Bernie Sanders

[mingus]

A lot of the pundits are saying how important it is she binds herself to Obama for these upcoming half-black voting populations. I mean, how much obvious can that be as pandering? Yet it's ignored and even praised. Bernie at least is straight up - he's had his disagreements, and as a senator with a long history, is it really surprising?

Yeah, it was plainly and disgustingly clear pandering on her part. But I guess it shows you what she really thinks of African-Americans to do that. She must think they're all stupid. I hope they watched that and saw how phony that was, and how phony she is.

I like Bernie. I like Bernie for the same reason I like Trump: they each run their campaign politically in a way that is different from how campaigns are typically ran. May not agree with the content of what they say, but they are genuine. They don't fall into this phony that the Clinton, Rubio, Cruz and most other politicians do all the time. It's refreshing and I hope they collide in a primary.

[z0sa]

The DNC Just Declared War on Bernie Sanders’ Political Revolution

The Democratic National Committee, headed by the massively unpopular Debbie Wasserman Schultz, has just lifted the last restrictions preventing the DNC from receiving direct contributions from Wall Street and special interest lobbyists.

Under the new rules, political action committees (PACs) and other corporate lobbyists and special interests are now free to donate unlimited sums to the DNC itself. The previous restrictions were put in place by President Barack Obama after his own election, which he marked by saying, “We are going to change how Washington works.”

He continued by affirming that corporate PACs “will not fund my party. They will not run our White House. And they will not drown out the voice of the American people when I’m president of the United States of America.”

These changes in the campaign finance and fundraising system of the DNC (and of the election process in general) are a cornerstone of the campaign of Bernie Sanders, who in his victory speech in New Hampshire referenced corruption in the campaign financing system no less than five times. He has also touted the fact that he has no super PACs funding his campaign and that the average contribution he receives is just $27.

However, some have speculated that these new rules will provide a boost to Hillary Clinton’s fundraising efforts, as Clinton has set up a joint fundraising committee with the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund. Sanders created his own to match Clinton’s, but it has raised only $1,000 compared to the $26.9 million raised through the Hillary Victory Fund.

This change in policy was preceded by a decision to allow PACs to donate to the annual nominating conventions, after Congress cancelled the $20 million it previously provided in federal funding to both parties’ conventions.

Robert Reich, who was Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Labor and is a harsh critic of Wall Street and vocal supporter of Bernie Sanders, was aghast at the DNC’s decision, posting a scathing Facebook post in which he accuses the DNC of being a “siphon for more corruption.”

http://usuncut.com/news/the-dnc-open...treet-funding/

Hillary and the DNC sure make it clear how much they just LOVE Obama and his policies!

[z0sa]

Yeah, it was plainly and disgustingly clear pandering on her part. But I guess it shows you what she really thinks of African-Americans to do that. She must think they're all stupid. I hope they watched that and saw how phony that was, and how phony she is.

I like Bernie. I like Bernie for the same reason I like Trump: they each run their campaign politically in a way that is different from how campaigns are typically ran. May not agree with the content of what they say, but they are genuine. They don't fall into this phony that the Clinton, Rubio, Cruz and most other politicians do all the time. It's refreshing and I hope they collide in a primary.

Agreed. Like I said, if not Bernie, I'm voting Trump. Someone who is not establishment.

[boutons_deux]

but is he a better feminist than Hillary Clinton?

what also accounts for this split is how voters respond to and formulate their positions in relation to the three “I’s”: Iden y, Ideology and Issues.

1. Iden y

Iden y refers to the unique characteristics voters believe distinguish their candidate from the opposition.

“Woman” is often understood as an iden y category, as is “feminist”. Those voters who believe that – above all else – what the United States needs now is a woman president prefer Clinton. Those voters who identify as feminists could choose either Clinton or Sanders, as both candidates have declared themselves to be feminists.

Which candidate feminist voters will select depends on where they stand on ideology and issues.

2. Ideology

Ideology refers to the system of ideas and ideals that motivate social and political action.

Feminism itself is an ideology. Yet there are many ideological strands of feminism. In this election, Clinton represents a liberal corporate feminism, while Sanders represents a democratic socialist feminism.

Feminists who believe that equality of opportunity for women should be pursued within the existing political and economic system favor Clinton’s feminism. Feminists who believe that women’s equality requires a democratic revolution against political and corporate power that drives economic inequality favor Sanders’ feminism.

Feminist ideologies differ not only by ideological strand but also by ideological stretch. All feminist ideologies consider how gender and sexuality privilege some people and disadvantage others, but not all feminist ideologies stretch as far as others. Some look only at how gender and sexuality affect women and/or heterosexuals, while others stretch the categories of gender and sexuality to include men, sexuals and trans people.

3. Issues

Both Clinton and Sanders stretch their respective brands of feminism, but Sanders claims to have been stretching his feminism for far longer than has Clinton. This is evident in how each candidate presents their record on the issue of LGBT rights and marriage equality.

As secretary of state, Clinton famously declared “gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights” in her 2011 Human Rights Day speech. While a long-time supporter of partnership benefits and civil unions for same-sex couples, Clinton said in 2000 had she been a senator in 1996, she would have voted for the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which denied federal benefits and marriage equality to same-sex couples. In 2013, Clinton announced her position had evolved in support of marriage equality.

Sanders, on the other hand, voted against DOMA in 1996. Whether Sanders’ opposition to DOMA was because he is a strong states’ rights advocate or a strong LGBT advocate is debated. What is not debated is that when Sanders (like Clinton) urged the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn DOMA in 2013, he did so as one of the few consistent legislative opponents of this law.

Iden y, ideology and issues combine differently for different voters – individually, as demographic groups and in relation to specific types of contests like caucuses and primaries versus national elections.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/02/bern...e+Raw+Story%29

[boutons_deux]

The Facebook Primary

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/.../?ex_cid=538fb

[rmt]

The Facebook Primary

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/.../?ex_cid=538fb

Those percentages don't seem too good for Bernie seeing as most of his supporters are young and on Facebook.

[boutons_deux]

Carrier in Indy, UTEC in Huntington to move units to Mexico, costing 2,100 jobs

http://www.indystar.com/story/money/...jobs/80181804/

===============

"The decision by United Technologies to ship 2,100 jobs from Indiana to Mexico is another example of how NAFTA and other trade policies have been a disaster for American workers.

In my view, we have got to fundamentally rewrite our failed trade policies so that American jobs are no longer our number one export.

I was proud to help lead the effort against NAFTA and Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China.

Unfortunately, Secretary Clinton supported these trade policies which have led to the loss of millions of jobs and thousands of factories.

Enough is enough!"

https://www.facebook.com/berniesanders/?fref=nf

[boutons_deux]

How Low Will the Clinton Camp Go?




Bernie Sanders, right, a member of the Congress of Racial Equality steering committee, stands next to University of Chicago president George Beadle, who is speaking at a CORE meeting on housing sit-ins in 1962.


http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/35211-how-low-will-the-clinton-camp-go

[boutons_deux]

Surging Sanders Could Surprise Nevada Caucus


As the Nevada Democratic caucus on Saturday comes closer, Bernie Sanders is surging, Team Clinton is panicked and the contest will be much closer than pundits expected.

For the last six months the national Democratic party establishment, which is virtually united in its support for Ms. Clinton, made four major mistakes in writing off the chances for Mr. Sanders in Nevada.

First, Nevada was one of the hardest-hit states during the financial crash caused by the corruptions of the rigged financial system Mr. Sanders is challenging and battling to dramatically reform. With Nevada recovering from the crash more slowly than many states, and with continuing concern about the state of the national economy, the Sanders message of populism and change is more powerful in Nevada than the political and financial insiders of the establishment understand.

The reason Mr. Sanders won the New Hampshire primary by a landslide of more than 20 percent is that he broadened his support—from young people and true blue liberals—to include working class blue collar white voters and enough women to enable Mr. Sanders to win a majority of all female voters in the primary.

Second, the establishment pundits have always assumed Ms. Clinton would ultimately receive the near-unanimous support of black and Hispanic voters. While the Clintons have earned much goodwill from minority communities, many minority voters are too young to remember most of the good works of the Clintons, and as voters have come to learn more about the progressive populist history and platform of Mr. Sanders, and his good works over many years, his support across all communities has risen.
One of the most interesting questions that will be answered in the coming weeks, beginning with the Nevada caucus and South Carolina primary, will be the number of young black and Hispanic voters who turn to Mr. Sanders in the same way most young white voters have supported him in Iowa and New Hampshire. My guess is this number will be larger than most insider establishment pundits expect.

Third, while Mr. Sanders has campaigned throughout Nevada for his positive agenda to create a political revolution that will make the American economy less rigged and more fair, Ms. Clinton has become a largely negative candidate with nonstop 24/7 attacks against Mr. Sanders that harden the low favorability and high distrust ratings plaguing her candidacy.

When Ms. Clinton falsely tells Nevadans that Mr. Sanders is a one-issue candidate, she is bearing false witness in a way voters understand. Mr. Sanders has talked at length and in depth about free public college education, a truly universal health care system, major reform of the criminal justice system, far-reaching Wall Street reform, and cleaning up our democracy from the corruptions of dirty money among other things in his litany of changes he promises with authenticity and passion to bring. Does this sound like one issue to you?
Ms. Clinton has virtually stopped trying to offer her visions and dreams for America and has resorted to little more than condemning the dreams and plans of Mr. Sanders—a mistake I have been warning the Clinton campaign against for many months, and a mistake that caused her great damage with New Hampshire voters.

Nevada voters suffered great hardship in the last financial crisis, are concerned about the current economy, and would suffer great hardship in the next financial crisis. Mr. Sanders is offering direct solutions to the problems facing Nevada voters while Ms. Clinton is seen daily attacking his solutions without coherently explaining her own.

Fourth, as the Clinton campaign has become alarmed about the Nevada surge of Mr. Sanders, its campaign spinners have begun to disparage the Nevada caucus itself—a major blunder that is beginning to cause a substantial backlash from Nevada voters and even from prominent members of the Nevada establishment.

Until recently, Clinton officials have bragged that she had a huge lead over Mr. Sanders in the state and suggested that the reason is that Nevada is a far more diverse state than Iowa or New Hampshire.

Now that Team Clinton is panicking about the surge for Mr. Sanders, her campaign spinners have begun saying Nevada is an 80 percent white state, which is the exact opposite of what they have been saying for many months and is insulting to all Nevada voters.

Nevada Senator and Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid has long championed the Nevada caucus with the argument—which is entirely correct—that Nevada is a very diverse state. For Clinton campaign officials to suddenly reverse course and say the exact opposite, in an apparent attempt to preemptively spin a disappointing caucus result for her, is anathema to all Nevada Democrats regardless of their age, race or faction.

As the Nevada Democratic caucus comes closer the result is now highly unpredictable. There is no question the Sanders campaign is surging and the Clinton campaign is nervous. The huge Nevada landslide for Ms. Clinton that was once widely assumed is now highly unlikely to happen. Ms. Clinton must still be called the favorite, but the Sanders magic is now on the march in Nevada and a stunning Sanders upset may not be likely but is certainly now possible.

http://www.commondreams.org/views/20...-nevada-caucus

[boutons_deux]

Bernie Sanders arrested at 1963 racial protest – video

http://redgreenandblue.org/2016/02/1...protest-video/

but

Congressional Black Democrats Unload on Bernie Sanders

http://www.texastribune.org/2016/02/...nload-sanders/

[boutons_deux]

Hillary Clinton Donors Hear Concerns About Nevada Outcome

Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager briefed some of her most loyal and active fund-raisers this morning about the upcoming Nevada caucuses and responded to frustrations among some of her donors that the campaign needed to do a better job of demonstrating its successful mobilization of grassroots activists and small donors.

Robby Mook, the Clinton campaign manager, sat at the head of a conference table in the New York office of Clinton donor and Wall Street investor Marc Lasry, according to accounts from people in the room. Joining them for the state-of-the-race conversation over coffee were members of the campaign’s finance steering committee, including Maureen White, the former Democratic National Committee finance chairwoman, Alan Patricof, Michael Kempner, Robert Zimmerman, Betsy Cohen, Jay Snyder and others.

Mr. Mook told the donors that the outcome in Nevada, a state he ran for Mrs. Clinton in the 2008 campaign, was hard to predict and that, depending on turnout, Mrs. Clinton could win by a lot or win or lose by a tiny margin, according to several donors who requested anonymity to discuss the private meeting. But Mr. Mook stressed that the map leaned in Mrs. Clinton’s favor as the race moved to South Carolina, where he was confident she would win, and that she would do well on March 1, when more states voted.

The collected fundraisers, who for years have bundled checks for Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, listened approvingly as Ms. White, who seemed especially frustrated, expressed bewilderment that the campaign’s mobilization of grassroots support had been eclipsed in the news media by Bernie Sanders’s criticism of Mrs. Clinton as the establishment candidate representing big money.

Mr. Mook, who had furnished the donors with a Washington Post clip about the campaign’s “small donor boom,” told the steering committee that he repeatedly told reporters about Mrs. Clinton’s small donors, but “they don’t listen.”

Donors also voiced some frustration with the lack of media scrutiny of Mr. Sanders, who they said was essentially getting a pass. They pressed Mr. Mook to demonstrate that the Vermont senator’s policy proposals were entirely implausible promises and that his responses to essentially all substantive questions drew on excerpts of his stump speech and rants about the “millionaires and billionaires.”

One donor also asked Mr. Mook to go after the youth vote. With a straight face, attendees said, the operative took the suggestion under advisement.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/firs...evada-outcome/

[boutons_deux]

The New York Times disclosed today that in a meeting held in a large Wall Street investor's office, big money donors instructed Secretary Hillary Clinton's campaign manager Robby Mook to go after Sen. Bernie Sanders for offering so-called unrealistic proposals and by claiming that all his solutions are related back to "millionaires and billionaires."

Not surprisingly those are exactly the attacks that the Clinton campaign is now dutifully lobbing.

With no small amount of irony, the mega-donors also asked Mook to highlight the Clinton campaign's support from small donors.

Jeff Weaver, campaign manager for Bernie 2016 said,

"One of the biggest differences between our campaigns is that Bernie’s campaign does not take its marching orders from Wall Street and big money donors. It's shameful that the Clinton campaign is parroting attacks at Sen. Sanders that The New York Times has do ented come right from her big money backers. Now we are beginning to get a glimpse into what goes on in all those closed door meetings with Wall Street interests."

https://www.facebook.com/berniesanders/?fref=nf

[boutons_deux]

Bernie Sanders Surges Ahead of Hillary Clinton For the First Time in New National Poll

A new Fox News poll released Thursday evening shows the Vermont senator beating the former First Lady and Secretary of State, 47 to 44, among likely Democratic primary voters. This is the first time Sen. Sanders has beaten Clinton, the longtime frontrunner, in any nationwide poll.

Clinton has been ahead of Sanders by as much as 35 points nationally, though in the wake of her narrow win in Iowa and decisive loss in New Hampshire, Sanders has been closing in on her lead. Since January, Sanders has cut Clinton’s national polling advantage in half. Another national poll conducted by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal shows Clinton ahead by just 11 points.

The Fox News poll may be an outlier for now, but polling averages from Real Clear Politics show Clinton trending downward and Sanders trending upward since the start of 2016:



http://usuncut.com/politics/bernie-a...national-poll/

[boutons_deux]

Watch Bernie Sanders Go After Obama's Opponents in this Passionate Rebuttal of Racism

By the way, I am appalled, people can agree with Barack Obama, you can disagree with Barack Obama, but anybody who doesn't understand that the kind of obstructionism and hatred thrown at this man, the idea of making him a delegitimate president by suggesting he was not born in America because his dad came from Kenya—no one asked me. I'm a citizen and my father came from Poland. Gee, what's the difference? Maybe the color of our skin... All of us together have got to say no to xenophobia and to racism and to bigotry of all forms.


http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2016...-birther-trump

[boutons_deux]

Thomas Piketty on the rise of Bernie Sanders: the US enters a new political era

Let’s glance back for an instant. From the 1930s until the 1970s, the US were at the forefront of an ambitious set of policies aiming to reduce social inequalities. Partly to avoid any resemblance with Old Europe, seen then as extremely unequal and contrary to the American democratic spirit, in the inter-war years the country invented a highly progressive income and estate tax and set up levels of fiscal progressiveness never used on our side of the Atlantic. From 1930 to 1980 – for half a century – the rate for the highest US income (over $1m per year) was on average 82%, with peaks of 91% from the 1940s to 1960s (from Roosevelt to Kennedy), and still as high as 70% during Reagan’s election in 1980.

This policy in no way affected the strong growth of the post-war American economy, doubtless because there is not much point in paying super-managers $10m when $1m will do. The estate tax, which was equally progressive with rates applicable to the largest fortunes in the range of 70% to 80% for decades (the rate has almost never exceeded 30% to 40% in Germany or France), greatly reduced the concentration of American capital, without the destruction and wars which Europe had to face.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/c...2016?CMP=fb_gu

iow, the decline of the 99% began in the 1970s as the VRWC, aka "movement conservatism", became established, organized, and BigCorp realized it didn't need to Give A Patriotic about America, only about screwing wealth out of Americans in every manner possible.

[rmt]

In addition to the doctor strike:

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-35608992

[boutons_deux]

In addition to the doctor strike:

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-35608992

Americans overpay $1T+ EVERY YEAR, iow, IN THE HOLE to BigHealthCare, and not everybody has access to health care.

[spurraider21]

Americans overpay $1T+ EVERY YEAR, iow, IN THE HOLE to BigHealthCare, and not everybody has access to health care.

thanks obama

[rmt]

thanks obama

for the $2.1 billion website with no backend

[boutons_deux]

thanks obama

nope, that's not ACA. The BigHealthCare screwing Americans. ACA doesn't set prices

[spurraider21]

nope, that's not ACA. The BigHealthCare screwing Americans. ACA doesn't set prices

obama was supposed to fix healthcare

thanks obama

[boutons_deux]

obama was supposed to fix healthcare

thanks obama

ACA's priority was increasing health access to Ms of Americans. That's a huge success.

"fix healthcare" is a strawman, GFY

[boutons_deux]

Latino Group Defends Sanders Against Clinton Attacks Over Immigration Vote

LAS VEGAS – Like clockwork, whenever Bernie Sanders gets hit for his vote against a 2007 immigration bill — which Hillary Clinton’s campaign has cited in an attempt to make his immigration record an issue — Sanders begins by saying that LULAC, the League of United Latin American Citizens, opposed the legislation, too.

At the time the group said, “LULAC cannot support a bill that will separate families and lead to the exploitation of immigrant workers,” pointing to, as Sanders has, guest worker provisions that it found to be morally wrong.

But LULAC eventually dropped its opposition to the filibuster of the bill, hoping, like other Latino and immigrant groups such as NCLR, that it could be improved in the House.

So how does the group feel about Sanders using them as a shield to protect himself from attacks on the vote? It turns out they’re annoyed with Clinton for making Sanders’ vote an issue.

“I really think it’s unfair for Hillary to make an issue of that vote,” LULAC executive director Brent Wilkes told BuzzFeed News. “I don’t really know, it’s hard to separate Hillary’s record from [Bill Clinton’s]. The Clintons, when they were in office, weren’t exactly friends to immigrants.”

Wilkes said that, at the time, President Bush was saying that “temporary means temporary” when it came to the guest workers staying in the country, in effect making the workers second-class citizens vulnerable to exploitation.

“We thought it was cruel and would lead to bracero-like abuses,” he said, pointing to the 1940s program that brought in millions of Mexican nationals, who were in turn treated badly. Many were eventually deported in the infamous “Operation .”

http://www.buzzfeed.com/adriancarras...im#.ckY177d6qz

[boutons_deux]

Arrest photo of young activist Bernie Sanders emerges from Tribune
archives




A Chicago Tribune archival photo of a young man being arrested in 1963 at a South Side protest is Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders, his campaign has confirmed, bolstering the candidate's narrative about his civil rights activism.The black-and-white photo shows a 21-year-old Sanders, then a University of Chicago student, being taken by Chicago police toward a police wagon. An acetate negative of the photo was found in the Tribune's archives, said Marianne Mather, a Chicago Tribune photo editor.

"Bernie identified it himself," said Tad Devine, a senior adviser to the campaign, adding that Sanders looked at a digital image of the photo. "He looked at it — he actually has his student ID from the University of Chicago in his wallet — and he said, 'Yes, that indeed is (me).'"

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...219-story.html

Bernie's been givin' 'em for 50+ years!

[boutons_deux]

The White House Just Defended Bernie Sanders Against Clinton’s Attacks

Press Secretary Josh Earnest said at a recent press briefing that the Obama administration has experienced no such animosity from Bernie.

“Senator Sanders stood not too far away from where I’m standing,” Earnest said. “You can just peek out the window and see the spot he was standing. Where he spoke to all of you after having spent an hour with the President of the United States in the Oval Office. Where he talked to all of you about how proud he was of the progress our country has made under President Obama’s leadership. And I think that’s a pretty strong statement about how supportive and proud Senator Sanders is of President Obama’s legacy.

Press Secretary Earnest is referring to Bernie’s recent visit to the White House on January 27th. After visiting President Obama, Bernie spoke with the press.

“There’s no secret that we have, as is the case in a Democratic society, we have differences of opinion,” Sanders said. “I was on the floor of the Senate disagreeing with him over taxes. We disagree over (the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal). By and large, over the last seven years on major issue after major issue, I have stood by his side to where he has taken on unprecedented Republican obstructionism, has tried to do the right thing for the American people.”

Earnest has even expressed some happiness on behalf of the Obama administration that Hillary isn’t running unopposed, saying “It’s good for the Democratic Party for there to be such a robust debate going on about who should be our party’s nominee.”

http://usuncut.com/politics/white-ho...ntons-attacks/