Official Bernie Sanders HQ: Not Me, Us!

[King Kreole]

She touts medicare for all, but when she's asked about it, she tip toes around the subject and talks about a public option, or reducing the age to 55, etc. Bernie's plan is medicare for all as a right, free at the point of service [hard stop].

Liz has been saying exactly what's in Bernie's plan, which she cosponsors. Bernie's plan is phased in, not immediate universal coverage free at the point of service.
NPR Choice page

Phased in over time. The Sanders plan wouldn't extend insurance to all Americans immediately; rather, it would do it over four years (and would, as stated above, greatly change the program). The first year, the Medicare eligibility age would be lowered to 55. That would move to 45 and then to 35 over the following two years, until finally, in the fourth year, everyone would be covered.

When Elizabeth Warren is asked about taking money from corporations, she says she won't during the primary, but will during the presidential election.

Yeah I thought this was a stupid move, at least rhetorically, on her part. But has Bernie made that pledge for the presidential election? If so, link? At least she's pushing the party to walk the walk of campaign finance reform.

Elizabeth Warren is significantly better than someone like Hillary Clinton and most republicans, don't get me wrong, but she's nowhere near the progressive/populist/leftist that Bernie Sanders is.

I disagree. But even if Bernie were more progressive/leftist/populist than Liz, I think his inability or unwillingness to acknowledge the actual hurdles to enacting progressive policies is a difficult pill to swallow, and keeps him distinctly in second place to Liz. I can't see a scenario in which he wouldn't be a lame duck President from day one. He doesn't seem to have any actual understanding of how power works in this system. His response is always that a vague "revolution" will sweep over the country and take care of the logistics. Liz, in addition to having a ton of plans to immediately utilize the powers of the executive branch, has been hammering the point that a grassroots progressive organization is needed to complete the cypher and push from the bottom up.

 

[King Kreole]

What we need is an outsider willing to knuckle up and take on the political establishment and the corporate class not someone who has a foot on both sides of the fence.

The idea of Liz as an insider who is cozy with the political and corporate class is uhhh fradulent. Liz has been fighting the political establishment, even within the Democratic party, and the corporate class since she stepped foot in Washington. She knuckled up with Obama and Geithner, fought entrenched political and financial interests to create the CFPB, went after Wall Street execs during hearings, gone after monopolies and big monied interests more than just about anyone else in Congress during her tenure, including Bernie. Wall Street hates her more than they hate Bernie

 

[ROFLOCO]

The idea of Liz as an insider who is cozy with the political and corporate class is uhhh fradulent. Liz has been fighting the political establishment, even within the Democratic party, and the corporate class since she stepped foot in Washington. She knuckled up with Obama and Geithner, fought entrenched political and financial interests to create the CFPB, went after Wall Street execs during hearings, gone after monopolies and big monied interests more than just about anyone else in Congress during her tenure, including Bernie. Wall Street hates her more than they hate Bernie

She's too cozy with the the rest of the democratic party and their corporate donors though. She's already on record stating that she's going to take their money, who do you think she's going to fight for when she's getting hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions from corporate super pacs during her presidential election?

Elizabeth Warren is better than anybody on issues of wall st. corruption/the finance industry, but there's still big pharma and the health insurance industry, and lobbyists, etc. to contend with.

Bernie Sanders takes NO corporate money as a principal. Which is why he has over 1 million volunteers already and is breaking small donor donation records. The entire democratic party hates him because he calls them out on their cozy relationship with corporations and lobbyists. He's funded 100% by small donors and labor unions.

There's a major distinction there.

Just the fact that you had to ask for a source on whether Bernie Sanders is taking corporate money during a potential presidential election tells me everything i need to know about how familiar you are with him and his record and his policy positions.

 

[ROFLOCO]

 

[FAH1223]

 

[King Kreole]

She's too cozy with the the rest of the democratic party and their corporate donors though. She's already on record stating that she's going to take their money, who do you think she's going to fight for when she's getting hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions from corporate super pacs during her presidential election?

If the critique is that she isn’t as widely hated across the Democratic Party than he is, then sure. The Democratic Party establishment is trash, but they vote, and Bernie will have a tougher time uniting the party for a general election because he is the most internally hated candidate (currently running, Biden would probably be just as, if not moreso, hated internally). But the idea that Liz is beloved by the corporate donors is nonsense. Schultz and his ilk are all saying anyone but Bernie or Liz. I don’t see a scenario in which Liz betrays her entire political identity to become a stooge for Wall Street and monied interests once elected.

Elizabeth Warren is better than anybody on issues of wall st. corruption/the finance industry, but there's still big pharma and the health insurance industry, and lobbyists, etc. to contend with.

She’s been tough on all concentrated industry and the power they wield. The biggest impact she’s had, apart from Wall Street, has been the medical devices monopoly in the hearing aids market. Bernie's been great on Big Pharma, but he hasn't really been going after other monopolized industries as hard. Liz has also made political corruption and lobbying a central issue of her campaign, saying it would be at the top of her priority list if elected, once again proving that she knows how Washington actually works and what the real roadblocks to a progressive agenda would be. Bernie speaks a lot about corruption and lobbyists, but yet again, he's scant on implementation and details. Liz proposed the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act, which would ban elected officials from lobbying for life, restrict stock ownership by lawmakers and Cabinet secretaries, and cut down on foreign government and corporate lobbying.

Bernie Sanders takes NO corporate money as a principal. Which is why he has over 1 million volunteers already and is breaking small donor donation records. The entire democratic party hates him because he calls them out on their cozy relationship with corporations and lobbyists. He's funded 100% by small donors and labor unions.

There's a major distinction there.

Just the fact that you had to ask for a source on whether Bernie Sanders is taking corporate money during a potential presidential election tells me everything i need to know about how familiar you are with him and his record and his policy positions.

...ok so you can't link me to Bernie pledging he will not take corporate money during the 2020 presidential campaign? I'm very familiar with his record and policy positions. The reason I ask is that we've been duped by a vaguely progressive campaign that was scant on actual progressive details before. It's not enough to just talk the talk anymore, we need to know how you're going to implement and we need to know details. When pressed on details so far, Bernie has been shaky. When pressed on the filibuster, it turns out he's not even willing to entertain getting rid of it. When pressed on DC/PR statehood, it turns out his plan is to hope Republicans find their moral compass and come around. That's the kind of shyt that makes me look twice at dude. Like '08, it seems like a lot of people are just porting their hopes and beliefs onto the candidate, assuming they're going to be everything they want. Not with that shyt, I want details. I'm not even worried Bernie would be compromised by his campaign taking corporate money during the general, he's pretty incorruptible. I'm just very skeptical about the idea of logistically running a presidential campaign solely on $27 individual donations, which was Liz's point.

 

[King Kreole]

These political mercenary fukks need to be purged.

 

[Jhoon]

These political mercenary fukks need to be purged.

And given an hour on CNN.

 

[FAH1223]

If the critique is that she isn’t as widely hated across the Democratic Party than he is, then sure. The Democratic Party establishment is trash, but they vote, and Bernie will have a tougher time uniting the party for a general election because he is the most internally hated candidate (currently running, Biden would probably be just as, if not moreso, hated internally). But the idea that Liz is beloved by the corporate donors is nonsense. Schultz and his ilk are all saying anyone but Bernie or Liz. I don’t see a scenario in which Liz betrays her entire political identity to become a stooge for Wall Street and monied interests once elected.

She’s been tough on all concentrated industry and the power they wield. The biggest impact she’s had, apart from Wall Street, has been the medical devices monopoly in the hearing aids market. Bernie's been great on Big Pharma, but he hasn't really been going after other monopolized industries as hard. Liz has also made political corruption and lobbying a central issue of her campaign, saying it would be at the top of her priority list if elected, once again proving that she knows how Washington actually works and what the real roadblocks to a progressive agenda would be. Bernie speaks a lot about corruption and lobbyists, but yet again, he's scant on implementation and details. Liz proposed the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act, which would ban elected officials from lobbying for life, restrict stock ownership by lawmakers and Cabinet secretaries, and cut down on foreign government and corporate lobbying.


...ok so you can't link me to Bernie pledging he will not take corporate money during the 2020 presidential campaign? I'm very familiar with his record and policy positions. The reason I ask is that we've been duped by a vaguely progressive campaign that was scant on actual progressive details before. It's not enough to just talk the talk anymore, we need to know how you're going to implement and we need to know details. When pressed on details so far, Bernie has been shaky. When pressed on the filibuster, it turns out he's not even willing to entertain getting rid of it. When pressed on DC/PR statehood, it turns out his plan is to hope Republicans find their moral compass and come around. That's the kind of shyt that makes me look twice at dude. Like '08, it seems like a lot of people are just porting their hopes and beliefs onto the candidate, assuming they're going to be everything they want. Not with that shyt, I want details. I'm not even worried Bernie would be compromised by his campaign taking corporate money during the general, he's pretty incorruptible. I'm just very skeptical about the idea of logistically running a presidential campaign solely on $27 individual donations, which was Liz's point.

Yup, this is my biggest issue with Bernie

Wielding power must be what the Dem President wants to do. GOP wields power all the time. If you had the same appetite from Dems, country would be in a way better space.

But there's an aversion to wielding power. They're scared.

 

[ROFLOCO]

If the critique is that she isn’t as widely hated across the Democratic Party than he is, then sure. The Democratic Party establishment is trash, but they vote, and Bernie will have a tougher time uniting the party for a general election because he is the most internally hated candidate (currently running, Biden would probably be just as, if not moreso, hated internally). But the idea that Liz is beloved by the corporate donors is nonsense. Schultz and his ilk are all saying anyone but Bernie or Liz. I don’t see a scenario in which Liz betrays her entire political identity to become a stooge for Wall Street and monied interests once elected.

She’s been tough on all concentrated industry and the power they wield. The biggest impact she’s had, apart from Wall Street, has been the medical devices monopoly in the hearing aids market. Bernie's been great on Big Pharma, but he hasn't really been going after other monopolized industries as hard. Liz has also made political corruption and lobbying a central issue of her campaign, saying it would be at the top of her priority list if elected, once again proving that she knows how Washington actually works and what the real roadblocks to a progressive agenda would be. Bernie speaks a lot about corruption and lobbyists, but yet again, he's scant on implementation and details. Liz proposed the Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act, which would ban elected officials from lobbying for life, restrict stock ownership by lawmakers and Cabinet secretaries, and cut down on foreign government and corporate lobbying.


...ok so you can't link me to Bernie pledging he will not take corporate money during the 2020 presidential campaign? I'm very familiar with his record and policy positions. The reason I ask is that we've been duped by a vaguely progressive campaign that was scant on actual progressive details before. It's not enough to just talk the talk anymore, we need to know how you're going to implement and we need to know details. When pressed on details so far, Bernie has been shaky. When pressed on the filibuster, it turns out he's not even willing to entertain getting rid of it. When pressed on DC/PR statehood, it turns out his plan is to hope Republicans find their moral compass and come around. That's the kind of shyt that makes me look twice at dude. Like '08, it seems like a lot of people are just porting their hopes and beliefs onto the candidate, assuming they're going to be everything they want. Not with that shyt, I want details. I'm not even worried Bernie would be compromised by his campaign taking corporate money during the general, he's pretty incorruptible. I'm just very skeptical about the idea of logistically running a presidential campaign solely on $27 individual donations, which was Liz's point.

You brought up some interesting points and i agree that Bernie needs to get more specific with his policy plans and im sure he will as we get closer to the election.

Bernie Sanders doesn't take money from corporate donors the same way donald trump doesn't believe in open borders. it isn't even something he has to be on record stating, it's a principal stance and defines his values and ideology.

I understand that Elizabeth Warren has written legislation/proposed a bill to take on corruption and lobby in washington, but when push comes to shove, when her presidential election is funded by wealthy corporations, who do you think is better equipped to actually take on corporate corruption and money in politics ? The person who doesn't take any corrupting dollars or the person who is in the pockets of the very institutions they are supposed to be fighting against?

You refer to progressive rhetoric in 2008 that didn't result in progressive policy (Barack Obama), but the same obstacles that made it difficult for Barack Obama to actually fight for progressive policies is the same challenges Elizabeth Warren will face. Barack Obama took huge sums of money from corporate america during his election cycles. He's naturally beholden to them the same way Elizabeth Warren would be.

Money in politics is a massive issue. It's not Bernie's *only* issue, but it's a big one. You fight on behalf of the people who fund your campaign. This is something that should just be intuitively obvious.

As for Biden being hated by the democratic party he's the very definition of the establishment corporate democrat. He's as much a beloved DNC insider as the Clintons, Pelosis, and Obama's, of the world. He's in direct contrast with someone like Bernie Sanders who was a complete outsider to the rest of the party before they took on his agenda after realizing how popular it was with the american people.

 

[King Kreole]

Yup, this is my biggest issue with Bernie

Wielding power must be what the Dem President wants to do. GOP wields power all the time. If you had the same appetite from Dems, country would be in a way better space.

But there's an aversion to wielding power. They're scared.

Yep. Also, Mayor Pete has been impressing the hell out of me, and I want him as VP on a Liz or Bernie ticket.

 

[King Kreole]

Bernie Sanders doesn't take money from wealthy/corporate donors the same way donald trump doesn't believe in open borders. it isn't even something he has to be on record stating, it's a principal stance and defines his values and ideology.

I understand that Elizabeth Warren has written legislation/proposed a bill to take on corruption and lobby in washington, but when push comes to shove, when her presidential election is funded by wealthy corporations, who do you think is better equipped to actually take on corporate corruption and money in politics ? The person who doesn't take any corrupting dollars or the person who is in the pockets of the very institutions they are supposed to be fighting against?

Bernie Sanders has also never run a General Election Presidential campaign before. The unprecedented success of his grassroots fundraising has been amazing and inspiring, but the General Election is a different beast than a Primary, and I'm just not sure how only taking small donations would work. I sincerely hope it would and will cheer him on if he comes out and pledges to only take small donations, but the fact that he hasn't done that yet indicates to me he might be considering it. Which makes sense. Presidential elections are absurdly, corruptingly expensive! Liz's point is that there needs to be bilateral, equally applied reform, not Democrats turning the other cheek and unilaterally disarming, giving Republicans even more unfair massive electoral advantages.

You refer to progressive rhetoric in 2008 that didn't result in progressive policy (Barack Obama), but the same obstacles that made it difficult for Barack Obama to actually fight for progressive policies is the same challenges Elizabeth Warren will have.

The challenges I'm assuming you're alluding to are going to be there for Bernie as well as Liz as well as any other Democrat who wins in 2020. The question is how are they going to respond to those challenges. My belief is that Liz will do so in much more effective ways than Bernie due to their respective approaches to power and governing.

Only one candidate between Liz and Bernie has seemingly learned from the mistakes of the Obama years, and it isn't Bernie. I trust Liz way more than Bernie to effectively learn from, and counteract the obstacles that led to the Obama administration falling short of their ostensible progressive goals. She was right in the thick of it and saw how the sausage was made up close. She's been more outspoken than he has about the Obama administration's failures. She knows the nuances, limitations and powers of the executive branch. She knows where the traps are. I have seen no reason to believe Bernie does. In fact, if we're talking about comparisons to Obama, just like Obama, Bernie doesn't seem to be a great steward of his grassroots progressive organization.

As for Biden being hated by the democratic party ? he's the very definition of the political establishment corporate democrat. He's as much an insider as the Clintons or Bush's.

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant that Biden is the consummate democratic establishment figure in a cycle where the left is resurgent and pulling the party in that direction. Biden is an incredibly divisive figure when looking at the entire potential Democratic voting base, including the left.

The rest of your post brings up some interesting points and i can't say i disagree to much with.

Thanks, so do your posts. It may seem like I'm ripping on Bernie, but I'm really a massive fan of his and will forever be grateful for what he did in 2016. Dude is an absolute legend. Just not sure if he's the right horse for the 2020 Democratic Primary.

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

Warren would lose to Trump. For stupid and terrible reasons, but she would lose.

 

[ROFLOCO]

You seem to think that working within the current system is an actual option in getting these policies enacted, and this is where i disagree.
I don't think you'll get any of this agenda enacted without a political revolution: e.g. ordinary folks running for office, holding their local political leaders accountable, marching in protest, getting arrested, striking, volunteering, going door to door, etc.

Elizabeth Warren would be better if you want someone to take office come to some bipartisan compromise to make some incremental change that moves the policy in america a little more left as a result (similar to Obama).

If you want an FDR like revolution that massively impacts society it's going to take a near overthrow of government where hundreds of millions of working class individuals get involved politically and take a stance against the political establishment. This sounds crazy on its surface but america has a history of fighting for social and economic justice. And it's going to take that kind of fight to move forward on Bernie Sander's agenda. And i believe we are already starting to see it with the massive crowds, the hundreds of thousands of small dollar donations, the million who've pledged to volunteer for his campaign, etc. etc.

Elizabeth Warren would be better in terms of working within the current political system to find some common ground and implement some change. Bernie Sanders doesn't believe the current system is workable. He is fighting for a complete political revolution that drastically changes the policy and laws in the country and that is going to be an epic war/fight against the current wealth and power that has ran washington since the 1980s.

 

[afterlife2009]

@FAH1223

Look at the goal posts being moved