RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Excerpt: "Bernie Sanders is described as radical and extremist, but if you take a look at his policies, they wouldn't have surprised President Eisenhower. Eisenhower famously said that anyone who doesn't accept basic New Deal policies doesn't belong in the American political system. Sanders is basically a New Dealer. If you look at his policies, they would have been considered relatively moderate in the 1950's."

Noam Chomsky. (photo: Graeme Robertson)
Noam Chomsky. (photo: Graeme Robertson)


Noam Chomsky: On the Death of the American Dream

By Kathryn Ryan, RNZ

08 May 16

 

Famed scholar, activist and political theorist Noam Chomsky talks frankly to Nine to Noon's Kathryn Ryan about politics, society and his new film Requiem for the American Dream.

ou argue that the problem with inequality at the scale it is developing in the United States, is that it is corrosive to democracy and that the history of democracy in the United States from the time of the founding fathers, has been a cyclical battle between the elite, trying to protect its position in power, and sporadic uprisings of working people and the marginalised in protest. Is this just such another era unfolding in the United States?

So it appears. If you look at the Trump victory yesterday, [which] solidifies his position of Republican candidate. But if you look at the attitudes towards him, the public opposition to him is enormous, it’s running well over 50 percent, just as a candidate. Clinton is not much more popular.

The hatred and anger [towards] virtually all institutions is just overwhelming. Support for Congress has pretty much been in single digits for many years. There is tremendous anger, disillusionment, fear … if it does not take a constructive, organised form, as it did in the 1930’s and to an extent in the 1960’s, it could be a very threatening development.

You have someone who is the Secretary of State, who has been a senator, spent decades in the public eye in the form of Hillary Clinton, who never would have predicted such a sustained challenge from Bernie Sanders, who has been around as an activist for decades, but now is also seriously still in this race for the Democratic nomination. Is that the same kind of feature of disillusionment with establishment politics?

It’s the same kind and in fact if you take a close look at attitudes of Sanders and Trump supporters, they’re not very different. They’re taking different forms, but the actual attitudes are rather similar.

In fact, basically social democratic support for greater government involvement in health, education, higher taxes for the rich and the terrible debt burden on students, opposition to the export of production and the enrichment of largely predatory financial institutions … these attitudes are quite wide spread, both among Trump supporters and Sanders supporters.

There is the clear frustration with the dysfunction of Washington politics and the fact that it’s almost in gridlock, trying to get any decisions made in the capital, in the Congress. Very interestingly, when you look at the Senate’s and Congress’ opposition to what a president is trying to do, that in-built check was there right at the beginning.

You make the point in the documentary that when the political system was being drawn up by the founding fathers, there was an appointment system built into the Senate. It was a check system right from the beginning.

The original framework, established by James Madison and others, held that (I’m quoting Madison) power should be in the hands of the wealth of the nation, the more responsible group of men, those who have a concern for property and its rights and that a primary goal of government should be to protect the minority of the opulent from the majority. And by structuring the system that way, the primary power was actually given to the Senate, which was not - as you say - not elected. The president at that time was more of an administrator. There have been many changes over the years. There’s been substantial struggles that have gained far more democratic participation, there have been regressive periods … we happen to be in one now.

The dysfunction you mention in the government presented in a little bit of a misleading way. It’s one-sided. When Obama was elected, the Republican leadership, Mitch McConnell, and others said straight out, that prime policy will be "No". Make sure that the country is un-governable. That is the primary source of the so-called gridlock and dysfunction.

Of course, from the point of view of the public, this looks like the system has collapsed - and to an extent it has - but its primary responsibility is the fact that the Republican Party shifted so far to the right, that they’re barely a political party anymore.

This is actually recognised by some of their leading intellectuals, the leading political analysts of the American Enterprise Institute, the Conservative institute. Norman Ornstein described the current Republican Party as a “radical insurgency”, which is abandoned parliamentary politics, and that’s not far from truth, that’s the primary source of the gridlock.

But the fact of the matter is that the policies, the Democrats have also moved to the right, but today’s Democrats are pretty much what used to be called moderate Republicans. Richard Nixon is actually the last liberal president if you look at policies.

Bernie Sanders is described as radical and extremist, but if you take a look at his policies, they wouldn’t have surprised President Eisenhower. Eisenhower famously said that anyone who doesn’t accept basic New Deal policies doesn’t belong in the American political system. Sanders is basically a New Dealer. If you look at his policies, they would have been considered relatively moderate in the 1950’s.

All of this is a reflection of the general shift of the mainstream spectrum to the right during the neoliberal period which began in the mid-‘70s and really began to escalate under Regan. And it has led to somewhat similar outcomes in many different places. 

In Europe, for example, the attack on democracy has been harsher than in the United States and it is leading to the significant decline of the mainstream political parties and organisations and sharp rise of opposition at both right and left. That’s not entirely dissimilar from the Sanders phenomenon and due to much the same kind of policies, the neoliberal policies have had that kind of consequence almost everywhere and in the Third World, they have been really destructive. But they have led to, for a majority of the population, near stagnation or decline in benefits and opportunities.

There’s a sense of hopelessness for the future. There is a strong antagonism to established institutions.

You talked about the Republicans - are Ted Cruz and others now reaping the prize of that policy, of blocking everything that the Democratic president tried to do? Is this effectively now coming back to bite the party, which does seem to be – certainly its establishment wing – in absolute meltdown?

That’s quite accurate. If you look at the last few primary elections, you can see this building up. In the last several elections in the Republican primaries, if a candidate came out of the popular base of the party they were regarded as so extreme and disastrous that they had to be eliminated and held back. Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, one after the other… And in the preceding primaries the establishment, which controls the basic funding, the institution’s personnel and so on, they were able to suppress, in one way or another, the candidates who arose from the base and finally get their own man… like Romney in the last election, unpopular as he was among the base.

This time, to everyone’s surprise, they were unable to do it. Trump was the candidate of the popular base and he simply overwhelmed the establishment candidates and they’re now in utter disarray, not even able to decide whether to support him, to hold their noses (as some say), as they vote for him or abandon the party.

The Democratic Party is in not much better shape, if you want to know the truth. And we may see in November, the Sanders supporters, many of them young, energised, mobilised, bitter about establishment politics, they may just not depart from the party. It’s the kind of situation that we’re also seeing in Europe – the decline of the centrist parties.

Do you have a sense of what this outcome is going to be?

I think we’re going to see, in the coming months up to the election, a very ugly scene of bitterly harsh, negative advertising, denunciations, condemnations, hatred, fury… you can hope that out of these forces, especially the Sanders forces, there might come an organised movement that might sustain not the specifically electoral extravaganza, but would be a continuing force. It could happen and it could even happen that they would be joined by the largely white, working class supporters of Trump. That is conceivable.

In fact, it’s kind of striking to compare the present situation with that of the 1930s, which I am old enough to remember personally. The 1930s, the Depression, the circumstances were much more grim. It was a much poorer country, the conditions were far harsher, but subjectively, it was a much more optimistic period.

People felt that, we would get out of this somehow. The labour unions, which had been virtually destroyed in the 1920s, were reconstituting. There was militant labour action, the CIO organising sit-down strikes. Activism of race issues, and so on. A lot of pressure. There were political organisations of many kinds. There were political debates, discussion on many fronts.

It was a fairly sympathetic administration and the effect of it was to yield the New Deal legislations, which didn’t end the Depression, the War ended the Depression, but they did soften the edges and give people a sense of hopefulness and expectation that the future would be better. That’s strikingly lacking now. But it might consolidate.

It’s not impossible that existing forces will organise themselves in a way that will yield a subjective experience and direct activism that could lead to policies that will overcome the harsh effect of the neoliberal programmes. They’re not in stone, they can be changed.

*In Requiem for the American Dream, Noam Chomsky unpacks the US policies of the past half-century which have lead to an unprecedented concentration of power in the hands of the select few.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are going to return to our original fully-moderated format in the comments section.

The abusive complaints in the comment sections are just too far out of control at this point and have become a significant burden on our staff. As a result, our moderators will review all comments prior to publication. Comments will no longer go live immediately. Please be patient and check back.

To improve your chances of seeing your comment published, avoid confrontational or antagonistic methods of communication. Really that is the problem we are confronting.

We encourage all views. We discourage ad hominem disparagement.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+45 # danireland46 2016-05-08 09:27
I saw the documentary, Requiem for the American Dream, and I highly recommend it. I saw it on Netflix.
Chomsky describes how the Oligarchy has set about to control the common man. He lists 10 Principles that would be employed to control the rabble and protect the elite. The first Principle is Reduce Democracy, and the last is Marginalize the Population. Other Principles include: Shape the Message, Attack Solidarity, Run the Regulators, Keep the Rabble Down, and so on. It's definitely an important blueprint of what has happened to Our Democracy, and what is yet to come. It should be in the Scary Movie category but it's under Documentaries.
 
 
-48 # WaaDoo 2016-05-08 09:40
"Bitterly harsh", Noam ? You mean like DEMS saying in '12 that Romney caused the death of the wife of a worker who lost his job? Or do you mean "bitterly harsh" like a Sec. of State and a PUTZUS lying to family of dead American public servants?
 
 
+47 # heiko12 2016-05-08 09:58
Quoting WaaDoo:
"Bitterly harsh", Noam ? You mean like DEMS saying in '12 that Romney caused the death of the wife of a worker who lost his job? Or do you mean "bitterly harsh" like a Sec. of State and a PUTZUS lying to family of dead American public servants?


I believe he would say "both". Democratic politicians have done a lot of really ridiculous things, and gone along with many others. That Republican politicians have been far worse is hard to deny, but should be good news for no one.

Let's hope Bernie and his supporters can help create a viable future for our democracy - at least what's left of it!
 
 
+21 # fletch1165 2016-05-08 11:40
What's worse, a wolf or a wolf in sheep's clothing? Is an Archie Bunker-like bigot worse than one that is tacit and works silently behind the scenes largely unseen for the reward of the bigoted class? One can be easily exposed to all, while the other perpetuates false mythologies and continues to be appointed, even elected into power.
 
 
+13 # indian weaver 2016-05-08 11:50
Yes Hillary is the wolf in sheep's clothing while Trump is the wolf. I choose Trump's honesty but his honesty is a threat to the planet. I despise Hillary's and Obama's cowardice and dishonesty which makes them the typical politically correct stinking politicians they are. I choose to vote for neither one, maybe. If I vote, it'll be for me or Bernie. To hell with the bullshit government. I'll join the violent revolution which is long overdue.
 
 
+18 # librarian1984 2016-05-08 10:53
race to the bottom.

we're not enemies.
 
 
+8 # John Escher 2016-05-09 05:14
Quoting WaaDoo:
"Bitterly harsh", Noam ? You mean like DEMS saying in '12 that Romney caused the death of the wife of a worker who lost his job? Or do you mean "bitterly harsh" like a Sec. of State and a PUTZUS lying to family of dead American public servants?


Noam Chomsky is intelligent. So WaaDoo can pretend to be intelligent by attacking him.
 
 
-48 # Shades of gray matter 2016-05-08 09:55
Given the devastating low Berner turn-outs in NY,PA,MD,CT, no one seems to know how to SUSTAIN "reform" until demographic changes kick in. Berners cannot seriously pressure DEMS because of Trump threat. Besides a few changes at Philly, the focus will need to be on 2018. That will be a real test. Can Berners move from whining to winning by 2018? This will be a YUUGE adjustment for them. Scapegoating SOMEONE ELSE is a lot like billing SOMEONE ELSE; so easy, SO tempting.
 
 
+22 # fletch1165 2016-05-08 10:57
Independents should be allowed to vote in the NY primary, and registration should be automatic, not required back in September. Corrupt. And 180,000 wiped from the rolls of Sander's birth place of Brooklyn should just be ignored by the jaded Hillary whores(if Bernie supporters are labeled Bernie bots or Berners the title is 100% apropos). It is Hillary and her low information/cor porate base that have elected Trump since they wanted a GOP sympathetic centrist and no progressive at all. You are no scapegoat when you embrace Bush and Goldman Sach's policies. Hillary is a disgusting embarrassment and traitor to the United States of America IN FACT. the people and the democracy are who she betrays. Instead choosing FAR RIGHT corporatism and the shenanigans the fascists Hillary and Trump have to offer. TPP, Fracking, clean coal, Coups in Honduras and Libya, Civil War in Syria, Funding ISIS wars, Destroying progress with Iran, Greek austerity, Bombing Palestine, Years to fix Flint when it should be months, fake gun control, fake gay rights, etc, etc etc. ALL HILLARY.
 
 
+24 # Radscal 2016-05-08 13:19
I agree with you that Open Primaries have benefits, especially in a time when nearly half of all registered voters are not Democrats or Republicans.

However, those were the rules going in, and complaining about how they harmed Sanders' campaign will (rightly) be met with name-calling about "sore loser whiners."

But what IS a valid complaint is the hundreds of thousands to millions of ELIGIBLE Democratic voters who have been illegally disenfranchised with voter roll scrubbing.

What IS a valid complaint is actual paper ballot counting audits being altered to match what the black box computers claim were the vote tallies.

What IS a valid complaint is Exit Polls being altered to match the reported "official" tally of votes. This in particular ends up doing the exact opposite of what Exit Polls are designed to do.

Instead of finding evidence of Election Fraud, they are MASKING Election Fraud.

If we are to stop that Wall Street sycophant Warmonger and the little Führer, then we MUST challenge the Election Fraud in the Democratic Primary and nominate the ONLY candidate who can stop the Right Wing/Fascist takeover.
 
 
+9 # lorenbliss 2016-05-08 17:47
@Radscal: I finally had time to respond to your typically thoughtful comment on the discussion thread of "Contested Convention," http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/36713-a-contested-convention-is-exactly-what-the-democratic-party-needs.

My apology for the delay. As I explained there, it's due to the increasingly difficult preparations for moving.

Meanwhile thank you for being; it's folks like you, librarian1984 etc. who make this site so addicting to folks like me.
 
 
+4 # lorenbliss 2016-05-08 19:45
@Radscal: by the way, how do you get the diacritical to spell Führer correctly (rather than by the anglicized but nevertheless incorrect "Fuehrer"?

(I copied it from your text but have no way -- at least that I know of -- to originate it from the RSN alphabet, though my Open Office includes all the diacritical marks [umlauts] essential to European versions of the Roman alphabet. It also contains the entire Cyrillic alphabet as well)

Any suggestions (as I write on-site rather than in my WP system then copy into RSN)?

Meanwhile thank you.

:-)
 
 
+4 # Radscal 2016-05-08 20:41
I'm still reading your Trotsky link and considering it all.

But to answer your question (no doubt disappointingly ) I copy pasta "Führer" from a web search.
 
 
+2 # lorenbliss 2016-05-08 21:23
Thank you, Radscal. Will henceforth do likewise.
 
 
+16 # librarian1984 2016-05-08 11:07
We've discussed 'projection' before, right ShadePuke? You're doing it again.

Note: YOU, PShaw, don't get to tell us when the 'real test' is or what the focus should be.

And by low turnouts I expect you're referring to the closed primaries (NY, PA, MD etc) which are a scintillating picture of what the party wants, while for a lovely snapshot of November's election we need to look at the OPEN contests (MI, WI etc).

You always try to act so superior, but a lot of people here see what you willfully ignore: that the open primaries are a better predictor of who will win a general election. We should focus especially on the open elections in battleground states. Senator Sanders dominates.

Then let's compare the agendas. I don't know what your job is or if you have kids, but with a Clinton presidency we know that 99% of the people you know will get no relief from this hostile status quo. You can think you're better than the rest of us, but the facts attest to your fatuous logic, at the same time you betray 99% of us.

BTW, you speak so longingly of easy money it's apparent where your bitterness comes from, while most of us here have chosen a good life over a profitable life, obviouly, so buzz off. You smell bad and you carry disease.

So the question is, as it is for Hillary, are you evil or just ignorant?
 
 
+4 # lorenbliss 2016-05-08 15:44
@librarian1984: I sought a way to post near the top of this thread my comment on the terminal error in Mr. Chomsky's analysis, and you gave me the perfect opening by asking whether Hillary is "evil or just ignorant."

Thank you.

Hillary is truly Evil -- not just lower-case "evil" but upper-case "Evil," Evil Incarnate: proven so by how she cackled with sadistic glee at the torture-death of Qaddafi, anally impaled on a sword.

And a Hillary presidency will mean still more Evil: more slow-motion genocide, more aggression, more ecological ruin, eventual thermonuclear war.

Or if nuclear Armageddon is somehow avoided, there looms the already-inevita ble environmental apocalypse.

In either case, we are doomed to extinction.

Finally -- too late to do anything but lament our fate -- we are awakening to that truly bottomless horror.

What Mr. Chomsky fails to comprehend is that our hopelessness is equally bottomless -- a condition without precedent in our species' experience.

Hence the foolish optimism of his conclusion: that "hopefulness," though "strikingly lacking," might somehow magically "consolidate."

But without a Sanders presidency, we have no hope left.

Alas, even Mr. Chomsky is ensnared by the USian cult of "positive thinking" -- the dementia of avoidance that led to our present denouement.

Otherwise he would understand "hope" is the pivotal issue in this election: Sanders' victory as hope's resurrection; his loss as hope's death forever.
 
 
+1 # lorenbliss 2016-05-08 19:56
Down-thumb me for my negativity as you like, but that will not alter the unbearable truth we as a species have already doomed ourselves to extinction.

In fact, only a miracle can save us from going the way of the dinosaurs -- with whose putrescent remains, petroleum and natural gas, we (in an ultimate irony of evolutionary history) have poisoned our planet and therefore ourselves.

But even the faintest hope of miraculous rescue is murdered by the curse of positive thinking -- the clinically suicidal denial of reality that keeps us from recognizing just how badly off we are. For without the prerequisite recognition of our plight, there can be no species-saving miracles.

(For the record, our history does in fact include notable miracles. One is the Royal Air Force's defeat of the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain. Another is the American Revolution -- the victory of an armed rabble over the most powerful empire and the most formidable military machine then on this planet. A third -- inexplicable by all known systems of logic -- is the spontaneous and potentially species-saving rebellion against patriarchy unintentionally begun by Sir Arthur Evans's discoveries during the excavations of Knossos...)
 
 
0 # John Escher 2016-05-09 05:21
I down-thumbed on the first post, up-thumbed on the second.
 
 
+4 # librarian1984 2016-05-09 08:19
Okay you seem to have some meta-depression , bliss. Very postmodern.

You can't lump all humanity into one big ignorance pot. Look at the people here. Look at Bernie Sanders, for goodness sake! The guy does not give up. He's like a political Terminator.

There are people who live in denial because they can't handle the truth, and it's hard to blame them. The world is rather overwhelming, and that's BEFORE you add in financial insecurity and the rapacious a$$es who 'govern'. With them it's a matter of grabbing their attention and getting a jingle stuck in their head.

Others knowingly deny the cr@p because it's to their advantage to do so. They are crap sellers or crap originators or crap shippers. You get the gist. That calls for lots of light.

And there are people like you, and Socrates. (That guy came to a bad end, didn't he?) You look at things and see them as they are, and then you batter your head against the proverbial wall trying to tell people what's going to happen. First they don't listen, then they don't believe you, then they deny you ever told them.

Maybe all those strategies hold some evolutionary promise. We don't know. We can't comprehend it all. But there are things in the world that are good, and you can't just deny them all because you're moving.

There's good and bad, always in flux. You take care of your corner and I'll take care of blah blah

There is a continuum between despair and denial, suggesting neither extreme is accurate.
 
 
+4 # librarian1984 2016-05-09 07:58
@ lorenbliss

Okay, first things first, bliss. You should not be contemplating the future of humanity when you're in the middle of a move. Everybody knows that, just like they know NEVER to start a ground war in the Middle East.

Secondly, there's always hope, even if it's a dark time, as it very well might be. But we were doomed to extinction the moment we climbed from the whatever. But not today. Probably not tomorrow. And most likely not til January 2017. So get your move done. THEN lose all hope.

We're doomed but there are rays of light everywhere. Well maybe not in Hillary's head. Look outward. We still need to deny HRC the 2383 delegates she needs to steal .. I mean 'win' .. the nomination. There ACTUALLY IS still hope.

Your Rx: Princess Bride, Empire Strikes Back, Return of the King.

Have I betrayed my geek upbringing? Have I mentioned I was raised by computer scientists?

PS Worst case scenario: Trump or Clinton become president. (Excuse me a sec, just threw up a little bit.)

WHO is going to be sitting in the Senate, with lots of followers, lots of money, lots of POWER?

WHO is going to be a gadfly on Trump or Hill's disastrous administration?

WHO is going to be riding up their butts like Nova Scotia, making them answer to the people for a change, calling them out? I really don't imagine Sen. Sanders all of a sudden getting meek and quiet, do you?

Imagine him and Warren working together and naming names.

Cheer up. You always have us :-)
 
 
+1 # lorenbliss 2016-05-09 18:25
Actually I am NOT moving...not now, not ever again.

The shortness of breath I first experienced while packing my 1,026-volume personal library worsened to the point I could no longer dismiss it.

Hence this morning I called on my Democrat-shrunk en Medicare and $35 in Democrat-hiked co-pays to learn I have congestive heart failure.

Now I'm facing another $150 in Democrat-hiked specialist co-pays to elaborate on the diagnosis.

This means the end, forever, of doing manual labor, which means the end, forever, to any fantasy of ever moving somewhere else.

The work involved, which includes moving 1400 pounds of books, is far beyond anything that could be reasonably asked of volunteers, and with my discretionary income already reduced to zero by the Democrats' $155-per-month reduction in my Medicare Extra Help and other stipends and services, I will never again have the money to hire a moving crew.

Its greatest tragedy is it damns me to spend the rest of my life without dogs. (The senior housing in which I dwell allows only "dogs" of 20 pounds or less, and I cannot look upon such always neurotic, typically psychotic ankle-biters with anything but contempt.)

(Sorry if this offends someone, but the smallest dog I've ever had was 65 pounds. Most weighed 100 pounds or more.)

The good news, at least from the sickness industry's perspective, is this is the treatable variant of CHF. In other words, I am once again exploitable for profit.
 
 
+16 # fletch1165 2016-05-08 11:29
Supporters are not here just to vote for Bernie. The recent left movement seeded itself in Dennis Kucinich and the fact everyone in Washington has moved so far corporate right there is no progress. Then the Wall Street Movement grew from this discontent and what was made known of it through public and private discourse. Almost everyone in the 99% versus 1% Movement became a Bernie supporter, and this is simply the next stage in the process of democratizing our society. Supporters are here for the movement and not just Bernie. Had the movement and the Bernie brand name not been so inhibited by the fascist structure itself, there would be no question of his nomination this term. No longer can we accept any party fully complicit in the shenanigans. Unless we accept and vote for Hillary of course. Then we have no excuse at all.
 
 
+6 # librarian1984 2016-05-08 12:50
BTW, ShadowPuppet, have you seen the LATEST Trump attacks, going after HRC for being an enabler of Bill's abuse of women? Charming! And just the beginning!

You know what strikes me about that? That despite ALL your depictions of Trump mining Bernie's speeches for points of attack, HE HAS FOUND PLENTY on his own.

As a matter of fact, of the 18 attacks I've seen in the past few days, only two had to do with Bernie: 1) the WS transcripts, 2) HRC using the woman card to attack Sanders when he hadn't done anything wrong.

I guess your little theory has been proven incorrect, eh SpotPrawn?

Sanders has been kind to Clinton. I wish he wasn't such a nice guy, but there it is. He likes to stick to the issues.

When we're all reciting the Trump national anthem and saluting Sieg, Trump! you comfort yourself with a whole set of NEW lies about how this result had nothing to do with your willful blindness and your consummate inability to reach beyond your own biases.

Thanks a lot, Shades of Vichy.
 
 
+7 # hkatzman 2016-05-08 14:40
Quoting Shades of gray matter:
Given the devastating low Berner turn-outs in NY,PA,MD,CT, no one seems to know how to SUSTAIN "reform" until demographic changes kick in.


The electoral corruption in NY disenfranchised voters who ... did not actively choose a party 6 months before the primary, did not vote in the last 2 federal elections (last 4 years), and move often. These are exactly the marginal voters that Sanders appeals to. The NY establishment is afraid of these unpredictable ("non-prime" voters) and has rigged the system to prevent them from voting.

Was Sanders low vote a sign of his lack of support or a sign that his voters have been disenfranchised?

p.s. When you find yourself not on the voting roll, always ask for an affidavit ballot. This will protect your vote if you go to court and fight for your right to cast the ballot.
 
 
+10 # Radscal 2016-05-08 16:08
NY just Certified their Democratic Primary results.

They tossed out 3/4 of all "Affidavit Ballots."

Frankly, I'm surprised they even counted 25% of them.
 
 
+1 # librarian1984 2016-05-09 08:23
Did they say why 75% were thrown out? And do we know who determined their eligibility?
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2016-05-09 22:49
The names weren't on the Democratic voter rolls (i.e. the reason they were not allowed a real ballot and given the affidavit in the first place) and the voter did not go to a judge to get re-registered before the certification.

Many did go to judges, where they again met hours-long lines, but from what I've read, that was pretty much the only way to get an affidavit ballot counted.

I haven't read any official excuse for the scrubbing.
 
 
0 # Caliban 2016-05-10 23:40
The process you describe sounds much like what happens in my state and others--and it is "official" party policy. The answer? Get on the voter rolls NOW for the November elections.

And tell any friends you suspect may have not gotten properly registered to do the same.
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-05-11 14:10
The situation with nearly all of the New Yorkers who were disenfranchised in the Primary was that they HAD BEEN registered as Democrats, but their party affiliation was changed on them, or their names were simply scrubbed off the lists.

The New York Democratic Party says, don't worry that your Primary vote didn't count. They promise to fix it for November. LOL

I was one of the hundreds of thousands to millions of long-time registered Democrats whose party affiliation was changed without my knowledge or input.

Fortunately, I caught it in time because I read about that happening in other states.

I encourage EVERYONE to request Absentee Ballots. Fill them out in pen at home, and then on Election Day, take them to your polling station and drop them in to ballot box yourself.

It's the best chance you'll have for having your actual vote counted accurately.
 
 
+1 # librarian1984 2016-05-12 07:15
But how do we know absentee ballots get counted?
 
 
+6 # Saberoff 2016-05-08 11:45
Ever hear the word scapegoat? I'm going to use it here, in my next (amazing) prediction.
Some things are just too painful to admit. 1) American elections are meaningless. We people would rather expend all of our breath and energy hypothesizing solutions than grapple with an ugly, well known fact, that we can do nothing about.
Many believe election results already in the bag. l'm one. I admit it's amazing what the criminal faction can do, given unlimited wealth.
So, here's the prediction; and an example.
America has come to the wall of Fascism; there is nowhere left to go except Declaration; Curtain up, open for business. But how to save the system (capitalism) from harm? A scapegoat, of course. We need a name, and a face... not unlike that idiot, W, or ya, a Hitler, to shoulder the scorn of history.
Trump will be our next president. Who better? But you really gotta hand it to the fascists for putting this shit together. Other hand, I guess, if you can do whatever you like with the vote, everything's pretty easy.
America's national nightmare isn't over yet; indeed, maybe just getting started.
 
 
+4 # Majikman 2016-05-08 14:21
Saberoff, your predictions are very similar to what I just wrote to a friend. When individuals are able to amass extraordinary wealth to hire greedy pols to do their bidding, the death of democracy is inevitable. A politician advocating to cut taxes on the rich and corporations is a stooge of the 1% and a sell out of the citizens..unles s I missed the thriving economies where tax cutting for the 1% has occurred.
 
 
+9 # seeuingoa 2016-05-08 11:48
What does "American Dream" actually mean?

It means simply, that if you are ruthless, and greedy enough, YOU can
also start up as a news paper boy on a
Street corner in New York and end up
a billionaire in Las Vegas with a pink
mansión, a pink Cadillac, and a hooker
with big boobs, showing a total lack of compassion with other people.
 
 
+14 # Radscal 2016-05-08 13:32
What you are accurately describing is the "Horatio Alger myth." The "Rags to Riches" fantasy in a country with lower class mobility than almost any other on the planet.

I see the "American Dream" as the attainment of equal opportunity. A land in which every child has a fair chance to attain whatever success and happiness (Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness) that their talents, ambitions and values can attain.

Regardless of heritage or what economic class or neighborhood a child is born into, they should ALL have as close to identical opportunities as a complex society can attain.

That means quality healthcare from pre-natal onward. That means good nutrition, clean environment, safe and comfortable homes and quality education for everyone.

If that sounds like an unrealistic Bernie Sanders advertisement, then we've forgotten what it took to go to the moon or transform industry to win WW II.

We can do it. We've undertaken bigger challenges in the past.
 
 
+1 # librarian1984 2016-05-09 08:35
Ugh had a depressing conversation yesterday with an old family friend. I had to listen to how Hillary is going to do great things for America and women, and if only women could learn to support other women instead of trying to tear Hillary down. (Pointed look in my direction.)

Then the inevitable logical fallacies and facetious arguments. 'Why should I give kids a free education' followed shortly thereafter by 'These kids need to get an education'. Hmm.

You know what is going on inside me as I listen, right? I'm not doing needlepoint in my head to escape. No, I'm SCREAMING inside my head wanting to dive into a dozen inconsistencies in her arguments, and deciding which ONE to counter, calmly. Instead of saying Hillary is going to kill us all (the Bliss Doctrine) I politely mention her shifting positions might indicate pandering.

'All politicians do that.'

'Bernie Sanders doesn't.'

'But he's a communist.'

Need I go on? Of course I got her to say 'hmm' a few times and 'Really?' once or twice, but I didn't change her mind.

The one thing she cared about was Social Security, convinced Sanders and Clinton had the same plans for it.

sigh.
 
 
+1 # Radscal 2016-05-09 20:03
I'm sorry to read you were struck by another low-information HRC supporter, and even more so since she's a long time family friend.

Right now in my personal interactions, most I'm close with are Bernie supporters (or some version of "conservative") . I'm trying to win them over to Bernie or Bust since they, too believe that HRC and Sanders somehow share goals.
 
 
-5 # Lyin Lefties 2016-05-09 15:36
You'd HAVE to be a Bernie cultist to be so unfathomably stupid as to claim that America has lower class movility than, say, your totalitarian socialist utopias like Cuba, NK or Venezuela.
 
 
+4 # librarian1984 2016-05-09 18:06
Lyin Loser --

Don't let facts get in the way but

http://www.businessinsider.com/social-mobility-is-a-myth-in-the-us-2013-3

It's one of the tragedies of post-Vietnam America. You are living in a mythic past, comrade.
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2016-05-09 20:18
Pakistan has higher class mobility than the US.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/12/09/news/economy/america-economic-mobility/index.html

While most of Latin America is still plagued by high rates of poverty, the World Bank notes that class mobility there has been rising substantially, and many countries exceed the US substantially (including Venezuela until the current coup attempt). They do not specify this is a result of the Bolivarian Resurgence, but the dates track quite well.

https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/11858

Cuba, on the other hand is basically a classless society. They guarantee food, shelter, medical care and education (through Doctorate degrees) to all, so talking about class mobility there is largely a meaningless term.
 
 
+1 # Merlin 2016-05-11 02:02
Lyin Lefties 2016-05-09 15:36

Boy sHillary must be scared of Bernie. She sends these really bad trolls to try and upset us. And recently lots of them!

As usual lyin troll has nothing in his profile. Zero. Zilch. Not even what country he lives in. What are you scared of Lyin?

That is typical of these trolls. Total cowards. Hiding as they degrade others that they don't know. Did I say coward? Yes I did.

You are a coward lyin troll. How does it feel to be a paid coward? Enquiring minds want to know!
 
 
-8 # Lyin Lefties 2016-05-09 15:35
Sounds more like you're just another Bernout totalitarian Useful Idiot whining about how unfair it is that we don't make you dictator.
 
 
+1 # Merlin 2016-05-11 02:16
Lyin Lefties 2016-05-09 15:35
"Sounds more like you're just another Bernout totalitarian Useful Idiot whining about how unfair it is that we don't make you dictator."

Hahaha! Its really funny when you trolls don't make sense, even when you are trying so hard to be noticed.

Maybe you should use the edit button over there on the left and erase this hilarious post, and try writing it again. I mean you sound like one of those tRump supporters who is finally able to spew his bottled up anger.

Have you tried one of those 12 step anger management thgingees? Might help you a lot. Being angry all the time is bad for the heart, you know!
 
 
+12 # grandlakeguy 2016-05-08 12:02
The negative perception of both Trump AND Clinton are at record levels and climbing.
When Trump starts running ads highlighting so much more of Clinton's terrible history (Bernie has been FAR too kind to her in the primary) her negatives will only climb.
Imagine the tv ads that can be produced with Hillary on camera actually telling her tall tale of "coming under sniper fire" when arriving at the Bosnia airport intercut with the images of the actual event where she is calmly conversing with a group of schoolchildren on the tarmac.
Then the clip can end with her admission that she "misspoke". "Misspoke"? NO she LIED!

How about an ad showing the gruesome and horrific results of children maimed by cluster bombs after Hillary joined the Republicans (while a Senator) and helped defeat a ban on the use of these barbaric devices.

Bernie never mentioned either of these easily verifiable and shameful incidents in the primary.

It is time to embrace a New Deal Democrat to return this country to some kind of government that is respected and embraced by the American people. Neither Trump or Clinton can achieve that end.
Bernie can!
 
 
0 # John Escher 2016-05-09 05:25
Trivial and inane when there is so much of substance to attack Hillary for.
 
 
0 # librarian1984 2016-05-09 06:13
Such as ....
 
 
+10 # Realist1948 2016-05-08 17:22
Shades of gray-m wrote: "Can Berners move from whining to winning by 2018?"
As Sanders has often said, he went from having support in single digits to beating Hillary in many races, in less than a year. He's been winning in many states where voting laws have allowed fair contests.

Also note that (as Sanders has reiterated) he received contributions averaging $27 each from millions of supporters.

Considering that he's up against a well-known candidate backed by the Dem establishment (both money and with "super-delegate s") Sanders has done extraordinarily well.

Sanders and his millions of supporters are in a good position to apply pressure to Hillary and the DNC establishment to commit to objectives that Sanders advocates. If the DNC chooses to ignore us, they run the risk of having us sit on our hands during the fall campaign, and stay home on election day. And although few Democrats are likely to want a Trump victory, it's hard to get enthusiastic about fighting for the status quo.
The DNC needs some planks in their platform that align with Sanders' key issues:

1. Single payer health care for all.
2. Reasonable levels of financial support for college students; earning a degree should not lead to years of indebtedness.
3. Break up the too-big-to-fail banks and other huge financial institutions.
4. Eliminate corporate welfare.
5. A more progressive tax system.
6. Less military intervention abroad.

Let's see serious discussion of above at the convention!
 
 
-10 # Lyin Lefties 2016-05-09 15:30
Because totalitarian scumbags like Chomsky have done everything they can to destroy it in the hopes of replacing it with a totalitarian socialist dictatorship like the ones he's made himself obscenely wealthy propagandizing for.
 
 
0 # chemtex2611 2016-05-11 14:59
Perhaps it is time for a NEW New Deal. We are living in another Golden Age like the 1890's
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN