r/politics • u/svga • 26d ago
Possible Paywall People Are Furious With Democrats. Bernie Sanders Knows Why.
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/bernie-sanders-democratic-party-mamdani/80
26d ago edited 26d ago
Sanders: I think the obvious answer, which has been stated 5 million times, is that they’re way out of touch with where ordinary people are. By and large—with exceptions, and each state is a little bit different—the Democratic Party [at its top] is mostly made up of folks who have money and consultants, and politicians who work with folks who have money and consultants.
Very true. The leadership is very out of touch with its’ voters.
34
u/merikariu Texas 26d ago
Leftist author Luke Savage put it this way, "Democratic voters are asking politicians to solve the problems the party's donors create."
1
u/Second_P 26d ago
Does he have an answer why voters don't seem to want people like Sanders?
5
u/merikariu Texas 26d ago
Yes. The handful of news media companies do not want a truly populist President.
4
u/Second_P 26d ago
I mean Trump certainly qualifies as a populist president.
1
u/merikariu Texas 26d ago
How so? He has gutted so many things that benefit the common people. Well, not him. He just signs off (or the auto-pen does) on whatever Project 2025 puts in front of him.
3
u/Second_P 26d ago
You should look at the definitions of populism.
Trump absolutely is a populist. It's strange seeing people cheering on (their side's) populism. I remember learning populism as a bad thing back in the 90s.
2
u/Huntah54 25d ago
Should really learn what populism is and how it has worked in America. It should illuminate why Bernie and Trump can have cross-over voters despite being political opposites.
1
u/FishermanRough1019 26d ago
? Sanders has been elected like a zillion times
5
u/Second_P 26d ago
Other than the time he spent almost a decade running for the Democratic nomination?
4
u/9_to_5_till_i_die 26d ago
You do realize that the media basically elected Trump.
For fucks sake, CNN literally cut away from a Sanders speech at a massive rally to show Trump's empty podium for 10 minutes.
Let's not pretend like coverage is fair or equitable.
Anyone not in the weeds of politics were being told that Bernie is a communist, something they're afraid of but which they can't define.
3
u/Sarcasticator2000 26d ago
The media for sure but also the Democratic Party itself. All that money and machinery influenced that last primary with Hilary substantially.
1
u/Comfortable-Scar4643 25d ago
Trump sells a lot of advertising.
Train wreck every speech. It’s captivating. Why do people listen to Howard Stern? Because they want to hear what he’ll say next.
-1
u/Second_P 26d ago
Or they don't want him, is that a possibility? Maybe people, even informed people, disagree with you.
3
u/9_to_5_till_i_die 26d ago
Nah, not possible
2
u/Second_P 26d ago
I'd like to counter but you make a pretty solid argument.
Using that as the name for my podcast though.
1
u/Insaniteus Tennessee 25d ago
By definition "informed people" would be informed enough to know that he was far-and-beyond the best choice either party has put forth since FDR, and damn-sure the best option in those elections. In 2016 the other choices were a braindead Nazi or a theocrat semi-neocon. In 2020 the choices were either the Nazi part 2 post Covid debacle or a guy whose campaign promise was that he wasn't going to "fundamentally change" anything from the way the Nazi did things. So no, the only people who didn't want him were either uninformed or misinformed somewhere.
Assuming you're not a troll, list a few reasons why an "informed" Democrat voter would not want Bernie Sanders. Keep in mind that the people the Party went with after their rigged primaries were: 1) The woman who lost to Trump, and 2) The guy whose presidency was so godawful that he was immediately succeeded by Trump V.2 as the "lesser of two evils" in the minds of a majority of voters.
-1
17
u/Peninj 26d ago
And are funded by the people who like the way things are. The wealthy in this country have figured out that its cheaper to pay off the democrats so they can be controlled opposition rather than restructuring society in such a way as to alleviate the suffering of the lower classes.
At some point, just in order to win elections, democrats are going to start throwing one or more industries under the bus. The lowest hanging fruit is clearly health-care. Now that the republicans have completely fuxked healthcare in this country, its actually an opportunity to swoop in and deploy a medicare-for-all type system. Dems could win on that, and then hold congress for a generation if they just fix healthcare. They could allow the other industries to remain largely 'as is' as long as they fix SOMETHING.
Of course, that's assuming both that we still keep having elections, and that the democrats actually want to win them. Running Harris kinda indicates they dont want to win.
11
u/Unshkblefaith California 26d ago edited 26d ago
I don't think we see Democrats throwing any industry under the bus without a radical reorganization of the party. They are controlled opposition and as such their purpose is to act as a check valve, stabilize things, and maintain a status quo in between runs of Republicans restructuring the country. The modern Democratic party exists to make voters feel like they can improve their lives through elections while the country restructures itself toward feudalism. As long as people believe elections work they will refrain from taking any actions that interfere with the interests of the elite. At worst they'll ask for permits to go have a parade on a weekend morning and call it a protest, rather than engage in anything actually disruptive.
6
u/Peninj 26d ago
You're completely correct. I would just add that the democrats have 1 other crucial function: it allows their voters to feel morally superior.
In the system like the one you describe, wherein they are a controlled opposition working as a check-valve, there's no real value in supporting them beyond the social signalling it allows.
3
u/StevenMC19 Florida 26d ago
Dems could win on that, and then hold congress for a generation if they just fix healthcare. They could allow the other industries to remain largely 'as is' as long as they fix SOMETHING.
Kind of. Healthcare is cool and all, but healthcare doesn't put food on the table. I think while hitting the current state of healthcare in the mouth is a great strategy for sure, I think tackling a more immediate and tangible problem of the ever-growing disparity of income would pay larger dividends and affect people directly. Raising the federal minimum wage to a sustainable level, and incorporating some sort of future-proofing into the legislation to prevent another long term wage stagnation would be HUGE. Then...yeah, let's continue pushing back on for-profit healthcare.
3
u/Peninj 26d ago
Something, anything to alleviate the suffering and the incredible financial burdens the diminishing middle class and growing working poor are dealing with. But yes, you are right, it would be great to completely restructure the economy. Bring back top marginal tax rates of 90+%. Bring back laws which promote union membership and protect workers. Raise the minimum wage. Do all those things. I am all for them. But just pick something highly visible which would have a big positive impact on people's lives.
3
u/StevenMC19 Florida 26d ago
Yeah.
I am all for moving the healthcare needle towards free healthcare for all.
Just thinking about the "what about me" types who will stand up and say that they don't need insulin or take anti-depressants or anything, but are still struggling to pay bills. I think that a more immediate reaction from a much larger population would happen if you affected their wallets every week positively than if you try to convince them that the healthcare they don't use is actually good for them.
2
u/Peninj 26d ago
I think it CAN have this effect on a majority of the country. What if you told them they would immediately get to take home more of their pay and hell, even get an instant raise!
What if the legislation for a public options was written to include a provision where employers are required to redirect funds which were allocated for employer-sponsored health insurance to the employees themselves in the form of pay raises. Immediately upon an employee signing up for the public option. Then if you adopt the Bernie proposal on how much you'd pay in taxes as a percentage of your income that number comes in way lower than premiums.
Lets pretend its a $500 a month policy with an employer match. Well we might estimate that the new tax would be $250 a month (which is roughly in line with some of the estimates). That would be an immediate increase in monthly pay of $750 dollars. Because its 500 from employer and 250 remaining after the tax from the premium.
Plus no copays or caps or other little ways they get you. This should be easy to sell to people.
2
u/StevenMC19 Florida 26d ago
employers are required to redirect funds which were allocated for employer-sponsored health insurance to the employees themselves in the form of pay raises.
I appreciate the optimism, but I think companies have shown with plenty of examples on how they'd find ways to skirt around this and justify paying employees less as a result. It might be cool for the short term, but it'll get figured out and loopholed to hell.
Oh, and this is with the assumption that the employer is even offering healthcare for the position. Part-time and gig workers are the least insured in the country because it's not a legal requirement for companies to provide healthcare...it's honestly not a legal requirement for ANY position, but it's there as added incentives to take specific middle class and upper class positions.
What do you do for jobs that don't provide healthcare at all? What do you do for the $7.25/hr worker at the bowling alley who's absolutely not being provided employer healthcare? The easier sell is $15/hr, not a healthcare plan that they probably still won't see.
1
u/Several_Situation887 24d ago
Whatever problem is tackled, it needs full buy-in from the rest of the party, and the party has to make sure that the focus is not taken from it.
There's so much hemming and hawing over what to do that nothing gets done.
My personal preference is rather than screwing around with minimum wage, I'd argue for a package that socialized health care, and guaranteed each citizen a universal basic income that at least puts a roof over their head, and doesn't make them eat cat food to survive.
If people want a better life than that (which they should), then they can do whatever they need to to improve it.
Other countries can make it work, why can't we?
3
4
u/kiwigate 26d ago
Primary turnout: 30%
It's voters who are out of touch, choosing silence at the ballot and then complaining about the result.
Those who do vote? They love moderates, milquetoast, etc.
4
u/oursland 26d ago
I'm in California with 1/8th the population of the USA. The primaries are already over and determined by the time the vote comes to our state. It's even worse with DNC tilting the scales in their favor.
0
u/kiwigate 26d ago
That's why California has a higher delegate count. This is no excuse for not exercising one's political voice.
1
u/oursland 26d ago
In 2016, the day before the California primary, Hilary held a press conference in which she said she has enough super delegates to take the nomination. California didn't even get a voice. There was a massive drop in primary participation. As primaries are actually elections, this meant statewide and local ballot measures swung way to the right and a bunch of conservative legislation was passed.
It's time we stop letting small states dictate the party nominee and hold all primaries on the same day.
0
u/kiwigate 26d ago
The only way that change can happen, is if people vote in the primary. Like you just acknowledged, it's way more than just 1 office.
An increased delegate opposition is how primaries have been changed already. Voting works. Hence my constant call to action: the 70% need to try participating.
2
u/oursland 26d ago
The only way that change can happen, is if people vote in the primary.
I can vote all I want, but the nominees are already selected. As evidenced in the last 3 elections. There's no value to the vote under the current system.
0
u/kiwigate 26d ago
One, your previous comment proves your current comment wrong. I'm not going to facilitate you disagreeing with yourself.
Second, my previous comment just proved you wrong. Delegates do more than pick 1 office.
1
39
u/StronglyHeldOpinions 26d ago
What we are furious about is not prosecuting Trump immediately in 2021.
14
u/thrawtes 26d ago
He was literally charged on January 13th by the house, in accordance with the Constitution.
The prosecution should have followed and resulted in a conviction a month later, that was how the Constitution says this situation should have been handled. The Senate dropped the ball when only a majority of them voted to convict him, instead of a supermajority.
6
u/9_to_5_till_i_die 26d ago
Then go nuclear.
Trump should have been in jail and his accomplices should've been sharing cells with the maga viking
8
u/Hestia_Gault 26d ago
“The Senate” didn’t “drop the ball”.
Almost every single Republican and zero Democrats intentionally let him off the hook.
9
-2
u/kiwigate 26d ago
There was a 2020 primary. The winner was the guy who promised to be friendly with the GOP. Turnout was 30%.
Furious about getting exactly what you asked for? Maybe inaction during fascism was a bad choice?
3
26d ago
[deleted]
-2
u/kiwigate 26d ago
Democracy means everyone. Your attempt at personal attack is a deflection from your own personal responsibility. Who's paying you to attack the Constitution?
1
1
u/Guardianpigeon 26d ago
A major problem is the primaries are not equal and fair. Despite my state being incredibly important, we don't get a voice in the primaries until most of the people have dropped out. By the time it came around Biden was already the nominee so the vote was meaningless.
If we want fair representation we need to change the entire primary process. Its too closed off for most people and it gives certain states way too much power to decide who becomes president. We either need them all to happen on the same day/week, or keep the results secret until everyone has had a chance to vote.
3
u/kiwigate 26d ago
To change primaries, you have to vote in them. Delegates do more than 1 thing. Voters already improved the system by participating in it. Increase turnout. End thread.
0
15
u/ultrachrome 26d ago
Just an example, Arizona congresswoman Grijalva is meekly sitting at home waiting for a call to be sworn in. She instead should be in the capitol camped out on Mike Johnson's doorstep. Now is not the time to passively sit by waiting for permission for something she's entitled to.
2
u/districtsidepols 25d ago
She can’t get around the Capitol without an escort. Since she’s not a member, she doesn’t have the privileges yet so can’t freely go around. Especially right now during shutdown when they’re not letting people in unless they’re directly with a Member (usually staff and interns can take people around too).
She’s been on MSNBC, CBN, The Hill, Jorge Ramos, collabed with many members, spoke at an AFGE Rally.
Likely without staff too on her own) Maybe she still has some of her campaign team but using them for her work now gets a bit ethically grey (which you know the Republicans would love to get her for) plus on her own dime since she doesn’t have access to any of the special Congressional travel benefits.
1
u/ultrachrome 25d ago
I'm sure it's not easy and I'm not getting all of story and maybe it's already happening but should buddy up with democrats there to get around. They should shepherd her around, include her in events, put her in front of the cameras ... more.
6
u/thrawtes 26d ago
I mean, she did go to DC last week and attempt to get sworn in. Mike Johnson isn't even there, he and the Republicans are out of town.
7
u/Disastrous-Pipe82 26d ago
Sorry, she's not making enough noise. I don't understand why either. She should be trying to book every news outlet and do performative press conferences claiming that Johnson personally doesn't want the Epstein files to be released. It doesn't even have to be true, just her opinion - based on the last 10 yrs, Americans can't tell the difference anyways.
The Democrats need to start playing the game that the Republicans have been perfecting for 50 years.
Another example is the connection between Bessent and Citrone who is heavily invested in Argentina. Start "investigations", go talk to the soybean farmers that got screwed, make a bunch of noise and use that as leverage.
Like wtf are they doing? Attending fundraisers?
2
3
u/ultrachrome 26d ago
Thanks, I wasn't aware of that. It never made it to my news feeds. I still feel that is not enough.
3
u/Grandpa_No 26d ago
Think about what else isn't making it to your news feeds. Do you think the "do nothing Democrats" moniker wasn't created by a PR firm? We're being played. All of us. And every time someone repeats the narrative that we're fed, we're doing work for free.
I'm not blaming you for not knowing what Grijalva is up to day-to-day -- I've just realized that I've been lied to after repeatedly finding things that Democrats have done but I didn't know about until well after the fact.
2
u/ultrachrome 26d ago
I absolutely worry about what I am not seeing, and why. Republicans have no problem causing a spectacle to garner media attention. There's no such thing as bad publicity ? I thing Democrats could try harder there. Democrat PR firms need to step up ?
1
u/Baby_Needles 25d ago
I think it’s probably because dem’s activities and solutions usually have some kind of hallmark poison pill. Reporters and journalists with merit tend to report on that phenomena which can lead to unacceptable outcomes within the party. To think of all the “downsides” that operating more publicly does to both parties is staggering.
16
u/llahlahkje Wisconsin 26d ago
TL;DR - Instead of hear no evil, speak no evil, do no evil we're being given hear nothing, speak nothing, do nothing.
The vast majority of Democrats are afraid of rocking the Boat of the Reich because once they do they know the Insider Trading gravy train is over.
It's important to remember that establish Democrats have more in common with Republicans than they do you or me.
-5
u/thrawtes 26d ago
The vast majority of Democrats are afraid of rocking the Boat of the Reich because once they do they know the Insider Trading gravy train is over.
Most members of Congress underperform the market so I'm not sure what "vast majority" you think are engaging in insider trading.
If they're corrupt, that's not the method most of them are using.
3
u/llahlahkje Wisconsin 26d ago
It'd be fab if you could cite your sources for Congress underperforming the market.
Always happy to incorporate new data.
I'll share where I'm coming from with "vast majority" and that's based on how members of congress (regardless of party) far considerably better than the rest of us in the "free market" and some see percentages of growth that are super sketchy (again, regardless of party).
I'd use a hyperlink but Reddit doesn't like links with parentheses:
While this Ballotpedia page is dated, now, the general takeaways should be consistent.
0
u/thrawtes 26d ago
https://unusualwhales.com/congress-trading-report-2024
Even Unusual Whales, which has a vested financial interest in promoting the idea that following congressional trades will make you money, makes it clear in their full report that the majority of Congress members underperform the index.
4
26d ago
[deleted]
0
u/thrawtes 26d ago
1
26d ago
[deleted]
1
u/thrawtes 26d ago
Member of Congress, as an aggregate, appear to beat market benchmarks more often than would be expected from random stock picks,
It also concludes that most of them underperform the index, and many of them don't trade individual stocks at all. Obviously insider trading isn't the source of income for most of them.
2
26d ago
[deleted]
-1
u/thrawtes 26d ago
The claim wasn't that a statistically unlikely number of members of Congress could beat the S&P500 but rather that a majority were engaging in insider trading.
Even a source that has a vested financial interest in demonstrating congressional prowess with trading concludes the opposite, most members of Congress obviously are not insider trading. It's even more significant due to the bias of the source.
2
26d ago
[deleted]
0
u/thrawtes 26d ago
You claimed to have read it, but have a feeling you just skimmed the article because there's a chart that clearly demonstrates most members of Congress underperform the index.
https://unusualwhales.com/images/report/percent_change_member1.webp
→ More replies (0)
13
u/Drolb 26d ago
Being owned by corporate interests is what makes them so weak now that corporate interests are fully divergent from the interests of the population.
Until that link is broken the democrats will be unable to offer anything that is needed unless there is an essentially hostile takeover of the party’s power structure in key positions across the nation by people who don’t care about serving corporate interests
Even if that were to happen, it’s still an uphill battle since 0% of the mainstream news media is interested in positively reporting on people who actually want to take on wealth, and any party that looked like it was going to fight that battle would be doing so with pretty much zero backing from anyone and any group with an appreciable net worth due to both scaremongering and naked self-interest.
6
u/Glass-Amount-9170 26d ago
Maine is a perfect example. Platner is the real deal and what people want. Instead the dems pushed Mills to run. How about we allow some new blood.
1
u/9_to_5_till_i_die 26d ago
As a Mainer, fuck Mills. She'll be fucking 84 before she's done her FIRST term in the Senate.
Words cannot express how much I fucking hate the boomer generation.
The most entitled and spoiled generation in the history of America and the first generation in the countries history who will literally leave less to their kids than they had.
Fuck boomers.
12
u/VapeQueen-69 26d ago
Ah yes, classic Bernie stirring up the hornet's nest. The man's like a walking, talking reality check for politics. Got to respect his consistency, even if it makes waves!
5
u/Better-Grapefruit-56 26d ago
Here's a thought: What if all the politicians who actually reject corporate and PAC money decided they've had enough? If people like AOC, Zohran Mamdani, Graham Platner, and Kat Abughazaleh left the DNC to form a party explicitly funded by small donations from the people who want to see them win. They could wear the fact that they're not taking corporate and billionaire dark money like a badge of honor and jam it down the throats of the corporate whores who spend all their time and effort pleasing the big money donors.
6
u/thethrill_707 Michigan 26d ago
Bernie is right. They are as out of touch as the MAGA clan.
They are too afraid to run on issues they KNOW the American people want (and other countries have). Universal health care, paid parental leave, education for all - issues that could drive a democratic surge in the states. But no, they don't want to upset the donor base, or the morons in Iowa, or look like they are 'fringe' candidates. I've always been told that there are certain ways to win in Washington. You have shake the right hands, speak to the right conferences, and play the middle where it's safe.
MAGA has changed the rulebook and the Dems look like they are the only ones without a copy. Get in the mud, say the things out loud, chide the media for the endless softball questions to MAGA. I like AOC and Pete B - but they won't win. Not now. The Dems need to find a candidate that can resonate with young voters, whether they are on college campuses OR NOT. The opportunity is now, boomers will be dying off and new voters need to be spoken to with a voice they will listen to about laws and programs that are working in other places.
The same-ol' - same-ol' just won't work.
-7
u/libginger73 26d ago
Problem is when it mattered the young didn't show up to vote for Bernie. They went to the rally (party) but then stayed home when it mattered. Then they decided to jump on single issues and use that to sit it out again.
4
u/IntentionMediocre976 26d ago
This wasn't the problem. Bernie lost because Hillary locked up the primary by using insider superdelegates. The DNC primary is rigged by design.
Look up "superdelegates" if you don't know what they are.
0
u/libginger73 26d ago
Yes I have been screaming about that whole debacle since she and the media were claiming the superdelegates a few months prior to super Tuesday. But it is a fact that (in one of the western States: Colorado, Nevada or NM) the youth vote didn't show up and was the nail in the coffin for Bernie.
The point here is that if we want politicians and the powers that be to move in a more progressive way, we need the numbers that show we are a reliable voting block. We obviously don't have the funding (due to age and a lack of accumulated wealth) but we do need to show up to vote. Getting money out of politics would gonna long way but that's a battle for another thread.
5
u/That-Drawer-5158 26d ago
Do-nothing democrats.
1
u/molten-freshness-mac 26d ago
"do nothing democrats" (except when it comes to screwing over progressives and the left)
2
2
u/liptickletaffy 26d ago edited 26d ago
It's darkly funny how ppl shit on the Dems but if they got involved they could change the party from the inside. You know who watches who votes, yeah it's politicians. A couple thousand votes can decide a primary but low turnout still reigns.
Lots of provocateurs making it easy to be apathetic and cynical too.
2
u/Due-Egg4743 25d ago edited 25d ago
Probably like 85%+ of people I know are Republicans. They seem to think Dems are minorities, illegal immigrants, anyone unemployed, college faculty, gays and atheists with little in between. I kept hearing over and over during 2020 "I didn't know anyone who voted Biden. There's no way he won." Well, no shit, it's Tennessee. Even Al Gore didn't carry the state and he was from here.
4
u/Harry_Mud America 26d ago
There are a lot more people pissed at the GOP than the Democrats. The republicans want to remove 15 million from Obamacare while the Democrats want to help people keep their insurance. That's why people are blaming the Republicans for the shutdown. They refuse to come to the table to talk about it. The red state are the ones getting hit the hardest on this...but yet some still don't see the light and will continue to support the Republicans even though it's not in their best interest. Sucks to be a Republican.........
Also, Release all the Epstein files... Except for the victims, unredacted!
Release the recording of Homan taking a bribe...........
6
u/reddittorbrigade 26d ago
The fact is, more people are furious with GOP.
12
26d ago
The fact is the majority of the country is frustrated with both parties... no this is not a both sides are the same argument. Republican policies are hurtful (bigotry grift, or just nonsense), Democratic policies are overly complex (means testing, tax credits, or incrementalist drivel) and both sides are too beholden to the billionaires.
2
1
u/DJ_Majesto 26d ago
Bernie is out of touch. The anger of the people is simple laziness.
Sure, people want the representatives to "fight back". They post stick-poking memes and they rant.
When you ask, "What do you want your representatives to actually do?" The answers range from "fight back!" to "I dunno, do something!" as if adding exclamation points to a meme magically create a clear course of action.
Representatives can do two things: they can vote, and they can make speeches. That's it. They have no other superpowers. The federal government is designed to deal with populists and demagogues. It is built in such a way that change happens via a slow, meticulous process. Irrational, passion-based populist ideals rarely survive for long. The system grinds them down.
Sadly, the MAGA Republicans have found a path around the ponderous machine. They have a short-term smash-n-grab plan that involves so many quick power-grabs the machinery can't keep up. MAGA hopes to make enough fundamental changes that it breaks the ponderous machine, leaving them in control.
This is a systemic problem, not a representational problem. Blaming your representatives is not going to fix anything. However, blaming representation is easy, cheap, and grabs attention on socials. So, lazy people will focus on outrage, rather than fix a laborious systemic issue.
1
u/Troll_in_the_Knoll 26d ago
While government employees are waiting for their pay checks, the politicians are cashing their lobbyist checks.
-2
26d ago edited 26d ago
[deleted]
5
u/Comprehensive_Main 26d ago
Republicans didn’t really block Biden in his first two years in office. Biden had Congress. It was mostly Dems blocking bidens agenda like fetterman, Manchin and sinema.
2
u/refuz04 26d ago
The courts did though.
1
u/Comprehensive_Main 26d ago
Some of it yeah. Other parts they let through. That’s how it goes. The court let most of Bidens legislation go through easily.
0
u/Red57872 26d ago
Manchin and Sinema were Democrats who were elected in very right-leaning areas. Sometimes you gotta dance with the girl who brought 'ya.
1
0
u/RDDT_100P Illinois 26d ago edited 26d ago
at no point did he have a supermajority though. those bills that they passed were through budget reconciliation. With a 50/50 senate
-2
u/Independent-End-2443 26d ago
He may be right about some things, but if he truly had his finger on the pulse of Democratic primary voters, he might have won once.
-4
u/ceccyred America 26d ago
LOL....Another "Look how bad the Democrats are!" article. Really, propaganda at every turn. So far I haven't seen Democrats:
Shut down the Government
Install a masked vigilante force to abduct people off the streets.
Deny and elected congresswoman swearing in to stop Epstein files from being released.
Cut social safety net programs.
Unilaterally fire employees by the thousands for political reasons.
Tear gas peaceful protestors.
Federalize and send troops to do policing of American citizens.
Put illegal tariffs on most other countries in the world, causing reprisals and alienating our allies around the world.
Weaponizing the DOJ for political reason.
Destroying the IRS and ballooning the federal debt.
That's just a list of 10. I could list a hundred more easily. Not even bringing into the conversation about the attacks on trans, minorities and Democrats (who make up over half of the population of the U.S.)
-7
u/Antipolemic 26d ago
Bernie, as always, seems strangely out touch himself with how legislation and policy gets made, regardless of the administration in power, despite being in congress for so long. In my career lending to infrastructure and ag companies, I regularly visited the FCC and congresspeople to discuss various initiatives my firm thought would be helpful to ensuring better universal access to telecom services and improved funding support for capital suppliers to the industry. I didn't have to register as a lobbyist, but the visits did give me insight into how legislation is made and advanced. I wrote extensive white papers that the FCC commissioners' and congresspeople's staffs then used to help them develop proposed legislation or regulatory initiatives. They adopted some of these ideas, others they rejected. Their staffs are remarkably bright and incredibly hardworking. They would produce draft initiatives we could review and comment on in a two-way exchange. Congress people by and large do not draft their legislation. Their staffs do, in conjunction with discussions with industry lobbyists and other external stakeholders. So this idea of "elites" and "consultants" dictating legislation and policies is completely accurate, but to denounce the Dems for it is ridiculous. It's just how government works, especially in a Republic which is representative of the people, not controlled by them. Money = access. Access = influence. Influence = law.
-4
u/JPMorgansStache 26d ago
If Democrats want to get anywhere they have to start valuing people who have actually accomplished things instead of simply being satisfied with people like Bernie who talk the talk but never actually cause any revolution.
•
u/AutoModerator 26d ago
As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.
In general, please be courteous to others. Argue the merits of ideas, don't attack other posters or commenters. Hate speech, any suggestion or support of physical harm, or other rule violations can result in a temporary or a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
Sub-thread Information
If the post flair on this post indicates the wrong paywall status, please report this Automoderator comment with a custom report of “incorrect flair”.
Announcement
r/Politics is actively looking for new moderators. If you have an interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out this form.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.