Call for Pelosi to ‘pass the torch’ — from fellow Democratic congresswoman
Call for Pelosi to
FEAST!
Call for Pelosi to
FEAST!
Democrat Party Civil War Begins
- Thread starter EagleSmack
- Start date
According to the article old Nancy just isn't progressive enough . Oh and miss Sanchez is a woman of colour .
Bernie Sanders Isn’t A Democrat… Thank God
In the hands of mainstream Democrats, the fact that Sanders is not a Democrat is wielded as an accusation. “I’m proud to be a Democrat,” writes Clinton in her memoirs. “And I wish Bernie were too.” Strangely, liberals who usually see unflinching commitments to patriotism as cultish and unsophisticated—the same people who were quick to defend Michelle Obama for acknowledging that it is not always easy to be proud of America—are unable bring the same nuance to the issue of party loyalty. For many, until he puts a “D” after his name, Sanders will remain an enemy.
It’s hard to support the idea that Sanders hasn’t worked hard to advance the party. Sanders’s efforts in service of Clinton’s campaign match or exceed the efforts of prior primary losers. Sanders readily acknowledged that “the election of Donald Trump as president would be a disaster for this country,” and committed to doing “everything that [he could] to see that that doesn’t happen. When I campaign,” he promised, “I campaign very, very hard.” As described by Amy Davidson Sorkin in an article published shortly before election day, he did, traveling across the country to give speech after speech imploring his supporters to vote for Clinton:
Since conceding defeat in the primaries, Sanders has been one of the real champions of this campaign. He let his supporters yell at him and deride him as a sellout in bleak delegate breakfasts at the Democratic National Convention, in Philadelphia, as he endorsed Clinton and explained why they needed to do the same. He made getting support for her his priority, putting aside any subtle, undermining gestures that might have better preserved his rebel-rock-star status.
But more relevant than whether Sanders has done enough to support the party itself should be whether Sanders has worked hard in service of the party’s ideals. After all, what would it mean to promote a party that stood for nothing? A label alone means very little. Political parties are not identities in and of themselves. Rather, they ostensibly represent a relatively defined set of principles. That set may only partially map on to an individual’s moral, political, and cultural values, but a politician’s failure to fully subscribe to a party’s doctrine does not necessarily imply complete rejection of it—just look at Sanders’ long-time caucus relationship with the Democrats.
Perhaps because we live in a largely binary political system, Sanders’s status as an Independent challenges the settled assumption that you’re either with us, or against us. But that framework has always been ludicrous: it was just as irrational when George W. Bush infamously gave voice to it in his effort to cast those countries that opposed his wars as supporters of terrorism.
Yet for some, party still seems to precede principle. Consider Senator Barbara Boxer’s rejoinder to Sanders’s claim that Clinton is only sometimes progressive: “Hillary is progressive EVERY day. Bernie is a Democrat ‘some days.’” The implication is that party affiliation is equivalent to political identity. That’s not the case, though: progressivism is defined by a commitment to a set of beliefs, while “being a Democrat” is defined by membership in an organization, one that may or may not represent that set of beliefs.
more
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/10/bernie-sanders-isnt-a-democrat-thank-god
In the hands of mainstream Democrats, the fact that Sanders is not a Democrat is wielded as an accusation. “I’m proud to be a Democrat,” writes Clinton in her memoirs. “And I wish Bernie were too.” Strangely, liberals who usually see unflinching commitments to patriotism as cultish and unsophisticated—the same people who were quick to defend Michelle Obama for acknowledging that it is not always easy to be proud of America—are unable bring the same nuance to the issue of party loyalty. For many, until he puts a “D” after his name, Sanders will remain an enemy.
It’s hard to support the idea that Sanders hasn’t worked hard to advance the party. Sanders’s efforts in service of Clinton’s campaign match or exceed the efforts of prior primary losers. Sanders readily acknowledged that “the election of Donald Trump as president would be a disaster for this country,” and committed to doing “everything that [he could] to see that that doesn’t happen. When I campaign,” he promised, “I campaign very, very hard.” As described by Amy Davidson Sorkin in an article published shortly before election day, he did, traveling across the country to give speech after speech imploring his supporters to vote for Clinton:
Since conceding defeat in the primaries, Sanders has been one of the real champions of this campaign. He let his supporters yell at him and deride him as a sellout in bleak delegate breakfasts at the Democratic National Convention, in Philadelphia, as he endorsed Clinton and explained why they needed to do the same. He made getting support for her his priority, putting aside any subtle, undermining gestures that might have better preserved his rebel-rock-star status.
But more relevant than whether Sanders has done enough to support the party itself should be whether Sanders has worked hard in service of the party’s ideals. After all, what would it mean to promote a party that stood for nothing? A label alone means very little. Political parties are not identities in and of themselves. Rather, they ostensibly represent a relatively defined set of principles. That set may only partially map on to an individual’s moral, political, and cultural values, but a politician’s failure to fully subscribe to a party’s doctrine does not necessarily imply complete rejection of it—just look at Sanders’ long-time caucus relationship with the Democrats.
Perhaps because we live in a largely binary political system, Sanders’s status as an Independent challenges the settled assumption that you’re either with us, or against us. But that framework has always been ludicrous: it was just as irrational when George W. Bush infamously gave voice to it in his effort to cast those countries that opposed his wars as supporters of terrorism.
Yet for some, party still seems to precede principle. Consider Senator Barbara Boxer’s rejoinder to Sanders’s claim that Clinton is only sometimes progressive: “Hillary is progressive EVERY day. Bernie is a Democrat ‘some days.’” The implication is that party affiliation is equivalent to political identity. That’s not the case, though: progressivism is defined by a commitment to a set of beliefs, while “being a Democrat” is defined by membership in an organization, one that may or may not represent that set of beliefs.
more
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2017/10/bernie-sanders-isnt-a-democrat-thank-god
The Democrats are battling for the soul of their party. The establishment wing of the party is insisting that it is their party and the Sander's supporters just better submit to their will. They thought it was funny that they rigged the primaries in favor of Clinton with the creation of the super delegates and they made no efforts to hide it.
"Unpledged (Super) delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don't have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists." ~ Wasserman Schultz
Obama was one of those grassroot activists. It was not his turn but he defeated Hillary nevertheless. The Democrat Establishment was going to ensure that something like that did not happen again.
Sander's supporters were robbed and they know it. To the Democrat Establishment chagrin, Sander's voters are loud and are getting up in the Democrat establishment's grill and they aren't going away.
"Unpledged (Super) delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don't have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists." ~ Wasserman Schultz
Obama was one of those grassroot activists. It was not his turn but he defeated Hillary nevertheless. The Democrat Establishment was going to ensure that something like that did not happen again.
Sander's supporters were robbed and they know it. To the Democrat Establishment chagrin, Sander's voters are loud and are getting up in the Democrat establishment's grill and they aren't going away.
The Dems made sure that the populist movement within their party wasn't going to do the same thing to Hillary twice.
They're at war with themselves.
Resistance to Trump fuels new generation of California liberals
http://thehill.com/homenews/state-w...p-fuels-new-generation-of-california-liberals
Resistance to Trump fuels new generation of California liberals
http://thehill.com/homenews/state-w...p-fuels-new-generation-of-california-liberals
The neo-liberal Dems don't want to accept what made FDR a 12 year President.....
DNC Appoints Anti- $15 Min. Wage Stooge To Finance Committee
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZPZtCsJkyE
DNC Appoints Anti- $15 Min. Wage Stooge To Finance Committee
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZPZtCsJkyE
Progressives’ Anger Over Key Committee Appointments Roils Democratic Party Meeting
Officials who backed Rep. Keith Ellison over Tom Perez were removed from crucial posts.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...ellison-loyalists_us_59ea6a44e4b0a484d0634a08
Officials who backed Rep. Keith Ellison over Tom Perez were removed from crucial posts.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...ellison-loyalists_us_59ea6a44e4b0a484d0634a08
DNC reshuffle has some worrying about a ‘purge’
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...orrying-about-a-purge/?utm_term=.2b595ba52589
Fitting
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...orrying-about-a-purge/?utm_term=.2b595ba52589
Fitting
Nancy Pelosi isn’t going anywhere
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...3470754bbb9_story.html?utm_term=.e793121968bd
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...3470754bbb9_story.html?utm_term=.e793121968bd