• selokichtli@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    8 hours ago

    You won’t see Sanders become president. That will never happen. They, the bipartisan political establishment, robbed you of that forever, in 2016. But you do need to go and listen to this guy, learn from him, absorb his energy and regain hope. That is how a decent, intelligent American thinks, talks and acts. He is doing this because he sees something alarming happening from within the state and he is throwing a hail Mary to every decent people he can find on the streets. He knows change is outside the system.

  • GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    10 hours ago

    What’s crazy and I feel very shortsighted of the Democrats is that they aren’t doing this more often. There is a large population that will/would respond to this type of politicking from the “opposition”. They would generate tons of energy for more protests and put more pressure on the republicans to oppose shit.

    instead we get:

    House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) has garnered scorn for meeting with Silicon Valley executives to “mend fences” with the powerful tech sector—where numerous CEOs have signaled support for Trump during his second term.

    Ken Martin, the newly elected chair of the Democratic National Committee, said last month that the party should continue to take money from “good billionaires.”

    • deadtom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Democrats are the controlled opposition. It’s why they would never give Sanders a fair shake. He would upset them “good billionaires” because going further right is preferable than a single step left for the wealthy.

      • Lukas Murch@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Under the proposed Trump tax cuts, I bet a vast majority of our Democrat leaders are looking at a big tax cut. From their standpoint, they need to put up just enough push back to get re-elected next election. Don’t rock the boat and get on Trump’s bad side.

        We need to clump the corporate democrats with the Republicans. None of them work for us. We need more AOC, Bernie, Jasmine Crockett, Rep Maxwell Frosts.

        • GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 hours ago

          From their standpoint, they need to put up just enough push back to get re-elected next election.

          You just unlocked the D playbook going back to at LEAST 2000 and dubya.

  • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    93
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    The fact that it still has to be Bernie doing this is nothing short of a failure on the part of the American people.

    • DrFistington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Pritzker is the only one even close to Sanders level, and he has the money to create a private army to hunt the gop traitors down like animals. I hope he does. File state level treason charges against Trump and his appointees, fly in some Ukrainian spec ops troops, a bunch of SAM’s and drones, and I’ll be one of the first volunteers help end the Russia problem

      • GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        File state level treason charges against Trump and his appointees, fly in some Ukrainian spec ops troops, a bunch of SAM’s and drones, and I’ll be one of the first volunteers help end the Russia problem

        Giggitygiggitygiggity GOO!

        Well, I’m spent.

    • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      14 hours ago

      The DNC could have let him win instead of cheating him out of the primary in 2016, we should have had a green new deal by now.

  • stopdropandprole@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    104
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    a singular politician. he’s going to die on the job, in the middle of an impassioned speech on behalf of the working class. indefatigable. not even Lincoln or Kennedy had a fraction of the perseverance and consistency this man has demonstrated. a true public servant.

      • NotLemming@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        12 hours ago

        In an ideal world, but haven’t we learned that she’s too female and probably not white enough for America? *I don’t agree, but I’m being pragmatic

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          12 hours ago

          In an ideal world, but haven’t we learned that she’s too female and probably not white enough for America?

          The entire point behind “Kamala lost because she’s a woman of color, not because she wouldn’t differ from her unpopular predecessor except to move to his right” is to shut out AOC in particular. The party is willing to hold back all women in order to stifle one person, and it’s gross.

          • NotLemming@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            10 hours ago

            The fact is that many Americans wouldn’t vote for a woman, and combining that with the ones who wouldn’t vote for a person of colour is a bad idea, especially when the alternative for president is so dire.

            I do think that the fact she wouldn’t support Palestine/condemn Israel was a factor too, but if she had, that would have set Israel against her and lost more votes, especially due to all the media Zionists control and their lobbying power.

            • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 hours ago

              The Democratic president with the largest margin of victory in recent times was a black man and you’re still out here saying we need to court voters that won’t vote for a person of color in order to win. Maybe your read on the inherent unelectability of women is similarly flawed.

              • NotLemming@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                3 hours ago

                You again. There have been 2 women on the ballot and both failed, this latest with drastic consequences. So I’d say my read was 100% correct, unfortunately. I wish I was wrong.

                • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  57 minutes ago

                  Oh, well then let’s run a black man. They not only have 100% success rate, but massively outperformed all the white men. That must mean black skin (as long as it’s not on a woman) is an electoral benefit! Why take a risk with a white person? That’s the heart of your argument, right?

            • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              9 hours ago

              The fact is that many Americans wouldn’t vote for a woman, and combining that with the ones who wouldn’t vote for a person of colour is a bad idea

              So long as a progressive is a possibility and not one femtosecond longer.

              I do think that the fact she wouldn’t support Palestine/condemn Israel was a factor too, but if she had, that would have set Israel against her and lost more votes

              So we have to (and you get to) support genocide forever too!

              • NotLemming@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                4 hours ago

                Not sure why I’m being down voted - I would have noted for kamala and I wish she was president. I’m saying that if there’s an option to take a risk now when failure means death then it’s best to not take the risk and wait for a time when the alternative is only pain. Trump was death, we all knew. Not a good time to take a risk. It would have been better to wait to take a risk in trying to elect a woman for the first time in a country of people who think its okay for a person held to the highest standards in the land to say ‘grab em by the pussy’, pay women for sex and be a rapist of women. Even aside from the racism. If you don’t see that then I’m shocked.

        • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Let’s do racism and sexism, not because we’re racist and sexist, but because other people probably are. It may look like us and the bigots of unclear numbers are both having the same effect, but we’re not bad people just because our actions proactively support bad things. We’re just being pragmatic.

          • NotLemming@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Let’s not live in the real world and run a black woman as candidate, which has never been done before… Why not?
            Oh, that’s just coincidence.
            As is the fact that even without racism, a woman lost to trump last time.
            Nothing to do with the fact that racism and sexism exist and are actually very important to some people. /s

            Come on. Run a black woman at a time when the consequences of racism and sexism being expressed in the voting booth aren’t AS bad. Not when a dictator from day 1 is going to get elected in possibly the last ever election for the US. Then you run your most boring, conservative candidate who as few people have a problem with as possible until whatever passes for normality in the US returns.

            What do you think that trump getting elected has done for women’s rights, or POC? Yeah, better to be pragmatic because getting a woman on the ballot paper was not worth it and probably set us women back by decades, at a minimum.

            • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 hour ago

              You’re making the entirely unfounded assumption that sexism was the cause for those women’s loss rather than them individually both being terrible candidates. Despite the Obama example showing you “racism exists, so only run white people” point is just completely bullshit. People literally made the same argument against Obama.

              There were blaring warning signs that had absolutely nothing to do with sexism with both candidate. Easy had campaign choices and cultural movements that very easily explain the losses without diving into the dark heart of man, but somehow you just ignore those to focus on banning women and POC from running for pragmatism.

              Whatever you believe about your non-racist internal beliefs, your actions are indistinguishable from racism. And I’m not sure you’ll ever think there’s an election so low stakes that we can select the best candidate if she’s a woman, because you don’t seem to have learned anything by the event that proved the whole philosophy as suspect.

    • robbinhood@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Eh, I don’t know. Lincoln was well aware that he was walking into a massively complex situation with nothing short of the future of the country 100% on the line. He knew he was doing it at great personal risk, and I am sure on some level he knew it could (and ultimately, would) cost him his life.

      Lincoln’s life was cut short so ultimately we never got to see what the next phase of his life would look like, but he persevered in the face of the greatest struggle this nation has ever faced.

      Trump and friends may well create as dangerous of a scenario as the civil war, especially if Thiel, Vance, and the other tech authoritarians achieve their goal of radically overhauling if not outright destroying the country.

  • wirebeads@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    19 hours ago

    This is the man that should be the U.S. president. Not the fucking fascist rapist felon who’s all cozied up to Russian Putin scum.

        • GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          9 hours ago

          The fact that both sides of the aisle circle the wagons to prevent him all the while plagiarizing his talking points should tell you volumes.

        • Banana@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          30
          ·
          17 hours ago

          I don’t understand what you mean. His entire activism history is on his Wikipedia page. He’s been fighting the good fight and influencing people in lower politics long before he became a senator.

          He did a lot in the 60s as a university student during the Civil Rights Movement, a time when a lot of white people weren’t stepping up, and they really needed to.

          “He became the chairman of the university chapter of the Congress for Racial Equality (CORE) and merged the group with SNCC — the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee. Bernie literally helped lead the first known sit-in in at the University of Chicago, where 33 students camped outside of the President’s office — protesting segregating housing on campus.”

          This is from this article: https://medium.com/@ShaunKing/you-dont-really-know-who-bernie-sanders-was-in-the-1960s-79628016125f

          Feel free to read more if you like. He did a lot of protesting against police brutality at the time as well.

          Just because somebody hasn’t fixed every issue doesn’t mean they aren’t fighting the good fight. Bernie is clearly a man who has always had his heart in the right place and knows that the good fight requires more than just him, but that doesn’t mean he’s ever gonna stop.

  • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I’ve felt that Bernie should be president since 2015, but he never stood a chance in the US. You have a 0% chance of being elected president in this country once the label of “socialist” has been applied to you.

      • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Obama never embraced the label, though. Bernie did. Obama was a Democrat and a liberal, Bernie is an independent and a socialist.

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      18 hours ago

      You say that but articles like this don’t fit that narrative. There are Republican voters who like Bernie and they have been showing up to his rallies for years. I know several Trump voters who have said they would have voted for Sanders if they got the chance. The idea that progressives don’t appeal to conservatives is neoliberal propaganda. Progressives hit on alot of the same problems as conservative politicians they just have different solutions (and a lot less bullshit). Neoliberalism just pretends that the status quo is fine. Despite the name conservatives are largely unhappy with the status quo. That’s how we got Trump.

      • BadmanDan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Brother, who the hell says they’re a fan of Sanders and then willingly votes for Trump other than chaos agents or racist who want to bury social issues?

        • krashmo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          30
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          17 hours ago

          More than you think. Trump is a fascist piece of shit but he’s not wrong when he says the system is rigged and drastic change is needed. Replace Trump’s Nazi rhetoric and egoism with workable ideas and genuine empathy and in simplistic terms you have Sanders.

          • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Yeah, a not-insignificant portion of Trump’s voters are people who have been shafted by the system and are desperate for change, any change. Two out of three times, Trump was the candidate offering change. That he’s destroying stuff is, to them, secondary at best because they think their lives can’t get much worse anyway.

      • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        18 hours ago

        There are Republican voters who like Bernie and they have been showing up to his rallies for years.

        Then Bernie should have run for the Republican nomination. He tried running for the Democrat nomination twice, and he lost twice.

        • krashmo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          18 hours ago

          You can be flippant about the nature of first past the post voting systems if you like but it’s not a useful contribution to the discussion. If you want to be POTUS you run as an R or a D and Bernie is not an R. That does not mean there are not R voters who like his policies.

          • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            If you want to be POTUS you run as an R or a D and Bernie is not an R.

            Did you miss the part where I said he ran for the Democrat nomination, twice?

            That does not mean there are not R voters who like his policies.

            I never said otherwise, but how does that help him win a presidential election?

            My whole point is that Bernie could not win a presidential election in the US. How has anything you’ve said disproven that?

        • ToadOfHypnosis@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          15 hours ago

          The DNC rigged it against him. He should have ran independent. The DNC is corrupt af.

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            The DNC rigged it against him

            Yep.

            He should have ran independent.

            Nope. Wouldn’t have worked.

            The DNC is corrupt af.

            Yep.

            • 8uurg@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 hours ago

              It is surprising how many people don’t realise the spoiler effect inherent in first-past-the-post makes running as an independent an bad idea: you are more likely to split the vote with a candidate who agrees with some of your points, causing both of you to lose, than being able to bring change.

    • NotLemming@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      12 hours ago

      True. People need to learn what socialist actually means. Much of Europe is socialist.

        • NotLemming@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I didn’t say communist, I said socialist. Socialism isn’t a monolith, there are different variants, but in general we have universal healthcare and good public services, support people with a financial safety net for those who need it, high taxes so wealth is shared more equally. I mean all this is relative and could be better but compared to America? Homeless shanty towns & workers living in cars for years? Was it Finland eliminated homlessness? Socialist paradise.