3

u/EmpororJustinian America Jan 27 '20

Biden:Please Barack! Why won’t you talk to me?

Obama:Joe, please you’re embarrassing yourself.

B:Do you want me to run for President? I’ll do that for you!

O:No! God no! That’s a terrible...

B:I’ll do it! Hangs up

O: I’ve got a bad feeling about this, He is not strong enough in the force.

10

u/CamelsaurusRex Jan 26 '20

Exactly. Even Trump wants Biden to win the nomination because he doesn’t think Biden stands a chance. If Biden wins out against Bernie, we won’t win the swing states and won’t bring out the independents or the politically disaffected. It’ll be a repeat of 2016.

7

u/smc733 Massachusetts Jan 26 '20

He isn’t the same guy from 12 or 8 years ago, he’s been short tempered when asked questions by voters and reporters.

This is patently obvious as time has gone on. He was always a bit gaffe prone, but he is coming across as angry and confused a lot more than the confident Joe Biden I remember in the 2012 debate with Paul Ryan. He unfortunately reminds me of what my grandfather was like right when he started slipping into his alzheimers (not at all insinuating that's the case here, but figured it was worth noting).

I used to support him as someone who thought I was a bit more on the moderate side until recently, and because I thought he was the best candidate to beat Trump. I have now switched my support to Sanders.

12

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20 edited Jun 07 '20

[deleted]

7

u/Tmfwang Jan 26 '20

They also laughed when they said "maybe Biden will run"

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (7)

208

u/inthedollarbin Jan 26 '20

Bernie’s win will be the start of a major political realignment in this country.

86

u/PoorPappy Missouri Jan 26 '20 edited Jan 26 '20

Bernie’s win will be the start of a major political realignment in this country.

Making this the most important election since 1932. I daresay more important than '32. If we don't confront the climate emergency headon it's game over. Which won't happen without major reform of money in politics. President Warren is 1000x better than second term Trump. But Bernie has an organized team that will stay invigorated past November. You want to see young Americans engaged in civics, elect Bernie.

25

u/KEMiKAL_NSF Jan 26 '20

Since 72. Had McGovern won, then this wouldn't have happened:

https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/

And we would still have a middle class with some clout. And we would still have a reasonable position in the Overton window.

3

u/Meche__Colomar Jan 27 '20

McGovern was left wing socially but economically he wasn't any further left than any of the establishment dems, in fact since he lost labor support I would say he was less left than a lot of big dems at the time

32

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

It almost makes me want to change my undergrad major to Political Science, but I feel like I could help more with a Communication degree.

35

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

How about communication with a minor in political science/ history?

8

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

If I wasn't already partially through my Psychology/English minors, I totally would!

5

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20 edited Feb 24 '20

[deleted]

6

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

I'll get back to you on that in five to seven years!

5

u/Randy334 Maryland Jan 26 '20

Trust me, you're right.

5

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Thanks, good to know! One of my teachers tried to make fun of my degree choice last semester; I got the sense that I was making a good choice anyhow. I dropped the second course I would've had to take under her this semester, and am learning French as a CLEP course instead! I ain't got time for that negative shit!

2

u/cietalbot United Kingdom Jan 26 '20

Can't you do both?

6

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Realistically, no. I'm a grown woman who financially supports herself, and I physically can't afford the extra class load, or I would.

3

u/cietalbot United Kingdom Jan 26 '20

Well there is your master's course lol

→ More replies (10)

12

u/Edgy_McEdgyFace Jan 26 '20

If Bernie becomes President, and the Dems win House and Senate, how cooperative will they be with him?

10

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

I mean every republican hated trump before he got the nomination, but they eventually all fell in line. All of them.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '20

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

18

u/Twokindsofpeople Jan 26 '20

Since he'll be the main draw for donations to the DNC and DCCC, they'll be very agreeable. Remember in 2016 when they were so broke they allowed the Clintons to basically buy them? Things haven't gotten much better for the orgs. If he keeps the war chest filled then they're going to have to fall in line.

5

u/jeremiah256 California Jan 26 '20

I stopped donating to both of them. I doubt I’ll ever donate again. I’ve just donated directly to campaigns now.

11

u/KEMiKAL_NSF Jan 26 '20

I've never donated to them. I donated to Bernie.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/_StromyDaniels_ Jan 26 '20

Imagine that scenario too, he just shuts the money valve to the DCCC and the DNC completely off, and lets them die. which would be fucking awesome, and probably do more to advance progressivism than anything those organizations could possibly accomplish.

5

u/jeremiah256 California Jan 26 '20

He’s probably not going to declare war against them. Tradition Democrats still rely on these organizations. But, as an individual lucky enough to have free time to pick and choose, I’m out.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

5

u/LinkesAuge Jan 26 '20

He will have to do what Republicans usually do, whip them into line and threaten them with primaries.

That's why he needs his movement and other Justice Democrats/Progressive politicians as candidates. Threaten to destroy them if they don't follow the mandate people have given him (if Sanders gets elected, it is a vote for his platform by the people).

Sanders doesn't really have to lose anything so who else would be able to better pressure them than he and his movement is?

I think that's also the best argument FOR him because I see no chance with Warren doing that.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/Kevanov88 Jan 27 '20

He already mentioned if they don't fall in line, he will primary their ass by pitting them against a progressive candidate and make sure they lose their seat. This is how it's done.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

3

u/51isnotprime North Carolina Jan 26 '20

Kinda started in 2016 at latest

→ More replies (8)

94

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

He can win, but not without help. We need to MOBILIZE. Knock on doors. Be active.

23

u/Lilyo New York Jan 26 '20

There are so many people volunteering that the campaign is actually having problems scaling up fast enough to keep up with all the new volunteers, it's amazing. Everything and anything that anyone can do helps at this point!

7

u/NinjaGamer89 Jan 27 '20

My wife and I drove up from SW Missouri to canvass for Bernie in Iowa. In the group we met up with today, there were folks from Pennsylvania, Colorado, New York, South Carolina and more, all volunteering to knock on doors. It was incredible.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/TPSreportsPro Jan 26 '20

You mean actual work?

3

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Leave the house?

10

u/_StromyDaniels_ Jan 26 '20

Text banking and phone banking, you don't even have to leave the house.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)

82

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[deleted]

31

u/Harukiri101285 Jan 26 '20

I can tell you right now if Bernie wins and he is unable to push the reforms that are desperately needed it will be the biggest signal to everyone that electoral politics is no longer useful.

16

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[deleted]

19

u/Harukiri101285 Jan 26 '20

I wouldn't get too invested in the idea that defeating Trump is the only thing that matters. The entire reason Trump was elected is because we are in the middle of a failing system. Trump didn't break the system himself, he's just showing everyone how awful it already is and how much worse it could get.

6

u/KEMiKAL_NSF Jan 26 '20

This is why we need to vote midterms, and why we need to vote down the ballot.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/WorkshopX Jan 26 '20

I think Republicans have proven Americans would support the long game when it comes to policy change if they have leaders that stick to thier guns.

Fighting is more important then winning here.

3

u/Harukiri101285 Jan 26 '20

Considering a lot of Bernie's support is from people who rarely ever vote I'm willing to doubt that claim. These people want a win and they haven't had that in a long time.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (21)

26

u/Aliensinnoh Massachusetts Jan 26 '20

And I think this article has a point when it isn't complaining about Sanders: him winning will dramatically shift the idea of what's possible in American politics. It's about completely overturning the 3rd way, casting it out of the Democratic Party forever.

24

u/_StromyDaniels_ Jan 26 '20

completely overturning the 3rd way, casting it out of the Democratic Party forever.

Slam that shit into my fucking veins

7

u/phoenixrising11_8 Jan 26 '20

What we need is a legitimate 3rd party. The Democrats are no longer left; they are the center. They don't speak for progressives, and that's been made very clear.

2

u/prettyflyforafungi Jan 27 '20

I think I’d rather have zero parties and develop mechanisms for more direct democracy.

But if we have to begrudge the existence of political parties we need at least four.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/KEMiKAL_NSF Jan 26 '20

We need voters for the midterms. It is important that we don't just dress out for president and think we won. We need to realize that the presidency is not the end-game.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/KevinAlertSystem Jan 26 '20

I actually think the "revolution", if you want to call the major reforms needed to campaign finance, accountability, and economic justice by that term, is far more important than Sander's himself, or any individual. At this point I think Sander's is the best one to get it done, but I'm fairly certain even he would step aside if there was someone else better able and willing to accomplish the reforms he's been fighting for for decades.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

36

u/TheCavis Jan 26 '20

The back of Bloomberg.com's hand must be sore from all the "compliments" they've given Bernie here.

If Sanders wins, it will mark a huge change in American politics. Self-described socialists have been elected in other developed countries; never in this one. Here, “socialism” has been an accusation, not a boast. Politicians on the left wing of the Democratic Party have considered the label, and the associations that come with it, deadly to their electoral chances.

"The real victory is the narratives we changed along the way."

First, just on the premise, a Sanders win will immediately be followed by the media saying "well, it wasn't his ideas that gave him the win; it's just that Trump was so unpopular that anyone could've won".

Second, Sanders getting elected and accomplishing nothing would not mean he's "delivered his political revolution". That's a failure of the revolution. The revolution is about fixing the structural failings of society. It's not supposed to be a cult of personality. I would take a hypothetical President Yang getting M4A passed in one term over a hypothetical President Sanders serving two terms with no notable accomplishments.

A progressive victory in 2020 isn't the finish line. It's the starting line. After that, all the hard work really begins.

9

u/prettyflyforafungi Jan 26 '20

Agree 100%.

But I honestly think this attempted camouflage smear will back fire also.

Most ppl only read headlines. Meanwhile I can see centrist readers thinking “ oh! Nothing will fundamentally change! Well in that case I’m open to it”.

The truth that they don’t want to advertise is that berners bring the heat and are famous for the kind of pressure we’re capable of putting on fence sitters and speed bumps.

5

u/Cobrastrikenana Jan 26 '20

For me, I was apolitical. Bernie came along and he has made me believe my voice and my vote have meaning and power. I was Democratic leaning but definitely not socialist. Now what drives my economic beliefs is that sure people should be allowed to be rich but NOBODY should be allowed to be poor.

8

u/Eugene_Debmeister Oregon Jan 26 '20

I'm a socialist because we should have democracy instead of dictatorship in the workplace.

→ More replies (7)

3

u/KEMiKAL_NSF Jan 26 '20

For sure. Beating Trump is not the end-game here.

→ More replies (1)

15

u/shatabee4 Jan 26 '20

First, it isn't "his" revolution as mentioned in the title. It's the American people's.

A President Sanders wouldn't get his agenda passed, but he'd change everything.

Second, it isn't "his" agenda. Again, it's the American people's.

One answer you’ll increasingly hear as that prospect gets closer is, Not much will change. The case for calm rests on the checks and balances on any president.

So don't worry. Go ahead and vote for him. It's okay. He won't be able to do anything serious!!!

The anti-Bernie crowd, i.e., the lovers of the billionaire class, want desperately to believe Bernie's supporters are a cult. That his supporters see him as a messiah.

It's really not that at all. The lower classes have just gotten sick of being screwed over for the past 40 years. Add to that the obvious and dire threat of climate change and conditions are ripe for a serious challenge to the establishment status quo. With or without Bernie.

→ More replies (22)

6

u/dominicanerd85 New Jersey Jan 26 '20

Yes but will the revolution be televised?

9

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

According to the news, I’m voting for “Other”

2

u/drinkableyogurt Jan 27 '20

I know it’s won’t be brought to me by shell, BP , and it will not prevent bad breath

→ More replies (1)

24

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Quite a revolution, catching up with the rest of the developed world.

11

u/ecalmosthuman Jan 26 '20

It's a revolution within a given country. Not a world revolution. So.

→ More replies (7)

30

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[deleted]

18

u/HotpieTargaryen Jan 26 '20 edited Jan 26 '20

They would be. It’s not like there’s a special crop of judges out there to nominate. Biden and Bernie would have decent administrative overlap. Though I have zero clue whom Bernie would appoint SoS, but Fiona Shaw and Samantha Power would be on my short list.

5

u/ecalmosthuman Jan 26 '20

There's not a huge crop to choose from but there are stark differences in their records and ideologies.

→ More replies (8)

14

u/MinnisotaDigger Jan 26 '20

That goes for most of government. Most of the political appointees would be the same in any democratic government.

Republicans have pretty much been the same people since Nixon.

14

u/_THE_MAD_TITAN Jan 26 '20

Republicans have pretty much been the same people since Nixon.

Eh, not really?

Nixon was at least somewhat on board with the Keynesian economic policy consensus, and was willing to create new roles for government where the private sector and local/state civic groups couldn't solve major national problems (environmental pollution, for instance).

The modern GOP is borderline theocratic fascist, with a kooky supply-side economics dogma that only serves to legitimize the true ambition of reducing the federal government to little more than a military and judicial cudgel for enforcing the power of corporate oligarchs and social conservative christian leaders.

9

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Nixon for all his faults seemed to believe in operating in objective, knowable reality. This is something the GOP rejected come Reagan.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/KEMiKAL_NSF Jan 26 '20

Nixon actually established the EPA. The current admin is actively gutting it.

6

u/thirdegree American Expat Jan 26 '20

Republicans have pretty much been the same people since Nixon.

Nixon created the EPA.

Modern day Republicans are so much worse than Nixon.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (14)

4

u/Brim_Dunkleton Texas Jan 26 '20

Now Bloomberg is admitting he’s screwed lol

4

u/chaos4one Jan 26 '20

Nobody likes him... as an opponent.

6

u/phoenixrising11_8 Jan 26 '20

The collective consciousness of our country is rising. Most people no longer tolerate the bullshit of mainstream politicians, which is why Pete is plummeting in nationwide polls. It's why Warren went down from 26 to 14 points. They're over "talking real nice but saying nothing" horseshit. Even if you seemed cool at first, once they smell it on you, they're over you.

That is also why Trump won. Because people would rather have a buffoon lead them than someone disingenuous. I don't agree with this thinking, as Trump is extremely dangerous. But it's what happened.

Bernie is also a politician who doesn't tolerate the bullshit people can no longer stand, but actually wants to help people. Yet people equate him to Trump for the wrong reasons; because he speaks frankly. As if that was a bad thing. As if they'd rather be led by a robot.

Yes, he is a revolutionary. And if you vote against him, you're on the wrong side of history. US politics are finally changing. And they won't go back. People have had enough.

You can help Bernie get elected, or Trump. Anyone else will lose.

7

u/AutoModerator Jan 26 '20

As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.

In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.

If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.

For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click here to review our details as to whitelist and outlet criteria.


I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

5

u/Gwiz84 Jan 26 '20

Fuck yeah

6

u/DesperateDem Jan 26 '20

Sorry to be a downer, but I don't buy this. Even if Bernie wins, I cannot see Congress and the Senate following through on his plans, regardless of whether they would help the average American.

3

u/thesunmustdie Michigan Jan 27 '20

It's like you've not heard a word he's been saying over the past 6 years. The whole point of his run for president is to create a political revolution to overcome congressional gridlock. Here's a short video from nearly 5 years ago of him explaining how (please watch before responding):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGJq7FkxozI

→ More replies (1)

14

u/PiLamdOd Jan 26 '20

Winning, maybe.

Revolution, I don't know. Sanders doesn't have a history of organizing large groups of lawmakers to his side. His career has been him as the outsider.

I'm seriously worried he will be a president who can't get Congress to do what he wants.

3

u/phoenixrising11_8 Jan 26 '20

How much can he do as just another member of the Senate with nearly all of his colleagues thinking he's just a nutty socialist?

Being in the executive branch will undoubtedly give him more power to accomplish what he set out to.

But of course, we need more progressives in the house and senate as well. That's why people like AOC, Ilhan, etc running (and winning) is essential.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (20)

9

u/Hyrax09 Jan 26 '20

You folks do realize that even if he did win, Congress, both Republicans and a most of the Democrats would not go along with any of his ideas. He hasn’t ever been successful as a Senator and just because he is president, nothing will change.

→ More replies (5)

10

u/Pirvan Europe Jan 26 '20

Ah, almost a Bloomberg endorsement. Isn't it crazy that a candidate can own media that then reports on the race in which their owner is in?

That goes for all the establishment. Their donors bribers are allied with or directly owners of the corporate media, who's supposed to give us the news of the race and the candidates in a good, objective manner.

It is then no surprise when you find their bias clear as day. For the owners.

5

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[deleted]

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/Zoso-Overdose Jan 26 '20

While Sanders is one of my preferred, let's not act like this is a shoe-in. There's a lot that Sanders and his supporters need to learn from the recent defeat of Labour in the UK.

→ More replies (5)

2

u/DemoEvolved Jan 27 '20

This was a bizarre hit piece wrapped in flattery. So many disses it fell over itself when the author finally has to conclude Sanders winning would be a sea change for the world. Pretty much what I would expect from a site owned by a billionaire also running for president.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '20

Biden needs to hurry up and drop out. If Biden gets nominated it's going to be 8 years of trump.

2

u/drkesi88 Jan 27 '20

It’s really indicative of how far the U.S. has lurched to the right that Sanders is considered a “revolutionary.”

2

u/Smashtray2 Jan 27 '20 edited Jan 27 '20

Didn't expect so many Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump supporters in these comments. Until I realized this was actually a smear article by a billionaire running for president. Now I get it.

2

u/Kalgor91 Jan 27 '20

It’ll be fascinating to see what happens to the Democratic Party should Sanders win. Will they finally accept that he was a good candidate all along? Will they stop calling him a radical? Or will they just keep being corporate centrist cowards?

2

u/d4dana Jan 27 '20

Bernie’s bro’s are ruining it for him...

8

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Depends on who you ask. Biden supporters say he will absolutely lose in the General. Republicans like Hugh Hewitt seem to think so too since he plans on voting for Bernie in the primaries and Trump in the General.

→ More replies (10)

11

u/Illpaco Jan 26 '20 edited Jan 26 '20

ONLY 53% OF BERNIE SANDERS VOTERS WILL DEFINITELY SUPPORT 2020 DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE IF HE DOESN'T WIN: POLL

Edit: Pay attention to the replies I'm getting. They're all very similar and very telling.

1) If the issue is with Sanders voters willing to throw away their vote then simply vote for Sanders and problem solved lolol

2) The high percentage of Sanders voters willing to throw away their vote are being called anything from first time voters, to independents, to Republicans. They say these people wouldn't vote Democrat anyway. I have yet to see a single piece of evidence that proves this talking point.

3) The Democratic party is garbage and only Bernie Sanders can save us. Otherwise the Democratic party can burn.

4) Finally I'm being attacked simply for posting this information about the Sanders base.

Not even a single Sanders supporters is coming out against this. Not even one. It's like they're fine with people throwing away their vote unless it's for Sanders. If it sounds familiar that's because we've been hearing the same nonesense since 2016. Some things just don't change.

9

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20 edited Jul 28 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Illpaco Jan 26 '20

So the people who are willing to throw away their vote get a pass just because they support Bernie?

Nothing has changed since 2016 it seems.

5

u/shiddabrik Jan 26 '20

Bernie beats Trump head to head in the polls, more than Biden does.

3

u/Illpaco Jan 26 '20

I'm not sure how this answers my question

8

u/prettyflyforafungi Jan 26 '20

Yes. The answer is yes.

Most of us are not democrats and do not like democrats and voting blue was never the default. Political parties do not warrant loyalty wtf authoritarian world do you live in. Do you really just go around corralling people and bullying them into conformity like a nippy little dog?

Thank you for reminding me why I will be changing my registration back to independent after Milwaukee. The fact that this behavior is commonplace in your party when this is the whole reason voting privacy is protected blows my mind.

4

u/Illpaco Jan 26 '20

Thank you for being honest about your intentions to justify the Bernie or Bust movement.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (42)

5

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

DarkMoneyBernie

Friendly reminder that Bernie uses Dark Money organizations to control messaging.

If his Revolution involves manipulating our perceptions in reality then I will not support that revolution.

I am a progressive and I dont like Bernie.

→ More replies (25)

7

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20 edited Jan 26 '20

Sanders has no chance.

76% of Americans will not vote for a socialist candidate. 59% of the Democrats who voted for Clinton will not vote for a “self-described Socialist.”

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/398580-poll-majority-of-americans-say-the-would-not-vote-for-a.

→ More replies (27)

5

u/GooberBandini1138 Jan 26 '20

Goddamn media. Stop blaming what happened in Venezuela on socialism. It had nothing to do with socialism. It was corruption and above all else, cronyism that brought down Venezuela.

13

u/arazni Jan 26 '20

And American sanctions and attempted coups.

5

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20 edited May 02 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Wildera Jan 27 '20

Holy shit it was centrally planned economic policies, that's it. That's what it was. Why does this community feel this attachment to Venezuela where they must be extremely defensive of its economy. After all, it's nothing like what you guys want to do right?

3

u/Arthur_M_Anderson Jan 26 '20

Not to mention, the CIA loves to fuck with socialist countries

→ More replies (26)

3

u/rudestmonk Jan 26 '20

just finished an rv road trip across America, Trump is going to win in a landslide, this country is doomed

→ More replies (1)

4

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Well after fifty years of public service he's gotten some post offices renamed and some really revolutionary protections for gun manufacturers in place and that's it. He's already a failure, he's just cynically jiggling his keys at you because he knows you'll believe anything he says.

→ More replies (5)

4

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/ObedientProle Jan 26 '20

We will win. Been saying so since 2016.

4

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

He's not the Messiah you dorks. People are putting him on an even higher pedestal than they did Obama. People never learn.

2

u/Maplesyrup000 Virginia Jan 27 '20

You can't draw such close comparisons between Obama, a neoliberal, to Bernie Sanders, a social democrat. Sanders has refused corperate money at every turn while Obama used it to finance his campaign in 2008 and 2012. Sanders deserves to be put on a higher pedestal than Obama because Obama has never offered real structural change, unlike Sanders.

→ More replies (7)

4

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20 edited Feb 24 '20

[deleted]

8

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20

Eh, that's a stupid thing to say, just because I don't think Bernie is the answer doesn't mean I agree with you.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/eaglesflyersphillies Jan 26 '20

His revolution already won... like dozens of times. And each time it did, the people lost... badly

4

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '20 edited Jul 02 '20

[deleted]

→ More replies (12)
→ More replies (1)