Some campaign aides urging Bernie to quit after Tuesday

[RaphaelDLG]

I'll definitely lose a great deal of respect for Sanders if he seriously intends on going through to the convention. However, I highly doubt he'll stay in much longer. He'll probably drop out some time between the 8th and the 14th. If he does, and gives a passionate endorsement of Clinton, urging his supporters to back her, will his haters admit they were at least partially wrong about him?

I'll admit that I was wrong about him being a bitter, stubborn, graceless asshole.  I'll also be confused since to do so would go against character and everything we know about him based on his actions thus far in the primary.

My guess is that he waits a week or two to try to blackmail the Democrats into kissing his ass, and then gives a begrudging semi-endorsement where he mostly talks about himself and how great his campaign was.  Something like the Ryan endorsement, except less motivated by integrity and more by selfishness.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[RaphaelDLG]

For me, it would take a lot more than a mere enthusiastic endorsement to undo the last year, and particularly the last six weeks, of obscene behavior.  Bernie has intentionally systematically poisoned the attitudes of an entire generation of young people who are just getting involved in politics towards the Democratic party and made a strong effort to convince them that the party is riddled with corruption, the election is rigged against their interests, most of its politicians are lying, bought-and-paid-for establishment shills, and its nominee is... well, too many things to list really.  I want to see him make a sincere and enthusiastic effort to undo the toxic, negative effect he has had on the party and on our democratic system in general in the minds of all these impressionable kids.  You can't just burn down my house, shoot my dog, and then leave a 20 dollar bill on what's left of my porch and expect me to call it even.

Just being honest here, but I don't think Bernie did much poisoning, I think the young people already feel that the "system" is corrupt, Bernie just gave them a voice and a platform from which to vent their anger and their desire for change.

I'm hearing the same thing coming from them that I used to say when I was their age: "anti-establishment" this and "corrupt" that, it's the generational thing. Young people don't want to do it the way their parents did it, whatever "it" is.

And as for your statement: "I want to see him make a sincere and enthusiastic effort to undo the toxic, negative effect he has had on the party and on our democratic system in general in the minds of all these impressionable kids", I wouldn't hold my breath. Bernie has repeatedly said that it's not his job to tell people how to vote. That if Hillary wants their vote she will have to do the work of getting it.

I think that's a cop out, but it's what he continues to say.

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9836.html


But according to you, the Democratic party are all good guys, the Republicans are all bad guys, this system isn't corrupt, and Millennials are just acting like rebellious children.  I won't say anything mean, as you seem like a good-hearted person, but your extremely patronizing and naively tribalistic perspective is part of the problem.

[RaphaelDLG]

For me, it would take a lot more than a mere enthusiastic endorsement to undo the last year, and particularly the last six weeks, of obscene behavior.  Bernie has intentionally systematically poisoned the attitudes of an entire generation of young people who are just getting involved in politics towards the Democratic party and made a strong effort to convince them that the party is riddled with corruption, the election is rigged against their interests, most of its politicians are lying, bought-and-paid-for establishment shills, and its nominee is... well, too many things to list really.  I want to see him make a sincere and enthusiastic effort to undo the toxic, negative effect he has had on the party and on our democratic system in general in the minds of all these impressionable kids.  You can't just burn down my house, shoot my dog, and then leave a 20 dollar bill on what's left of my porch and expect me to call it even.

Just being honest here, but I don't think Bernie did much poisoning, I think the young people already feel that the "system" is corrupt, Bernie just gave them a voice and a platform from which to vent their anger and their desire for change.

I'm hearing the same thing coming from them that I used to say when I was their age: "anti-establishment" this and "corrupt" that, it's the generational thing. Young people don't want to do it the way their parents did it, whatever "it" is.

And as for your statement: "I want to see him make a sincere and enthusiastic effort to undo the toxic, negative effect he has had on the party and on our democratic system in general in the minds of all these impressionable kids", I wouldn't hold my breath. Bernie has repeatedly said that it's not his job to tell people how to vote. That if Hillary wants their vote she will have to do the work of getting it.

I think that's a cop out, but it's what he continues to say.

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9836.html


But according to you, the Democratic party are all good guys, the Republicans are all bad guys, this system isn't corrupt, and Millennials are just acting like rebellious children.  I won't say anything mean, as you seem like a good-hearted person, but your extremely patronizing and naively tribalistic perspective is part of the problem.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

That was a very thoughtful, considered, informed, evidence-based rebuttal.

[RaphaelDLG]

Here's an easier-to-read version for everyone else:

http://www.vox.com/2014/4/18/5624310/martin-gilens-testing-theories-of-american-politics-explained

Lawrence Lessig and Zephyr Teachout also gave great books on the subject, though there are many, many others.

[RaphaelDLG]

Ya know, a lot of us younguns disliked the Democratic party as it is to begin with.  

Or at least had limited illusions.

And frankly? It deserves what it gets.

Can the pretenses be dropped, then? We all know Sanders only ever ran as a Democrat to game the system and take advantage of the infrastructure already in place.

The way you put it, it almost sounds as if to support Sanders wasn't done in an attempt to change the party, but an attempt to destroy it from within. Or, at least, to make it over in an outsider's image. The Democratic Paty is far from perfect, but if one truly dislikes it so much, do something else. Because the fact of the matter is that millions of people do like where the party is. The disparity in primary votes proves that.

You can only choose between two parties in the US because of electoral law.  The Democratic Party is obviously the more savable one than the Republican Party.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law

[RaphaelDLG]

Ya know, a lot of us younguns disliked the Democratic party as it is to begin with.  

Or at least had limited illusions.

And frankly? It deserves what it gets.

Can the pretenses be dropped, then? We all know Sanders only ever ran as a Democrat to game the system and take advantage of the infrastructure already in place.

The way you put it, it almost sounds as if to support Sanders wasn't done in an attempt to change the party, but an attempt to destroy it from within. Or, at least, to make it over in an outsider's image. The Democratic Paty is far from perfect, but if one truly dislikes it so much, do something else. Because the fact of the matter is that millions of people do like where the party is. The disparity in primary votes proves that.

You can only choose between two parties in the US because of electoral law.  The Democratic Party is obviously the more savable one than the Republican Party.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law

Someone forgot to tell these people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_presidential_election,_2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_election,_2006
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010

I'm unfamiliar with the phillippines and only vaguely familiar with Canada, but Duverger's law still holds in the UK in that, within boroughs (districts), there are still only two competitive parties. 

The Presidential election is of course one gigantic borough (America).  You could have Libertarian or Green representation in Congress theoretically in some district that was so far right or left that Democrats or Republicans were a totally non-competitive party, respectively, allowing Libertarians or Greens to emerge as the second party.  But not at the Presidential level.

[RaphaelDLG]

Ya know, a lot of us younguns disliked the Democratic party as it is to begin with.  

Or at least had limited illusions.

And frankly? It deserves what it gets.

Can the pretenses be dropped, then? We all know Sanders only ever ran as a Democrat to game the system and take advantage of the infrastructure already in place.

The way you put it, it almost sounds as if to support Sanders wasn't done in an attempt to change the party, but an attempt to destroy it from within. Or, at least, to make it over in an outsider's image. The Democratic Paty is far from perfect, but if one truly dislikes it so much, do something else. Because the fact of the matter is that millions of people do like where the party is. The disparity in primary votes proves that.

You can only choose between two parties in the US because of electoral law.  The Democratic Party is obviously the more savable one than the Republican Party.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law

Someone forgot to tell these people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_presidential_election,_2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_election,_2006
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010

I'm unfamiliar with the phillippines and only vaguely familiar with Canada, but Duverger's law still holds in the UK in that, within boroughs (districts), there are still only two competitive parties. 

The Presidential election is of course one gigantic borough (America).  You could have Libertarian or Green representation in Congress theoretically in some district that was so far right or left that Democrats or Republicans were a totally non-competitive party, respectively, allowing Libertarians or Greens to emerge as the second party.  But not at the Presidential level.

Someone still forgot to tell the Philippines, and I'm sure there are plenty of districts with 3 or more competitive parties.

Do you seriously think starting a totally new political party at the Presidential level is more effective than going through the Democratic primary and attempting to shape the Democratic party?

There was this dude back in 2000 named Ralph Nader who was a great candidate who started a new party, I don't know if you remember him.  A lot of people liked him but because of FPTP, he handed the election to Bush, and nobody voted for his party every again.