RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Frank writes: "My leftist friends persuaded themselves that Clinton's many concessions to Sanders' supporters were permanent concessions. But with the convention over and the struggle with Sanders behind her, headlines show Clinton triangulating to the right, scooping up the dollars and the endorsement, and the elites shaken loose in the great Republican wreck."

Hillary Clinton. (photo: AP)
Hillary Clinton. (photo: AP)


With Trump Certain to Lose, You Can Forget About a Progressive Clinton

By Thomas Frank, Guardian UK

14 August 16

 

Come November, Clinton will have won her great victory – not as a champion of working people’s concerns, but as the greatest moderate of them all

nd so ends the great populist uprising of our time, fizzling out pathetically in the mud and the bigotry stirred up by a third-rate would-be caudillo named Donald J Trump. So closes an era of populist outrage that began back in 2008, when the Davos dream of a world run by benevolent bankers first started to crack. The unrest has taken many forms in these eight years - from idealistic to cynical, from Occupy Wall Street to the Tea Party - but they all failed to change much of anything.

And now the last, ugliest, most fraudulent manifestation is failing so spectacularly that it may discredit populism itself for years to come.

Two weeks ago, I wrote in this space about how the Trump phenomenon had reconfigured the conventional geometry of the two-party system. Trump was riding high in the polls at that moment, and there was reason to believe that his criticism of trade deals - one of several Trumpian causes long associated with the populist left - might play havoc with the Democrats' happy centrist plans.

Now let us ponder the opposite scenario. In the intervening two weeks, Trump has destroyed himself more efficiently than any opposition campaign could ever have done. First, he heaped mounds of insults on the family of a US soldier killed in Iraq, then prominent journalists raised doubts about his mental state, and then (as if to confirm his doubters) he dropped a strong hint that gun enthusiasts might take action against Hillary Clinton should she appoint supreme court justices not to his liking.

His chances, as measured in the polls, went almost overnight from fairly decent to utter crap. For much of this year, populism had the gilded class really worried. There was Bernie Sanders and the unthinkable threat of a socialist president. There was the terrifying Brexit vote. Just a short while ago the American national newspapers were running page-one stories telling readers it was time to take seriously Trump's followers, if not Trump himself. And on 3 August, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman actually typed the following: "It scares me that people are so fed up with elites, so hate and mistrust [Hillary] Clinton and are so worried about the future - jobs, globalization and terrorism" that they might actually vote for Trump.

Yes, it scared Friedman that the American people didn't like their masters any longer. As it has no doubt scared many of his rich friends to learn over the past few years that the people formerly known as middle class are angry about losing their standard of living to the same forces that are making those rich people ever more comfortable.

Well, Friedman need be frightened no longer. Today it looks as though his elites are taking matters well in hand. "Jobs" don't really matter now in this election, nor does the debacle of "globalization", nor does anything else, really. Thanks to this imbecile Trump, all such issues have been momentarily swept off the table while Americans come together around Clinton, the wife of the man who envisaged the Davos dream in the first place.

As leading Republicans desert the sinking ship of Trump's GOP, America's two-party system itself has temporarily become a one-party system. And within that one party, the political process bears a striking resemblance to dynastic succession. Party office-holders selected Clinton as their candidate long ago, apparently determined to elevate her despite every possible objection, every potential legal problem. The Democratic National Committee helped out, too, as WikiLeaks tells us. So did President Barack Obama, that former paladin for openness, who in the past several years did nearly everything in his power to suppress challenges to Clinton and thus ensure she would continue his legacy of tepid, bank-friendly neoliberalism.

My leftist friends persuaded themselves that this stuff didn't really matter, that Clinton's many concessions to Sanders' supporters were permanent concessions. But with the convention over and the struggle with Sanders behind her, headlines show Clinton triangulating to the right, scooping up the dollars and the endorsement, and the elites shaken loose in the great Republican wreck.

She is reaching out to the foreign policy establishment and the neocons. She is reaching out to Republican office-holders. She is reaching out to Silicon Valley. And, of course, she is reaching out to Wall Street. In her big speech in Michigan on Thursday she cast herself as the candidate who could bring bickering groups together and win policy victories through really comprehensive convenings.

Things will change between now and November, of course. But what seems most plausible from the current standpoint is a landslide for Clinton, and with it the triumph of complacent neoliberal orthodoxy. She will have won her great victory, not as a champion of working people's concerns, but as the greatest moderate of them all, as the leader of a stately campaign of sanity and national unity. The populist challenge of the past eight years, whether led by Trump or by Sanders, will have been beaten back resoundingly. Centrism will reign triumphant over the Democratic party for years to come. This will be her great accomplishment. The bells will ring all over Washington DC.

In this ironic and roundabout way, Trump may prove to be a disaster for the reform politics he has never really believed in. Indeed, it would be difficult to find a leader who could discredit populism more thoroughly than this compassion-free billionaire. For Friedman's beloved "elites", I predict that Trump will come to serve an important symbolic purpose. Trump loves to boast that he is immune to the scourge of money in politics, that he's nobody's puppet, and from his coming ruin and disgrace we will no doubt be told to draw many lessons about how money in politics actually helps prevent the rise of people like Trump and makes the system more stable.

For decades, the Davos set have told us that doubt about "globalization" was a species of racism, and soon Trump, as a landslide loser, will confirm this for them in overwhelming terms.

My friends and I like to wonder about who will be the "next Bernie Sanders", but what I am suggesting here is that whoever emerges to lead the populist left will simply be depicted as the next Trump. The billionaire's scowling country-club face will become the image of populist reform, whether genuine populists had anything to do with him or not. This is the real potential disaster of 2016: That legitimate economic discontent is going to be dismissed as bigotry and xenophobia for years to come.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+146 # grandlakeguy 2016-08-14 11:43
Dear Mr. Frank you have it wrong!

While I am always happy to see articles from the foreign press you are completely missing the elephant in the room...

ELECTION THEFT!

The Bernie movement did not "fizzle" it was ruthlessly extinguished by a well co-ordinated attack beginning with extreme bias in the American mass media and completed by massive manipulation of our primary elections utilizing MANY different forms of voter suppression and culminating with the actual physical elimination of Bernie votes and the changing of results reported by our completely non secure unverifiable voting systems.

Bernie Sanders excited and energized the American people, his candidacy was destroyed by a ruthless and corrupt political machine controlled by the thoroughly corrupt power hungry Clintons.

If the primary elections were held in an open and honest fashion HRC would have been humiliated!

If you want to publish a great story in the Guardian you need to research the fraud of America's elections and expose it to your European audience.

You can be certain that the American press will not touch this topic other than to ridicule those who speak out about it!

And...I must add that Hillary Clinton was NEVER A PROGRESSIVE! She parroted Bernie Sanders as she became terrified to see the tens of thousands of excited, energized voters, both young and old, thronging to Bernie's rallies.

Hillary Clinton has always been a Goldwater Girl Republican pretending to be a Democrat!
 
 
+53 # REDPILLED 2016-08-14 14:31
Thomas Frank is a U.S. writer and author of What's the Matter With Kansas and, recently, Listen, Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People?

So he is very well aware of the Hillary-control led DNC's theft of Sanders' primary victories.
 
 
+30 # Helga Fellay 2016-08-14 14:44
if what you write is true, Redpilled, that would make Thomas Frank just as phony as any of the talking heads at Fox and CNN. How else could he refer to Clinton as "progressive" when it is crystal clear to anyone with connected brain cells that she is the exact opposite. And why is RSN printing such drivel?
 
 
+30 # Ralph 2016-08-14 16:37
It's imperative that RSN deliver a cross section of political opinion that represents the true political discourse of this nation. I seriously doubt that any of the true supporters of this site want it to be an echo chamber.
 
 
-23 # tomr 2016-08-14 18:12
Imperative, yes. But that's not what RSN does. They pick a side, sometimes foolishly. Like remember when RSN was clearly against Bernie and in favor of Hillary? Then, when they saw that the tide was coming in, they jumped on the Bernie bandwagon.
 
 
+29 # Ralph 2016-08-14 18:18
This was the only site I know of that gave Sanders fair coverage. If they want to be a "news" site, they would be wise to cover all angles as best as possible.
 
 
+12 # A_Har 2016-08-15 14:19
Quoting Ralph:
This was the only site I know of that gave Sanders fair coverage. If they want to be a "news" site, they would be wise to cover all angles as best as possible.
Actually, Common Dreams was pretty good too.

http://www.commondreams.org/

RSN is a news aggregator, and they sometimes publish articles by specific people, but mostly they post articles found on other sites.
 
 
+13 # Interested Observer 2016-08-15 10:39
Do not forget his most important book, The Wrecking Crew. This book explains the foundations of the modern GOP and the background necessary for the following books. Essentially it is a mission to erase every trace that there ever was a Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
 
 
-25 # Caliban 2016-08-14 14:59
If Frank is as smart as you say he will he'll also know there is no hard evidence that meaningful primary thefts occurred. So don't get your mis-guided hopes up over the "election theft" non-issue.

Hopefully Frank (and many others) will do what every progressive now must do -- stop daydreaming about a Sanders presidency and start working to get the Sanders legislative program passed at every level of government from town councils to states legislatures -- and, of course, our fine US Houses of Congress.
 
 
-30 # Rain17 2016-08-14 17:49
This is conspiracy theory land.
 
 
+12 # A_Har 2016-08-15 14:10
Quoting Rain17:
This is conspiracy theory land.
NOPE, you are living in a dreamland: see no evil, speak no evil, HEAR no evil--the monkey is deaf, dumb, and BLIND.

As someone on another forum said over and OVER:

"They are all in it TOGETHER." Methinks this proves the point.

2016: The Year America's Two-Party System Officially Began To Implode
http://theantimedia.org/2016-two-party-implosion-2/
Submitted by Carey Wedler via TheAntiMedia.or g,

"The fact that diehard members of the Republican party are opting to vote for Clinton shoots holes in the popular, long-standing belief that the Democratic and Republican parties represent fundamentally different values. That so many established Republicans are abandoning their party in favor of a politician reviled by the Right demonstrates how few differences there are between the two parties – and what lengths those in power will go to in order to maintain the current paradigm." [It's a sham.]

The current SICK fucked up paradigm.

OH....and this too:

Clinton Bonds with Neocons as GOP Elites Launch Final Bid Against Trump
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/08/08/clinton-bonds-neocons-gop-elites-launch-final-bid-against-trump

(eyeroll!) I am no Trump fan, but these shenanigans disgust me.
 
 
-2 # Caliban 2016-08-17 01:27
"I am no Trump fan, but these shenanigans disgust me." -- and you know these charges are true exactly how?

Because to me these headlines look like total BS from extremely dubious sources.
 
 
+8 # Anarchist 23 2016-08-16 14:16
But you are living in a country that is practically run by conspiracy! Exxon conspired to hide scientific proof of global warming; the tobacco industry hides the effects of its product; Volkswagen hid the true emissions of its diesel engine...and there is of course much more...every broken treaty with the Native Americans since the 13 colonies, for a long running example. The 'Conspiracy Theory Nut' as a wide-spread even official term of ridicule was introduced into the lexicon by the CIA after the assassination of JFK, because the Warren Report was so ludicrous they had to discredit any critic that came along.
 
 
+30 # Radscal 2016-08-14 21:02
Time and time again I and others have posted links to the overwhelming evidence of many different types of election fraud, and asked you to look at it.

The fact that you've either never looked, or looked and are deliberately lying shows you not to be a sincere person.
 
 
-22 # Caliban 2016-08-15 03:04
Sorry Radscal, but I have looked at everything I can find -- including everything on RSN -- and it consists of accusations without proof, plus some meaningless statistical guesswork.

Nothing--even the Wasserman-Schul tz's preferences as revealed in leaked communications- -constitutes evidence that anybody could manipulate the millions of votes in a dozen different states to steal the nomination from Sanders -- a conclusion arrived at also by the Sanders campaign, as you well know.

I am a very sincere person, I voted for Sanders in my state's primary, and I don't lie. But I'm not delusional. Clinton won (but did not steal) the Democratic party nomination process.
 
 
-13 # Interested Observer 2016-08-15 10:42
I, too, am getting tired of the screaming and whining from Bernie truthers. It is so bad that they consider Bernie himself to have "sold out" for not agreeing with them. I also voted for Sanders, and he won that particular primary.
 
 
+10 # A_Har 2016-08-15 14:13
Quoting Interested Observer:
I, too, am getting tired of the screaming and whining from Bernie truthers. It is so bad that they consider Bernie himself to have "sold out" for not agreeing with them. i also voted for Sanders, and he won that particular primary.
Reality is a HARD SELL.
 
 
-1 # Caliban 2016-08-16 11:32
Exactly why effective PR and lobbying firms do well at the bottom line.
 
 
+5 # AshamedAmerican 2016-08-15 18:10
If you were "sincere", Caliban, you would at least recognize the importance of the problem.

I have not looked carefully enough to make a valid estimate of how many votes were affected. And then one would have to account for the given state's delegate formula. But there were many votes manipulated my numerous means. If you are honest, you should be obligated to admit this is a major threat to our alleged democracy.

You should also see a major threat to our alleged democracy when your candidate overtly rewarded corruption from which she benefited. When HRC's friend and former campaign manager oversaw a conspiracy to discriminate against HRC's competition, and upon being caught, was rewarded with the position of HRC's "honorary chair", you perhaps should be offended at the degree of obvious corruption witnessed.

Whether or not you recognize that enough votes were affected to change the primary election results, if you are "sincere", you should be appalled at the many ways this election was corrupted.

All of this might even be enough reason to vote against the candidate who benefited, and was presumably at least aware, if there were not already enough reasons.

But at the very least, the many forms of corruption exposed should be enough to deeply concern a thoughtful, "sincere" citizen who thought s/he was living in a representative democracy.

It is considerably more than "daydreaming about a Sanders presidency".
 
 
+5 # Radscal 2016-08-15 18:36
Clearly you have NOT looked at the information we've posted because it includes actual ballots with Sanders' vote whited out, paper ballot tabulating machines that do not recognize votes for Sanders and many, many more.

So, thank's for demonstrating to all that you're a liar, like your candidate.
 
 
-7 # Caliban 2016-08-16 12:34
# Radscal -- I did look at all the so-called "Clinton Cheated" materials I could find online and saw lots of accusations such as you make here but NO evidence that meaningful cheating was actually done.

In fact is there have been NO proven cases of large scale ballot fixing in national elections in the modern history of the US.

Why no cheating? From my own experience as a long time precinct officer, I'd say that large scale cheating is just too hard to do successfully.

For one thing, the Diebold company, the county's largest voting machine provider, has an excellent reputation for both corporate honesty and secure manufacturing practices. Plus, its machines and counting practices are checked regularly in precincts all over the country by suspicious folks like you.

For another, from my experience as a precinct officer in three states, county precincts provide ready access for party poll watching at every level from local to national elections. In short, large scale cheating is much harder to do than you think.

Finally, #Radscal, I suggest that you cease calling those who disagree with you "liar". In my experience, it is the folks who call others liars who are themselves the liars.
 
 
+7 # Radscal 2016-08-16 13:36
I do not believe that you've looked at the documented cases of election fraud that I and others have posted here repeatedly. I suspect you've looked at "debunking" evidence by HRC-supporters.

Prove me wrong. Explain the following:

This site has been archiving the overwhelming evidence of many different methods of election fraud in the Democratic Primary.

1) Targeted voter roll purges in many states (my 30+ year Democratic Party membership was changed without my input, but since I knew about it happening in earlier states, I discovered it and was able to repair it and vote). NYC Mayor de Blasio said the 130,000 Democrats purged from one county alone in NYC had been "targeted."

2) Targeted poling place closures, moving locations without notification, changing operating hours at the last minute, etc.

3) Whiting out Sanders votes from paper ballots.

4) Paper ballot tabulating machines that did not recognize properly marked Sanders votes.

5) And of course, computer voting machines that spat out results favoring HRC well beyond exit poll results.

https://electionfraud2016.wordpress.com

This legal organization has documented the above and more:

http://www.election-justice-usa.org/Democracy_Lost_Update1_EJUSA.pdf


ps. Diebold was forced out of the computer voting machine business years ago. That is now Dominion Voting Systems, and yes, it is owned by a Dominionist, the Christian Taliban who want to replace Constitutional Law with Biblical Law.
 
 
+3 # grandlakeguy 2016-08-17 10:24
Thank you for re-posting this again Radscal.

Unfortunately these Hillbots have the mindset of: "I wouldn't believe it even if it was true."

They are so fervent in supporting their evil queen that there is no consideration of ethical behaviour or integrity.
Those are weaknesses in their eyes.
 
 
+7 # Observer 47 2016-08-16 13:44
Quoting Caliban:
# Radscal
For one thing, the Diebold company, the county's largest voting machine provider, has an excellent reputation for both corporate honesty and secure manufacturing practices.


So....the fact that during the 2004 election cycle, Diebold's CEO issued an internal memo to the effect that the company would "do everything possible to re-elect George Bush," and then Kerry's win in Ohio changed in the wee hours of election night into a loss, means nothing, huh?
 
 
-4 # Caliban 2016-08-16 15:15
More accusations and no proof? Same old, same old, # Observer 47.

And the so-called Dominionist Takeover? Sorry, but the owners' personal religious preferences are no concern of the rest of us unless said owner chooses to actually take over the world one machine at a time.

When -- and if -- that process actually starts, please get it on RSN and I'll start to worry.
 
 
+2 # AshamedAmerican 2016-08-16 19:16
Unless, maybe, if your candidate was being cheated, you would/do not acknowledge the fraud even when others show/ed it to you. If you were not in either denial or on the payroll, you would be beyond worried.
 
 
-4 # Caliban 2016-08-17 01:49
My "candidate was being cheated"? I'm not sure what you are getting at with this remark. With Sanders out, the only thing I can say on "my candidate" is that it will not be that casino and game show guy from Jersey.

I will say again, however, that HRC won the Democratic nomination within the rules as they are commonly understood. I wish Sanders had won, and had he been a Democrat from the start (like Obama in 2008) I'm quite sure he would have done so.

But -- without Sanders in the race -- I plan to go with that party's chosen nominee, Senator Clinton.
 
 
0 # AshamedAmerican 2016-08-19 22:12
I meant that if your current candidate, HRC, had been a victim of election fraud, you might acknowledge it. But as it is, you do not acknowledge Radscal's breaking down (again) for you a list of types of fraud that did take place that benefited HRC.
 
 
+2 # crispy 2016-08-19 16:37
Quoting Caliban:
If Frank is as smart as you say he will he'll also know there is no hard evidence that meaningful primary thefts occurred. So don't get your mis-guided hopes up over the "election theft" non-issue.

Hopefully Frank (and many others) will do what every progressive now must do -- stop daydreaming about a Sanders presidency and start working to get the Sanders legislative program passed at every level of government from town councils to states legislatures -- and, of course, our fine US Houses of Congress.


1 in 77billion chances she won without fraud says Stanford study. look it up Caliban!
 
 
# Guest 2016-08-14 14:48
This comment has been deleted by Administrator
 
 
-44 # michael447 2016-08-14 14:50
Oh PULEEZE! You are just like Trump. "We didn't lose, they cheated! Whaa whaa."
 
 
+52 # Radscal 2016-08-14 15:18
BTW: Last week, HRC was campaigning in Florida.

She got some critical coverage when the father of the alleged Orlando Pulse Nightclub shooter was invited by the party to attend, and given a prominent seat on the stage right behind HRC.

But essentially unreported is that HRC also had Debbie Wasserman-Schul tz with her. HRC is putting all her political might into getting DWS reelected, against the progressive Tim Canova, and appeared with DWS at many campaign events.

Some may know that Canova has been trying to get DWS to debate him, and she's ducked even saying she refused. Well, last week she agreed to a debate.

A 15 minute debate! Canova rightly says that's ridiculous and is continuing to call for a genuine, substantive debate.
 
 
+13 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-14 20:48
@Radscal,
I've just read your comment and I'm trying to control the urge to vomit. : (
 
 
+23 # Vardoz 2016-08-14 18:18
Perhaps these energized tens millions will flock to Jill Stein in a desperate attempt to get someone in office with Bernie's values? Of course she would also face the election fraud mine field that Bernie had to endure. I think the documentary IRAQ FOR SALE: THE WAR PROFITEERS on utube points out who is part of the shadow govt that was mentioned and make to big decisions. The Democracy haters.
 
 
+9 # RLF 2016-08-15 06:04
What the hell is going on at The Guardian? Seems to be getting right squishy!
 
 
+7 # Navigatio di Brendani 2016-08-15 07:12
Frank is very premature in asking "Who is going to be the next Bernie?" After taking a well deserved rest, he is back in the political ring, landing haymakers...

His goal is to help install 100 progressive legislators, and judging by the momentum of his movement to date, he may even exceed that number.

While most folks were focused on the 2016 election, far-sighted Bernie knew his chances were slim and stayed focused on his Movement.

If he WAS elected this year, he would have had to battle a deeply entrenched Machine that certainly might have chewed him up and spit him out in 4 years like Carter and his outsider Georgia Mafia staff.

So Bernie's Plan B of using his Movement to build a much more solid foundation for a Democratic Socialist administration in 2020 is fucking BRILLIANT!

Frank sez Hillary's coming landslide will cause her to swerve to the right. I think just the opposite will happen because of the INCREASING, NOT DIMINISHING power of the Democratic Socialist Movement.

Feel the Bern again, people!
 
 
+1 # crispy 2016-08-19 16:42
She just nominated pro BIG_OIL (pro fracking, pro TPP)and anti-environmen t Ken Salazar as her transition team head... How progressive is that??
 
 
0 # AshamedAmerican 2016-08-19 22:24
I guess the current answer is now we have to elect HRC, "hold her feet to the fire" and hold all of her appointees' "feet to the fire" too.

But my answer remains the same. We must get past being brainwashed to always vote for an evil the media declares "electable", and always vote for a 99%er.
 
 
+3 # Anarchist 23 2016-08-16 14:07
On the up side, at least TPTB didn't kill Bernmie, like they did to RFK in that memorable nightmare year 1968...leading to Nixon/Humphrey. ...leading to this....like with all illnesses, the country must reach the crisis point and either recover...or die....some thought by electing Nixon the Revolution would occur sooner...they were wrong....nor did Ray-Gun/Bu$hCo halt the ongoing catastrophe for the average and minority citizens...so here we are...in the post-'New Pearl Harbor' of PNAC's dreams...let's hope the mass of our population can finally see beyond the constant propaganda which shapes their views. We think of the US as the Rooseveltian US I suppose, when we pulled together, aspired to a greater democracy and a more universal common welfare ...as mandated in the Constitution BTW...or the post WWII prosperity...wh ich really existed for only a short time...say 1952 to 1973...and for the most of this time, the USA has been at war. Think about that elephant!Then think back on our comparatively short but extraordinarily bloody history. Given the excessive brutality of our present society, we may be at the crisis point between death and life as a country and as people.
 
 
+2 # davehaze 2016-08-17 21:57
Grandlakeguy

The blatent election thief is not allowed to be mentioned. We must pretend as Americans that our docoracy is pure, and if not exactly pure, the best on earth. That Hilary won fair and square. Blah, blah, blah, and the sore-head, poor-loser, ignorant progressives should just get over it and VOTE for their own destruction.
 
 
+104 # RMDC 2016-08-14 12:14
I don't think there was ever a chance that Hillary would have even the slightest interest in progressives or the left wing of the democratic party. She knew she was going to steal the primary from Sanders, so she was polite to his face while her back room surrogates did the dirty work. Now those surrogates have turned on Trump and are chopping him off at the knees -- or maybe somewhat higher up.

It is a given that Trump is a terrible candidate, but he won because he actually mentioned things like oppostion to TPP and other trade agreements, breaking up banks, demanding US corps return jobs back home, getting out of the Wars in the middle east, working constructively with Russia, and other things that ordinary Americans wanted. Trump is no progressive but he did seize on populist issues.

When Trump is gone, only Hilary and her friends in the banks and weapons makers will run the nation. And they will tell us that we should be grateful because Hillary saved us from Trump.

The american oligarchs chose Hillary as the next president a long time ago. Sanders and Trump were always only minor inconveniences, but the sort of public nuisances they have to tolerate in order that the masses keep believing in the myths of American democracy, freedom, and the greatest nation on earth.

Sanders was only a bump in the road to the white house. And Trump is just noise in the system.
 
 
+45 # guomashi 2016-08-14 12:47
Sad but true.
I am already getting my expat residency papers in order.
It's not going to be pretty.
 
 
-47 # michael447 2016-08-14 14:40
Goodbye. As the say, don't let the door hit you in the ....
 
 
+22 # Majikman 2016-08-14 18:30
You're new here. Apparently the MO of you Shillery trolls is to enter a house, shit on the floor, and leave laughing.
 
 
+7 # PCPrincess 2016-08-15 11:18
OH HELL NO! No one disses guomashi without being called out if I happen upon it. The same goes true for anyone dissing on any of my fellow long-time leftists on this site.
 
 
-12 # Navigatio di Brendani 2016-08-15 07:31
For shame, Guo! Are you really yet another One Round boxer biting the dust? I thot you had the makings of a Warrior, and that is why I gave you so damned much Tough Love teaching you the Warriors Path yesterday, but I see I was mistaken, young man. If you had actually listened to and believed in Bernie you would see that in all likelihood, as I point out above, his main objective was building a sold foundation for a truly EFFECTIVE Democratic Socialist admin in 2020.

Why am I guessing this is your first election cycle as an adult, Guo? Maybe coz you are deeply into instant gratification, and if you don't immediately get what you want, you cry a lot then quit?
 
 
+9 # guomashi 2016-08-15 08:29
Quoting Navigatio di Brendani:


Why am I guessing this is your first election cycle as an adult, Guo?


Because you are stupid.
 
 
-12 # Navigatio di Brendani 2016-08-15 08:36
Kudos for a memorably high-brow reply that ignores the main points of my post. You did the same thing yesterday, ignoring data and advice and responding with little baby-kicks, instead of being the ass-kicker many of your posts have shown you to be at times. Well, since you are running scared and fleeing the country, it will certainly be your LAST election cycle. See ya... Send us a post card.

I know, I know, you will say you were just kidding, as you usually do when someone takes you to task for what you write...the Coward's Path, not the Warrior's Path.

Granted, I may be the Sparring Partner from Hell, who doesn't give a rat's ass about upvotes. But you are young enough to actually enter politics or academia and ACT on your philosophies. But if you won't even get in the ring with my sorry, stupid, old ass, what REAL battles ahead are you going to win?

Ancient Shaolin wisdom:"Patienc e, Gwasshoppa!"
 
 
+9 # PCPrincess 2016-08-15 11:21
(Sigh) Another calling out. You do not know anything about the poster guomashi. You didn't stop long enough from bashing a poster personally to make a valid point. Therefore, why respond? Secondly, there is no more 'time' for patience. Patience and a dollar won't even buy a cup of coffee anymore.
 
 
-1 # Bryan 2016-08-16 01:49
''Ancient Shaolin wisdom:"Patienc e, Gwasshoppa!">>>

Yea well..

“He who hesitates is lost.” ― Marcus Porcius Cato.

"Time and tide wait for no man." - Geoffrey Chaucer

You and Bernie missed the boat.
 
 
0 # Anarchist 23 2016-08-16 14:26
Of copurse some of us have been waiting since 1968 with meager results...just look around! so I can sympathize with wanting it NOW...there may not be a future as we conceive it...alas HRC is not really the candidate we needed and Bernie was...and since this country has a long tradition of election stealing, I believe the count was definitely manipulated...i f the country continues on the same path...getting out may be a good idea...like leaving Germany in 1938...because the forces unleashed by Mein Drumpf are not going to go quietly away!
 
 
+71 # jdd 2016-08-14 13:30
By basing her entire campaign on bashing Trump, Goldwater Girl Hillary, with the help of the controlled media, is quietly assembling a nightmare team of neo-con advisers that are clearly branding Putin's Russia as "the enemy." Meanwhile Obama has re-launched war on Libya and is openly supporting Al-Nusra against the attempt of Assad and Russia to liberate Aleppo while Congress and the American people sleep.
 
 
+63 # REDPILLED 2016-08-14 14:35
Also, in a threat to all life on earth, Obama has started a reckless, unnecessary "modernization" of the U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal, with weapons which are allegedly "more accurate" and "more useful" to the Dr. Strangeloves in "our" military.

Of course, this has provoke Russia and China to respond in kind.

Cold War 2.0 may be even worse than the first one, and, this time, we may not escape nuclear holocaust.
 
 
+3 # Anarchist 23 2016-08-16 14:30
And in the Apocalypse Sweepstakes, it's that reliable race horse WWIII inching ahead of the pack, closely followed now by Global Warming, Fuk-U-Shima, Plankton Decimation and...
 
 
+40 # Radscal 2016-08-14 15:12
Yep. Additionally, there are 7,000 new "rebels" (really foreign mercenaries and jihadi nut jobs) amassing in Jordan on Syria's border.

They're bragging that they've been armed and trained by the US and GB, and are likely going to invade Syria and force Assad and his allies to divert forces from Aleppo.

At the same time, the Ukrainian army and private militias are ramping up shelling in the Donbass and amassing on the border with Crimea.

It looks like the Deep State is determined to "prove" the world is a dangerous place that requires the "experience" of HRC.

More thousands of innocents, especially women and children are set to be sacrificed for HRC's goals.
 
 
-5 # Navigatio di Brendani 2016-08-15 08:28
Rad- In my shortest Godot article (one sentence long) , I propose that overpopulation is the main driver behind nearly all our problems. As you probably know, David Rockefeller and his power elite lap dogs have long espoused Malthusian mass birth control of the great unwashed masses. This often involves the CIA fomenting civil wars with the elite sitting back and warming their hands over the ensuing conflagration, with a few token dollars for relief to make the public think they give a rat's ass.

But there is a far cleaner, saner, and more controllable and predictable, way of controlling population so Earth doesn't turn into frigging Mars:

Skyrocketing energy production, and oil in particular, is unquestionably the main enabler of overpop. So if we reduce worldwide energy production by 2 percent every year for the next 35 years, our pop should settle down to a SUSTAINABLE 3 billion or so, instead of the projected suicidal 10 billion.

I am not off topic here, I believe. As you know, I always seek root causes of problems. So many folks get caught up it the Blue Smoke and Mirrors and while I dabble in that shit, I will always be a deep historian by nature.

Waddya think re turning down the Oil Tap?
 
 
+4 # PCPrincess 2016-08-15 11:24
On this we can agree that over-population is a definite sister cause of what ails us. However, what is it that pushes human's to continuously reproduce, in many cases, without thought to family planning or the effect on our sustainability?
 
 
0 # Navigatio di Brendani 2016-08-15 16:42
Did you read my post? Skyrocketing OIL PRODUCTION is root cause of overpop. EVERY manmade object you see around you has direct ties to oil.

Populations could not spread to desert or cold regions without energy production first. Search:

Google Images human population and energy production graph

Human pop stayed well under 1 billion for 50,000 years until first modern oil well was drilled in 1880s. By 1900 Oil Boom was on, followed 3-4 years later by pop boom.

Overpop is thus a physics equation not a state of mind as you imagine. Energy also needed FIRST to produce food for masses. Reduce oil production gradually and pop will fall gradually, regardless of people's individual beliefs or philosophies.
 
 
+1 # crispy 2016-08-19 21:29
"Google Image human population and energy production graph" CORRELATION ! No causality here.
Your views would create suffering and more famine I guess that would KILL some more than now.
I love it!
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2016-08-15 18:42
The UN says we could feed the current population for an additional $30 billion per year.

And that's without making any changes to the type of food we produce or the technologies used.

Overpopulation is used as an excuse for the deaths of 50,000 children every single day due to poverty, and all the manufactured scarcity, while one classroom would hold all the people who are hoarding 1/2 of all the world's wealth.
 
 
+4 # A_Har 2016-08-15 20:34
Quoting Navigatio di Brendani:
Rad- In my shortest Godot article (one sentence long) , I propose that overpopulation is the main driver behind nearly all our problems.

Actually, the troubles we face have to do with a number of converging crises--any one of which would be a deal killer. This is well described in an old article by Matthew Stein which was posted on Huffington Post in 2010:

The Perfect Storm: Six Trends Converging on CollapseThe Perfect Storm: Six Trends Converging on Collapse
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matthew-stein/the-perfect-storm-six-tre_b_582779.html

05/19/2010 10:00 pm ET | Updated May 25, 2011

"There are dark clouds gathering on the horizon. They are the clouds of six hugely troubling global trends, climate change being just one of the six. Individually, each of these trends is a potential civilization buster. Collectively, they are converging to form the perfect storm—a storm of such magnitude that it will dwarf anything that mankind has ever seen. If we are unsuccessful in our attempts to calm this storm, without a doubt it will destroy life as we know it on Planet Earth!"
 
 
+4 # Anarchist 23 2016-08-16 14:32
Over-population a problem? The answer is simple: give women control over their fertility. But in the US, OTOH.....
 
 
+2 # AshamedAmerican 2016-08-16 19:58
Yes, let's turn down that oil tap. But that is not the cause of the problem at hand.

That the ruling class wishes to seize and control all oil taps, and all other sources of wealth, power and control is what causes the wars we and our allies create.

It is predictable that there would eventually be wars over crucial scarce resources. Creating a sustainable economy is a worthy and important goal.

But you are "off topic here", as the "root causes of" the current wars are not due to overpopulation.
 
 
0 # crispy 2016-08-19 21:26
are you saying Indian men think about the price and availability of gasoline before they f-ck without condoms?
Really, never heard of such theory
 
 
-30 # Rain17 2016-08-14 17:35
Goldwater Girl Hillary? She was a teenager at the time. People can change their opinions. The much-beloved Elizabeth Warren was a Republican well into her adulthood.
 
 
+31 # lorenbliss 2016-08-14 18:29
@Rain17: Yes, people CAN change their opinions, but to anyone who studies Hillary the Horrible's Goldwater-Girl policies, it's obvious she has NOT.

Indeed -- as I keep saying -- the most useful task some major-media pundit could do to help save the world from the deadliest threat since the Cuban Missile Crisis is get a copy of Barry Goldwater's "Conscience of a Conservative" and compare Barry the Belligerent's ideology with Hillary the Horrible's.

Allowing for linguistic and circumstantial differences -- John Bircher/McCarth yite Barry Nuke-em's 1964, Neocon/Neolib/M cCarthyite* Hillary Nuke-em's 2016 -- the two are identical.
_________
*Anyone who knowing employs Joe McCarthy's Big Lie Russophobic smear tactics is legitimately damned as "McCarthyite."
 
 
-29 # Rain17 2016-08-14 19:19
Again she was a teenager at the time. The "Goldwater Girl" smear is ridiculous.
 
 
+30 # AshamedAmerican 2016-08-14 20:46
And again, she has not changed. She is a fascist warmonger threatening Russia.
 
 
+15 # jimallyn 2016-08-15 00:40
Quoting Rain17:
The "Goldwater Girl" smear is ridiculous.

It's not a smear. It's the truth, and it's obvious to anyone who has their eyes open.
 
 
+10 # A_Har 2016-08-15 15:03
Quoting Rain17:
Again she was a teenager at the time. The "Goldwater Girl" smear is ridiculous.
Says Rain17 who doesn't know and doesn't WANT TO KNOW.
 
 
+1 # crispy 2016-08-19 21:32
too much RAIN, without windshield wipers obscures one's view
 
 
+11 # RLF 2016-08-15 06:11
Seems to me that her cuddling up to a future dictator in Turkey has to do with Hillary's Russia hate as well.
 
 
-3 # dipierro4 2016-08-14 20:38
I probably don't agree with you on much else, but I do on that point. I think we demean ourselves when we take something a person did as a teenager and throw it back at them like that. We become the mirror image of a Trump. We are better than that.
 
 
+23 # Radscal 2016-08-14 21:43
More than 30 years later, in 1996, HRC Clinton told NPR’s Scott Simon that her political beliefs were “rooted in the conservatism that I was raised with."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511348775

She has certainly adopted many of the domestic social issues of "identity politics," though even there, she's bee very late to "evolve."

But she remains a Cold Warrior, Wall Street and corporate "free market" supporter and fiscal conservative.
 
 
+15 # RMDC 2016-08-15 05:53
The WaPo has a puff piece today on Hillary's transition from conservative to progressive.

Hillary Clinton’s breakout moment at Wellesley College
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clintons-breakout-moment-at-wellesley-college/2016/08/14/18039d3c-5bfe-11e6-9aee-8075993d73a2_story.html?wpisrc=nl_politics&wpmm=1

"She was a college conservative, then seized the chance to change her image."


It is really appalling how much the mainstream media is puffing up Hillary and tearing down Trump. The media decides who the next president will be. They are doing what Walter Lippman said they should do "manufacturing consent" among the masses for the policies of the oligarchs.
 
 
+5 # JoanF 2016-08-14 13:59
Trump didn't appeal to his base because of any serious issues, it was his racist white supremacy that attracted his followers. With the demographic changes we are seeing, these people will be more and more a minority.
 
 
+10 # Eliza D 2016-08-14 14:30
You are so wrong to dismiss half the US population as racists. Remember, before his recent meltdowns, Trump was polling neck in neck with Hillary. I know many intelligent people who supported and still support Trump. The first serious issue of concern is trade deals. They don't want any more jobs outsourced to other countries. Secondly, they want the brakes put on immigration. They are frightened by the strain being put on our resources by unchecked immigration. We have droughts, wildfires and tornados whose damage must be paid for. We cannot pay for these as well as the cost of relocating the populations of Syria, El Salvador and whatever other war-torn countries, into the borders of the US. Until we accept that these folks have legitimate concerns and try to dialogue with them, we will continue in this horrible cesspool of violent polarization.
 
 
+24 # kgrad 2016-08-14 14:46
Quoting Eliza D:
You are so wrong [...] They are frightened by the strain being put on our resources by unchecked immigration. We have droughts, wildfires and tornados whose damage must be paid for. [...]


What part does climate change play in these tribulations? If climate change impacts are not addressed, what else matters in the long run?
 
 
+25 # Eliza D 2016-08-14 15:47
Of course climate change is fueling most of these disasters. Syria's civil war is a direct result of droughts. But somehow in the US, we have half the population who equate acknowledging and fixing climate change with liberals who just want to raise taxes and spend, spend, spend. How do we get conservatives on board with making climate change a priority unless we draw them into the circle?. You are right, kgrad, we need to be working on Mother Earth as of yesterday.
 
 
+33 # DaveEwoldt 2016-08-14 16:11
Well, Eliza D, we could start by being truthful ourselves if we want to get conservatives on board. So this response is in regard to your first comment on this sub-thread as well.

Half the population is not supporting Trump. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats can entice more than 20-25% of the eligible electorate to show up for them on election day, and I'd be surprised if Trump really even has half of that. So, we're actually looking at about 10% real support.

Trade, immigration, and war are intimately interrelated. Economic growth is directly responsible for global warming, and immigrants and refugees are the natural consequence of stealing or destroying lands and livelihoods.

And the vast majority of Americans--perh aps not Fox News viewers--unders tand global warming is real and support doing something about it, even if it costs them a bit.

So, let's stop the disastrous trade deals, stop invading sovereign nations for wars of choice, and concentrate on mitigating global warming--which we'd have the money for if we stopped the first two. These are things the right and left agree on. The only ones who don't are the 1% who believe in neoliberal economics and the neoconservative militarism that requires.
 
 
+21 # lorenbliss 2016-08-14 18:49
I agree with the absolute importance of climate change; we have been raping and otherwise abusing Mother Earth since the advent of patriarchy.

But climate change will be irrelevant if Hillary the Horrible and her Goldwater Gitl, nuke-the-world foreign policy exterminates all recognizable life on this planet.
 
 
+18 # DaveEwoldt 2016-08-14 21:28
Hey Loren... While patriarchy is much worse than matriarchy, the core problem is hierarchy. As soon as you set any group, based on any criteria, above another you've set the stage for inequity. The main things that emerge from that condition are resentment and vengeance.
 
 
+11 # lorenbliss 2016-08-14 21:44
Indeed!
 
 
+2 # Caliban 2016-08-15 14:51
Hello # DaveEwoldt --

Your comment on hierarchy is intriguing.

But, do you have knowledge of any human social order in known history that has NOT formed itself in some form of hierarchy?
 
 
+7 # DaveEwoldt 2016-08-15 17:57
Hi Caliban... yeah, actually quite a few, from prehistory up until modern times--although current examples are fewer and fewer as dominator cultures are pretty successful at exterminating them.

Sometimes called partnership societies, Earth-centered peoples are based on networks of mutuality, which modern systems science is coming to understand is the way life itself actually works. In order to create and sustain life, the tendency of living organisms (which includes humans, we're not separate from nature) is self-organizing into networks of mutuality that support the whole. Like MLK, Jr. said, we all do better when we all do better.

One thing that doesn't work well is trying to interpret the social structures of partnership societies from the perspective of our hierarchical structure. The main problem is that's the only language we have. We assume there has to be a King/Queen calling the shots. It turns out it is more efficient and effective for ruling counsels, for lack of a better term, to work together in achieving common goals. But only one of the roles on these counsels is what we would assume to be a supreme leader. This is one of the mistakes Europeans made when first encountering indigenous North American cultures.

Anyway, I'm running out of allowable characters, but that's a quick abstract.
 
 
+5 # guomashi 2016-08-15 08:33
Quoting lorenbliss:
I agree with the absolute importance of climate change; we have been raping and otherwise abusing Mother Earth since the advent of patriarchy.


The patriarchy meme gets old quickly.
The rape of the planet begins with agricultural cultivation, and the depletion of the soil. All of that took place under the aegis of matriarchal symbolism.

We rape the planet because we are rapists. The only people who do not do so are hunter-gatherer cultures.
 
 
-3 # Caliban 2016-08-15 15:00
"We are rapists", # guomashi? According to The Donald, "They're rapists", not we fine folks north of the Rio Grande.
 
 
+5 # AshamedAmerican 2016-08-15 18:28
You said earlier that you are a "sincere" person, Caliban. Why do you completely ignore Guomashi's point, and the topic of subconversation to take a swipe at Trump, out of the blue? It would seem that you are "sincere"ly here solely to benefit HRC.
 
 
-1 # Caliban 2016-08-16 18:17
Fair question, # AshamedAmerican --

The swipe at Trump was for the benefit of the increasing number of Republicans trying to hijack this liberal site.

Of Guomashi's point, I'm sorry to say that he doesn't seem to know the difference between "rape" and ordinary, instinctual survival skills.

Thus I find the notion that "The rape of the planet begins with agricultural cultivation" to be simultaneously tendentious and foolish. You might as well say that the rape of the planet began when lions began to kill antelope.

The planet is being raped, but this is being done by businesses and governments who ignore well known principles of conservation.
 
 
0 # AshamedAmerican 2016-08-19 22:59
Do you think Guomashi is a Republican? Do you think everyone who advocates voting for Stein is a Republican?

I find his point interesting. And it seems certain that he is right that peoples have depleted the soil of their surroundings and were forced to move elsewhere. And under certain conditions, maybe survival skills force people to rape the land around them.

Your last paragraph describes an important fact of our time, as does DaveEwolt's excellent description below. But in earlier, and quite possibly future, times, Guomashi's point could be quite valid, and important, as well.
 
 
+6 # DaveEwoldt 2016-08-15 18:12
I don't disagree with you on much, guomashi, but this is one of those.

Patriarchy is actually pretty self-centered and anti-life. The problem is that humans have the unique ability to allow stories to substitute for reality. Yes, we can chose to act like a cancer or exploit others in different ways, but that's not the only alternative, and we do have the ability to make different choices--and enforce those choices at a cultural level.

Agricultural cultivation isn't the problem that animal husbandry is, but both can be done sustainably. The problem with sustainability is, that in order to be defined in an ecologically sound manner, carrying capacity must be factored in. This means population, consumption, and waste assimilation must be in balance with ecosystem regeneration, recharge, and replenishment rates.

Any permaculturist knows this. And today we know how to rebuild topsoil, and how long it takes. So the only time agriculture is problematic is when we, through religious dictates or other disconnected reasons, allow population to get too large, or consumption and greed to get out of hand, or any of the other ways we forget about the balance we should be sustaining with our living world.
 
 
+13 # lfeuille 2016-08-14 20:33
Yes lets, but how. It won't happen with Hillary in charge.
 
 
+9 # DaveEwoldt 2016-08-14 21:24
lfeuille, let's make these the core issues of employment--if policies and legislation don't further these core goals, then no more cushy jobs in State houses or Congress. Then it's less relevant who's in charge--at least as long as Hillary can be kept from creating nuclear winter just to prove she has a bigger pair than Bill (or whatever the core trigger is for her delusions of grandeur).

The one-percenters were not born with an aristocracy gene, and it's past time we quit treating them like they were. People and planet are more important than profit and power.
 
 
+14 # Radscal 2016-08-14 21:52
Syria's "civil war" is the result of US Empire stirring up legitimate opposition and then arming, funding and shipping in foreign jihadi nut jobs and mercenaries.

The drought was a real, region-wide phenomena, but it did NOT result in "civil wars" in any of the neighboring US allies.

But the US plan to "regime change" Assad goes back to the 1990s "Project for a New American Century" white papers. In September, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld had it on his list of 7 countries to topple.

Rumsfeld's 5-year plan has taken much longer, but right now, Iran is the only country from his list that has not been destroyed or neutered.
 
 
+22 # Ralph 2016-08-14 15:57
Sad to say, the US created this worldwide refugee crisis. John and Jane Working Class might not understand the consequences of voting for the corporatist duopoly but there are consequences for their ignorance. The chickens are coming home to roost and we aren't going to stop them by voting Dem/Repub. Hold onto your hats folks, things about to go from bad to worse.
 
 
-5 # Caliban 2016-08-15 14:39
Hi, Eliza D --

The outsourcing of American jobs overseas has been going on for decades.

Indeed, the primary rationale for trade agreements is to try to build global trade compensations from Mexico, Thailand, etc. for the job opportunities already being lost in the US without such agreements.
 
 
+3 # Anarchist 23 2016-08-16 15:10
The real strain on our resources is by the military industrial complex which hogs 55% of the budget 'keeping us safe' and enriching further those corporations who out-source the jobs and own the news. Until the Trump voters stop being caped by the matador, distracted by scapegoating Muslims, immigrants, gays, women etc, etc, etc, things will continue to go the Oligarch's way. Yes, Trump has a point both on TPP and Russia...but unfortunately his solutions are all wrong.
 
 
+32 # Sunflower 2016-08-14 14:13
Quoting RMDC:
I don't think there was ever a chance that Hillary would have even the slightest interest in progressives or the left wing of the democratic party. She knew she was going to steal the primary from Sanders, so she was polite to his face while her back room surrogates did the dirty work.
The american oligarchs chose Hillary as the next president a long time ago. Sanders and Trump were always only minor inconveniences, but the sort of public nuisances they have to tolerate in order that the masses keep believing in the myths of American democracy, freedom, and the greatest nation on earth.
...
Sanders was only a bump in the road to the white house. And Trump is just noise in the system.


Speaking of Clinton `friends' consider Victoria Nuland, wife of PNAC author Robert Kagan. Check out this article:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/clintons-hawk-in-waiting/

Not only is Hillary not progressive, she is a
more accurately characterized as a Neocon.

Robert Kagan himself is fundraising for her:
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/06/23/exclusive-prominent-gop-neoconservative-to-fundraise-for-hillary-clinton/


From Maureen Dowd, in today's NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/14/opinion/sunday/the-perfect-gop-nominee.html


I'm not sure leaving the country will help you--after all the Neocons want complete control of the rest of the world in the `New American Century' so you could be bombed like
everyone else not in the USA.
 
 
+15 # lorenbliss 2016-08-14 19:03
@Sunflower: In absolute agreement, but with one editorial suggestion. You wrote, "Not only is Hillary not a progressive, she is more accurately described as a Neocon." It would be more accurate had you written "Not only is Hillary not a progressive, she is more accurately described as a fascist."

Apropos Ms. Dowd -- and thank you very much for the link as my professional-co urtesy NYT subscription died in 2010 -- she is one of the Gray Lady's writers for whom I still have considerable respect.

Indeed I recommend we all read it. It is probably the first mainstream-medi a piece that actually dares report the truth about Hillary the Horrible.
 
 
+18 # futhark 2016-08-14 20:09
Absolutely correct, Sunflower. The PNAC is, in its own way, as abhorrent as the KKK and Ms. Clinton should be questioned on why she thinks this group is supporting her, just as Mr. Trump has been pilloried for his acceptance of Klan support.
 
 
-1 # Caliban 2016-08-16 18:30
# futhark -- I'm not sure that either Trump or Clinton should be attacked or supported on the bases of announcements of support or opposition by third parties.

Better they be judged by a stern analysis of what we know of their policy preferences from their written and spoken statements and from relevant prior actions.

If we are concerned about the motives of supporters we should make that inquiry of directly to said "supporters".
 
 
+44 # Willy M. 2016-08-14 13:19
If you all would just quit quitting and take the next step: organize at the city, county and state levels to put progressives in power - take a page from the right wing Republicans who took over governors, statehouses and smaller city governments and are now dictating to the U.S. House.
Or go ahead and wring your hands, moan bitch and complain and do nothing. The rest of us will do it without you.
 
 
+15 # jimmyjames 2016-08-14 13:28
Who are you to say that people who respond on RSN are quitting? And we have every right to "bitch and complain" about the stolen Democratic Primary season. And if Trump were in the lead right now (I never believe the polls), the Clinton machine would just steal it away from him anyway, or he would be assassinated (the Clintons are good at that as well).

So stop complaining about our complaining. We have every right to do so. And you said nothing about what YOU might be doing to change the predicament we are in.
 
 
+23 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-14 14:11
@JJ,
Thank you.

@Willy M.,
As much as Trump makes my flesh crawl, I agree, at least somewhat, with what JJ has said. Even though I think Trump & Clinton are in cahoots, I think she's capable of getting rid of if he's no longer useful or becomes a legit threat. (And I don't mean that 2nd amendment crack, I mean a real and explicit threat.).


I won't ask what constructive contribution(s) you've made or plan to make. But, I sense that you're making assumptions about us and you're simply paying attention.

Speaking of paying attention, you say "the rest of us will do it without you." Will do? As in the future tense? Dude, some of us have been working on it for a long time. Sounds like you're the one who needs to catch up.
 
 
+14 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-14 14:13
@Willy M.,
Correction: I sense you're simply NOT paying attention. At. All.
 
 
-3 # Willy M. 2016-08-15 11:05
Did I not say to elect progressives? Can you identify a progressive? Are there no progressives available in your state? Are there none among you who are progressives and who might decide to run for office? The reality is the reality; get over the loss and get busy. You can still make attempts to keep HRC as honest as you're able while still thinking ahead to the next mid-terms and the next general.
 
 
+8 # PCPrincess 2016-08-15 11:32
Please understand Willy that we are at a point where we've been through the farce of democratic elections enough times and now (luckily) have a conduit (internet) to which the propaganda can now be easily seen by any who wish to see it, that many of us have reached a point where we fully believe that working within the current system will never create a fair, ethical, and healthy system for Americans.
 
 
+4 # Aliazer 2016-08-15 12:13
jimmyjames, you are right about "complaining" but it is futile as well as a total waste of time!!

We must need to recognize that our country and government has been stolen from us and that we need to take it back!!

Taking it back, means that our society and country cannot be allowed to be splintered into so many pieces which, by and large, are the creation of the very powerful with "divide and conquer" tactics.

I think the time has arrived to assail that power at its roots. There are numberless ways to accomplish that. Failing that, we'll be dead as a country, as a democracy and as a people!! We need to survive as "US" and stand up to be counted!!!
 
 
+1 # Sandor 2016-08-14 14:06
The system just flipped my "thumbs up" to a thumbs down". RSN better change their system. I've seen this happen far too many times!

Willy M. is quite right. And there are plenty of signs that what he advises is indeed happening. It will be about time.

The enthusiasm for the Green Party that I see in so many of the comments on RSN seems to me to be altogether idealism, and self-defeating. Nader used and abused the Greens, and then left them holding the bag--from which they have never recovered. They can become a serious force in National politics only if they elect far more candidates at the state and local level than they have so far managed to do.

I can certainly wish them luck, for most of their platform is admirable. But it does not differ in any significant way from the aspirations of the Bernie supporters, most of whom will remain (and continue to work hard, I hope) within the Democratic Party.

Those of us who live in Seattle know very well that we live in a progressive bubble. Even here we need more genuine hardworking progressives to run for office. Some of those will be Socialists. Will any of them be Greens?

But outside our bubble? Progressives have to run for office, and WIN state and local elections. The Koch brothers know that State and Local is where the power really is. We have to know that too, and act on it.
 
 
+19 # Henry 2016-08-14 14:20
Quoting Sandor:
The system just flipped my "thumbs up" to a thumbs down". RSN better change their system. I've seen this happen far too many times!


This happens when other people are reading the same comment and voting at the same time.
 
 
+12 # djnova50 2016-08-14 14:47
Sandor, it is not the system. If you give a thumbs up to one of the other comments; but, 3 people give thumbs down while you were reading the essay, then what you will see when you give your thumbs up is a negative number. That's how it works. If you disagree with a comment and give it a thumbs down; but, others agree with it and give it thumbs up, what you will see is a positive number.
 
 
+9 # Ralph 2016-08-14 16:08
"The system just flipped my "thumbs up" to a thumbs down". RSN better change their system. I've seen this happen far too many times!"

This is an old style voting system. There is no automatic refresh of votes in your web browser. This means that as you take the time to read the article and comments, you are not seeing the current voting tabulations. When you do vote, the count for that comment is updated. When you see your up vote register as a down vote, that means two other people down voted it while you took the time to up vote it. Refresh your browser and make your vote quickly to see it register properly.
 
 
+7 # economagic 2016-08-14 20:44
Exactly. That is the technically correct explanation, perhaps too technical for some people to understand.
 
 
+16 # markovchhaney 2016-08-14 14:29
How are you getting from point A to point Q, Willy? I don't hear anyone quitting. But it's imperative to keep people aware of what they'll be getting in Hillary-monster .
 
 
-13 # Rain17 2016-08-14 17:51
Willy M.--Don't you know? It's much easier to complain!
 
 
+1 # Patriot 2016-08-19 00:19
Willy M, you're on the right track. Over the last 40 years or so, Repubs have steadiy, doggedly, assumed control of huge swathes of public offices, and, by the same dogged effort, persuaded millions to buy their take on government and society.

I sat downm severa years ago, to think my way through the puzzle of why Republicans seem to be so much more successful at reaching their goals than Democrats, and came to two conclusions:

Democrats seem to me to be live-and-let-li ve people. Also, as the detestible Clinton very astutely pointed out, Democrats have to fall in love with a candidtate in order to support him/her (end her comment), while Republicans do what they're told, more or less. (Nothing is ever so simple, so cut-and-dried, but bear with me.)

Statistically, we are a left-leaning nation. Of course. Aren't we descendants of the people who rebelled against the British yoke of taxation, of control over where we bought everything, of quartering troops and lack of representation? We certainly are! But we're also descendants of the Loyalists, who adhered to the Crown because...it was the Crown. And those long-ago rebels and loyalists have metamorphasized into todays radical/progres sive/liberal Democrats and conservative/re actionary Republicans. We're still a nation of people who choose either to keep loosenng our bonds, or to keep adhering to what we conceive as an orderly, well-discipline d society.
 
 
+1 # Patriot 2016-08-19 00:29
Democrats, jusding from all the pople I could think of at the time that I knew called themselves Democrats, or liberals (no progressives on the horizon then) were mostly interesting in being left to find their own way, without being hindered by imposed restrictions or limitations. They didn't favor a lot of rules or laws because they didn't want to be bound by same. They also weren't great respectors of authority, cachet, or class/privilege . And wealth wasn't overly impressive, either, because they strove to have wealth of their own someday.
The Republicans I could think of, on the other had, were people to whom order--especial ly hierarchy--seem ed very important, who respected authority and wealthy quite a lot. They were proper, prim, very upstanding members of the community, and tended to regard Democrats as (dirty) "activists", which was pronounced with pursed lips, as if actually saying "anarchists".

The critical point seemed to me to be that Democrats wanted to give our various community and national "systems" a good swfit kick in the pants now and then, to get them back into proper working order, while Republicans never took their hands off the tiller or their eyes off all the gauges.

Republicans worked steadily and unceasingly to accomplish what they wanted and demolish what they didn't like, while Democrats were much more haphazard, but far more fervent once roused.
 
 
0 # Patriot 2016-08-19 00:42
Neocon and neolibs, I think, all are far more characteristic of Republicans than Democrats, because Democrats usually are too busy leading their own lives to become very wrapped up in larger, broader matters, while Republicans seem to be easily persuaded to be "worker ants".

I'm not at certain that I've made my thoughts clear, but, the problem we now face is that, if we want to try to head off the ultimate (fast-approachi ng) uninhabitabilit y of the planet and the equally fast-approachin g abrogation of the Constitution, all of us Democrats need to dig in and work like Republicans, singlemindedly and tirelessly, to protect what matters to us.

Get the teens in the neighborhood to babysit the little people and got to PTA and City Council meetings. Set aside one night a week and write to state legislators and congressmen. Set aside another night and read, both history and current books about politics and government. At least once a month, get together with at least a dozen neighbors and discuss public affairs (local, state, national, international). Spend one weekend afternoon, and maybe vacation time, helping with the environment and wild animals. Start a "victory" garden in the neighborhood. Get involved.

Consumerism (not capitalism) is killing us; it's as atrificial as a diet of popcorn, pizza, and chocolate, and just as unsustaining and unsustainable. One way to bring the greedy capitalists to their knees is to stop supporting them and start supporting one another.
 
 
+10 # backwards_cinderella 2016-08-14 13:25
AND get it straight: Trump destroyed himself ON PURPOSE. He's been working with Clinton ALL ALONG. I'm sure it was a REALLY GOOD DEAL for him.
 
 
+20 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-14 13:52
@b_c,
THANK YOU. As the saying goes, we've had this conversation goes and I'll give 'em credit. They're good. They're amazingly good.

@Mr. Frank,
As for the next Sanders. We've still got this Sanders and the movement, OUR movement is absolutely not over. I must agree w/glg and respectfully suggest that you didn't complete your homework before submitting your piece.
 
 
+18 # grandlakeguy 2016-08-14 14:00
WikiLeaks has promised many more leaked emails!

If there is proof positive that the primary was stolen then there is a good probability that HRC will have to step aside for him!
 
 
+20 # hwmcadoo 2016-08-14 14:26
With both candidates involved in multiple criminal actions and enterprises, in a democracy they would have been indicted by now. They are VIPs and it is unlikely for either but the corrupt systems that may let them off also makes the laws into a weapon so either could be indicted by irritating the power elite.
 
 
-7 # kgrad 2016-08-14 14:51
Quoting grandlakeguy:
WikiLeaks has promised many more leaked emails!

If there is proof positive that the primary was stolen then there is a good probability that HRC will have to step aside for him!


...and that the cow really will jump over the moon... NOT.
 
 
+2 # Henry 2016-08-14 14:22
Quoting backwards_cinderella:
AND get it straight: Trump destroyed himself ON PURPOSE. He's been working with Clinton ALL ALONG. I'm sure it was a REALLY GOOD DEAL for him.


You've gotten thumbs down on this. I guess this means some anonymous people don't agree with some portion of what you wrote, but can't be bothered to say which portion.
 
 
+11 # lfeuille 2016-08-14 20:42
I don't agree with any of it. Does anyone really believe that Trump will go to all this trouble for another person? His ego wouldn't allow it. I've said it before. It's getting boring. Trump has a personality disorder that just doesn't allow him to let sleeping dogs lie. He always has to make himself the center of attention even if it's to his advantage to let her squirm in the limelight. Just because Hillary is a monster doesn't mean Trump isn't wacko. I think she is the greater danger, but he is still loony tunes.
 
 
+13 # Radscal 2016-08-14 22:06
Well, what we do know is that the Clintons and Trump have been close friends for decades. Ivanka and Chelsea both say they've been best friends since childhood. That doesn't happen if Trump's only relationship with the Clintons was donating to them to gain "access" to help his businesses.

We do know that Bill Clinton gave Trump encouragement to run and pointers on how to reach a certain target demographic.

We do know that Trump is now espousing things he either never did before, or are in direct contradiction to things he's said and done in the past.

Some people choose to believe that these close friends are actually ideological enemies.

Personally, I look at Trump and see an egomaniac who would do most anything for money and fame. They seem like a perfect match.
 
 
+15 # grandlakeguy 2016-08-14 14:55
I have always theorized that Trump is working for the Clintons.

Nothing else makes sense...he seems to be trying to lose every time he opens his mouth!
 
 
+10 # kundrol 2016-08-14 15:52
@b-c: Yes, I agree. It looks like he is self destructing right on schedule now that the primary is over, and he helped Shillery steal it. I don't think he ever had any intention of becoming president. He did have fun scamming everybody though, while making the Shill look good in comparison.
 
 
+7 # Ralph 2016-08-14 16:13
It's entirely possible but proving it would be improbable.
 
 
+3 # lorenbliss 2016-08-14 19:14
Where is Andrei Vashinskiy now that we need him?

:-)
 
 
+2 # kundrol 2016-08-15 09:27
It will probably all come out in the wash one of these days.
 
 
+4 # Radscal 2016-08-15 19:13
As you may know, a newspaper consortium sued to get access to the ballots from Florida after the 2000 election, and proved that Gore had actually won the election.

But, they didn't finish their study and release their findings until November, 2001, almost 2 months after 9/11/01 and at the very moment the US was invading Afghanistan, so no one paid much attention.

The country was "united behind our war president."

Hell, most people seem to still not even know that Gore won FL.

So, my bet is that by the time the truth about HRC's election fraud in 2016 is made public, we will find much of the country "united behind our war president" again.

My only question is whether her invasion of Syria will be sufficient, or will it take a war on Iran, or even Russia?

Those nutty "survivalists" who've been building and stocking bunkers are looking less crazy all the time.
 
 
+33 # Anonymot 2016-08-14 14:00
I read The Guardian every morning along with the NYT, Le Monde, and much of what's on Google News. It's been sad to see the Guardian slip in alongside the NYT in the last year after the departure of Alan Rusbridger and his replacement by an NYT-style Money/Manager cum Editor. If Rusbridger had management problems, he was one of the last great independent, courageous, and brilliant Editors left in the Western world. I've lived a lot in Europe including some in London so my perspective is not like yours. I also spend 4/6 months a year in the US.

The UK just had its populist movement in Brexit. That was the wisest move since you stayed out of the Eurozone. Since the Guardian had slipped from Left to Establishment already, you whored around propounding Remain with the EU. Sad.

And you clearly fail to understand that America's shadow government has been heading it toward the cliff of democratic fascism since the Bay of Pigs. There has been a strong Germanic trend for many decades, but since Cuba, Vietnam and the ascension of the CIA to the Oval Office with Papa Bush, the acceleration has been deadly for democracy and the world.

The Bush/Cheney group lit the final fire. Obama/Hillary extended it. The system of checks & balances were shredded.

Amazonian Hillary, corrupt, indecent, dishonest, and a master in the art of the Big Lie so honed by Hitler will introduce a dictatorship to the humble folks who fail to understand where they are being taken.

It's Germany 1934.
 
 
+23 # Vardoz 2016-08-14 18:00
HRC was a coup. She was made Sec of State so she wouldn't just be a loser to Obama. This was all planned out. As Sec of State she had status and name recognition and of course the media helped and then there was the all pervasive election fraud that Obama totally supported and he too was a Wall Street sweetheart.
 
 
+6 # Vardoz 2016-08-14 18:06
So are they going to put people in the ovens? Demise of the environment? total corporate state? Concentration camps? Do you think this is what's to come with a HRC presidency? Bernie did say we are expendable. Maybe he was trying to warn us. So whose going to be the Jews? he 99%? African Americans? Immigrants? Remember there was an underground.
 
 
+17 # lorenbliss 2016-08-14 19:23
@Vardoz: "They" -- the One Percent and its Ruling Class vassalage -- are already exterminating us with the slow-motion genocide of cutting welfare, food stamps, Medicare and Medicaid plus the de facto Social Security and SSI cuts imposed by denial of cost-of-living increases.

Though mass arrests and death camps remain unfashionable, all Hillary the Horrible need do to is manufacture another domestic-terror ism threat, as for example by another 9/11 Reichstag Fire-type incident, then blaming Russia and -- just as she is already doing, claiming the (real) Left is a tool of the Kremlin.

Meanwhile the Trump campaign's open advocacy of a domestic Holocaust against minorities has already demonstrated widespread support for such draconian measures -- obviously as was intended if Trump is indeed a clandestine Hillaryite operative.
 
 
+6 # kundrol 2016-08-15 09:33
Thanks Loren - They don't need the old fashioned death camps, etc. They now have pesticides, and GMOs. They are slowly poisoning all those who either can't afford to buy organic food or are too ignorant to be aware of the danger.
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-08-15 19:21
Atmospheric Aerosol Spraying.

Here's an interesting report. Based on the theory that people with a certain genetic allele are more likely to become religious fanatics, they developed a strain of a virus that attacked that allele, neutering it, and thereby making people more mellow.

They tried 6 different methods of dispersal, one of which was spraying aerosols containing the virus from airplanes. Apparently, they did this over Iraq, likely related to the second attack on Fallujah.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/health/funvax070601.pdf
 
 
+3 # librarian1984 2016-08-16 19:28
This is just like the plot of the Firefly movie. I won't spoil it for you since you're sure to watch it right away but it's excellent. C'mon .. believe me!

They did this to actual people? Geez. The new weaponry is going to be more insidious than bombs, isn't it? And we don't get a damn say in at all, in what's being done in the name of America.
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2016-08-18 00:52
My wife was one of the millions in the SF Bay Area who had bacteria sprayed on her by the military many years ago. They intended to just see how it dispersed, but of course, some people had much greater reactions than expected, and a couple died.
 
 
+2 # librarian1984 2016-08-18 07:00
I had my enflamed tonsils shrunk by x-ray treatments when I was two years old! Because .. why not? Who worries about kids and massive doses of radiation?

How is any of that different from the Nazi doctors?

That's what worries me about science, as much as I love it. Scientists seem too ready to do things because they CAN and they want to see what happens, without thinking of the consequences.

I think we talked about that in the context of bomb testing as well.

They are easy tools of the oligarchs, those curious minds.

You guys having a good summer? Other than the apocalypse and all :^)
 
 
+3 # Observer 47 2016-08-16 14:29
@ Anonymot:

Your post is so good, I'm in awe. Your timelime citing the Bay of Pigs is absolutely relevant and crucial at this point in our history. However, the shadow government's plan dates back even earlier. At the end of WWII, many tons of war materiel were kept in the Pacific, ALREADY with the final destination of Vietnam. See L. Fletcher Prouty's book, "The Secret Team: The CIA and Its Allies in Control of the United States and the World." The events that are unfolding now were set in motion 70 years ago.
 
 
+8 # newell 2016-08-14 14:00
It was never about Sanders winning. It is about the revolution. The author must be religious, as he's wanting a savior.
 
 
+33 # Henry 2016-08-14 14:23
Quoting newell:
It was never about Sanders winning. It is about the revolution. The author must be religious, as he's wanting a savior.


I think it was a little bit about Bernie winning. Else why would we all miss him so much? And why did we want him to win so much? Nothing wrong with that. Bernie is REAL.
.
 
 
-28 # michael447 2016-08-14 14:46
Hillary got 5 million more votes than he did. That's democracy for you. It sucks to be on the losing side. Get over it. Or don't. Whatever.
 
 
+8 # PCPrincess 2016-08-15 11:38
OH yes, please do post the same exact thing that paid posters do. That is sure to earn you respect. Do tell: where were those 5 million more votes earned? You do realize that there are countless lawsuits ongoing that challenge the fraudulent results in many states, right?
 
 
+12 # Vardoz 2016-08-14 17:53
269 seats will be up for grabs in the house and senate. Time for us to clean house.
 
 
+8 # AshamedAmerican 2016-08-14 21:37
It was about Sanders winning. Otherwise, there would not have been, and is not, any way to accomplish the goals of the "revolution", as they are in opposition to what the winner (cheater) is about. Sanders' supporters will still be around, but they will have very little representation. Meanwhile, the victor (cheater/HRC) has the 1%, all of their resources, the MSM, an increasingly formidable police state. So what can we expect? We can expect the revolution to go the same way as the huge groups of protesters of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the occupiers of Wall Street. We can expect HRC and the 1% to give us brand new problems to protest. One does not have to be religious to recognize that we need something extraordinary to save us from our fascist government.
 
 
+10 # anarchteacher 2016-08-14 14:04
https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/deep-state-mccarthyism-trump/

Deep State “McCarthyism” Against Trump



https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/pat-buchanan-yes-system-rigged/

Pat Buchanan: “Yes, the System Is Rigged”



https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/nayirah-private-jessica-lynch-khizr-khan-expendable-disposable-tools-deep-state/

Nayirah = Private Jessica Lynch = Khizr Khan: Expendable and Disposable Tools of the Deep State


https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-media-enjoy-puppet-show/

Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, in the Media: Enjoy the Puppet Show



https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/old-days-life-much-simpler/

In The Old Days Life Was So Much Simpler



https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/assassinations-cover-ups/

Deep State: Assassinations and Their Cover-Ups
 
 
-19 # anarchteacher 2016-08-14 14:11
https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/revealed-socialist-bernie-sanders-new-600000-island-home-photos-nearby-demographics/

How many of you dedicated progressive warriors have been invited to Bernie's new $600,000 secluded island mansion? Feel the Burn yet?

North Hero, VT
White 95%
Latino 1.6%
Native American 0.6%
Asian 0.2%
Black/African American (just about statistically zero)

http://www.newsofinterest.tv/politics/book_summaries/daisnaid/daisnaid_chomsky.php

I wonder if he and millionaire Noam Chomsky share the same investment councilors and tax attorneys? Chomsky is among the top 2 percent in the United States in net wealth, and the location of his primary residence being in an extremely affluent and exclusive wooded suburb of Lexington, Massachusetts.

https://www.americarisingpac.org/two-multi-million-dollar-mansions-hillary-says-struggled-pay-mortgage/

And them Arkansas po folk, the Clintons, ain't doin' too bad either.
 
 
+12 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-14 15:11
@anarchteacher,
No invitation from Clinton either. Closest I came to one was a bunch of texts trying to bribe me w/ Hamilton tickets if I said is was "with her."

I passed.
 
 
+23 # Ted 2016-08-14 15:32
Wow, when I think of all the million-dollar real estate and major business investments that the vast majority of Senators accumulate on their salaries, I have to wonder why Sanders is only now just buying this relatively low-priced property.

Definitely something to think about!

Why is he so broke compared to the majority of other Senators????

Thanks anarchteacher!
 
 
+22 # Ralph 2016-08-14 16:21
Have to agree Ted. A lake front home selling for 575K is definitely not a mansion. It's 1800 square feet in fact, purchased from the proceeds of a sale of a summer home his wife owned in Maine.
 
 
+11 # BlueMorpho 2016-08-14 21:11
@Ralph,
Thank you. I just read a piece elsewhere, re: the Pulse nightclub killer's father and Clinton's rally. Apparently a donation of around $200 or $250.00 secured him a seat at that rally. Months ago, I saw Sanders at a rally for free. All I had to do was show up.


Sanders bought a house using the money (and not zillions of $$$) from the sale of another house? Somehow, I think I can live with that.
 
 
+9 # hwmcadoo 2016-08-14 14:16
It matters not! If she worries about winning over Trump she will remain progressive in speeches. If Trump sinks now she could change her speech tone such as on TPP, pipelines global warming etc.

In either scenario she will not be progressive after the election. All Trump can do is temporary. Clinton lies and lies. She will have no problem with reversal whenever needed. If she is as bad as some suggest, she may not have to worry about her second term as there are ways for a President to takeover the entire Government. It is happening slowly now but it could happen ion an hour and one proclamation.
 
 
+7 # bardphile 2016-08-14 14:18
Too pessimistic, folks. This election year showed the potential of an honest progressive candidate. If Bernie were on the ballot in all 50 states, he'd beat either Hil or Trump head-to-head, and would win a 3-way with a plurality. We're getting closer, demographically and in terms of raised consciousness. Newell, you're right, if what you mean is that the movement is bigger than any one person. Even the maligned Dem party has a roster of good people to get behind.
 
 
+16 # Ted 2016-08-14 15:57
"Even the maligned Dem party has a roster of good people to get behind."

That's very true, and it's my personal opinion that with a strong Progressive third party, those good people will no longer have to wrangle their way up through the rotting and corrupted ranks of the dem party as Sanders was forced to try to do.

Support and Vote Green.

Jill2016.com/plan
 
 
+10 # librarian1984 2016-08-15 06:51
Quoting bardphile:
Too pessimistic, folks.
Not pessimistic enough.

Yes, it is great news that so much of the electorate shares many progressive values, and it's great that Bernie won the nomination, but what is the end result?

Bernie and the progressives are being marginalized and it's probably no accident that the Dems turned away/off millions of young people. Who wants progressives and the idealistic young messing up their cozy corporatocracy?

We are already witnessing the redbaiting and the astonishing drumbeat taking us to war with Russia. Does this feel any different than the runup to Iraq? And what did the largest international peace march accomplish? Zip.

War is on the menu and if the neocons take power, as they seem quite determined to do and the MSM seems quite happy to abet, people like rocback and lights have got nice big databases about us and it's going to be the same old future. We may be very happy to have Bernie Sanders' sane voice in the Senate, but what can he do alone?

The populace, with its inconvenient needs like clean air and water and healthcare, is beyond expedient. They have all the legal tools they need to round up any of us they want, when they want.

If we don't keep the Clintons out of the WH, how do we prepare for the coming storm?

I don't need to be pessimistic. Being realistic, and having a sense of history, is enough to scare the cr@p out of me.
 
 
-29 # michael447 2016-08-14 14:43
Disgruntled Bernie Botts. Their dreams of a socialist, left leaning, northern European style government dashed, so they become bitter and withdrawn. I have a flash for you folks. The US IS a democracy, and the majority of Americans DON'T agree with you. That's the way democracy works. If you want to stick out your collective lips and go pout in a corner, then have at it. That's your right.
 
 
+20 # Ted 2016-08-14 15:24
micheal447,

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're new to this election cycle coverage and so you didn't see that SANDERS HAD A STRONG POLLING LEAD AGAINST CLINTON AND TRUMP before he stepped out of the race, proving that the majority percentage of Americans DO agree with us.

All that Progressives have to do now is switch the name we are supporting from Sanders to Stein and our numbers will continue to carry that strong lead while our Progressive goals will remain the same.

Jill2016.com/plan
 
 
-20 # Rain17 2016-08-14 17:53
The flaw in this argument is that Sanders's radical past had yet to be included in negative ads.
 
 
+17 # Ted 2016-08-14 19:41
I doubt any of it would discourage the strong Progressive following he built.
 
 
+15 # lfeuille 2016-08-14 20:59
The flaw in your argument is that nobody cares.
 
 
+8 # PCPrincess 2016-08-15 11:41
You are persistent. Absolutely and completely false and/or delusional, but persistent.
 
 
+9 # jimallyn 2016-08-15 00:48
Quoting michael447:
Disgruntled Bernie Botts. Their dreams of a socialist, left leaning, northern European style government dashed, so they become bitter and withdrawn. I have a flash for you folks. The US IS a democracy, and the majority of Americans DON'T agree with you. That's the way democracy works. If you want to stick out your collective lips and go pout in a corner, then have at it. That's your right.

News flash for you, michael447: All the northern European states are democracies.
 
 
+19 # djnova50 2016-08-14 14:57
From the article's last paragraph: My friends and I like to wonder about who will be the "next Bernie Sanders", but what I am suggesting here is that whoever emerges to lead the populist left will simply be depicted as the next Trump.

Perhaps take a look at Jill Stein. She was Bernie before Bernie. Take a look at her plan, Jill2016.com/pl an, it's Bernie's plan only better. Most of us who were Bernie supporters did so because Bernie came across as progressive. We knew that Hillary was not progressive and only pretended to be a progressive because it was politically prudent. Many of us remember her as First Lady and Secretary of State and that is why we don't support her.

It's a long shot that Jill Stein would win in November; but, I prefer to vote for somebody who can lead us out of perpetual war and regime change. Since Clinton has already said that she would continue Obama's policies, that most likely means to keep pushing drones onto unsuspecting civilians around the world, in the hopes of killing at least one bad guy. Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize; but, I suspect that there are many people who say that he should have given it back long ago.

The Green Party is the only national party that does not take corporate funding.
 
 
+4 # Ted 2016-08-14 16:10
"Stein was Bernie before Bernie was Cool."

Can I use that?
 
 
+10 # librarian1984 2016-08-15 07:01
And if the Clintons get into the WH who is going to be the next Joe McCarthy? What do you want to bet Bill is already courting Ted Cruz?

And that there will be a record number of GOP pols in the 'Dem' administration.

The Clintons, with their neo-whatever philosophy, have successfully taken over the Democratic Party.

We have GOT to support the Green Party but given the fear and aversion people have been taught about third parties, chances are that millions of people who support the GP's principles will hold their nose and vote for HRC, not knowing they are enabling war, fracking and corruption that just may be the last gasp of this DINO -- democracy in name only.

Stein and Johnson need to be in the debates.
 
 
+15 # badwillie02 2016-08-14 14:57
"Trump Certain To Lose"

Old time recipe for cooking rabbit stew:

"First, catch the rabbit."
 
 
+9 # Ralph 2016-08-14 16:25
Even I have to admit that the Trump rabbit has run into a den of wolves. If he isn't torn to shreds, this will be the greatest escape act since Houdini.
 
 
+9 # librarian1984 2016-08-15 07:04
We who are engaged may underestimate the disengagement of the majority of Americans, who start paying attention to the race after Labor Dy.

If Trump can get his act together by then, and more email leaks emerge, amd news about Clinton's health surface -- we may still have a chance to avoid war and abuse.
 
 
+5 # kundrol 2016-08-15 09:47
That's a lot of ifs, but I guess there is some hope still. The health issue has been discussed at length, and I doubt any proof will surface in time. They tend to buy off or kill any opposition to the grand plan. I do have some hope for more leaks, but that may have been squashed also.
 
 
+4 # Ralph 2016-08-15 18:34
A Trump presidency will cause mass civil unrest. That generally leads to crackdowns and war. This election is lose-lose. The American LOTE calculator just exploded trying to calculate the lesser.
 
 
+2 # librarian1984 2016-08-16 00:17
Exactly. That's what most of us are agonizing over -- who actually IS the least horrible?

This feels like a death march. WHY are we constrained to accept these two horrible candidates? Nobody wants either of them but we keep stomping on, like a slow motion Titanic.
 
 
+1 # Patriot 2016-08-19 01:04
Librarian, we're NOT stuck with either/or. We can vote for Stein and other progressives or moderates. If enough of us do that, instead of wringing our hands and moaning that a 3rd party candidate can't win the WH, Stein will win it!

See gp.org, Jill2016.com
 
 
-15 # Robbee 2016-08-14 15:13
Thomas Frank, Guardian UK just dumped a hit piece, load of crap on RSN - With Trump Certain to Lose, You Can Forget About a Progressive Clinton, 14 August 16 - never complain again about not getting enough hil hit pieces

by what words did hill move to center? no words!

"She is reaching out to the foreign policy establishment and the neocons. She is reaching out to Republican office-holders. She is reaching out to Silicon Valley. And, of course, she is reaching out to Wall Street. In her big speech in Michigan on Thursday she cast herself as the candidate who could bring bickering groups together and win policy victories through really comprehensive convenings."

is there no difference between saying nothing to encourage someone to do something? - and "reaching out"?

sure! hill said she would unite our diverse nation! here's what else hill told factory hi-tech workers in warren, mi

8/11/16 - hill just gave her major econ policy speech - so rump trojans can stop reading - you won't like what i have to say

she says she opposes tpp now - after election - and as prez - she has a website that lists american manufacturers of products rump says are not made here - so rump makes them abroad

she will rebuild infrastructure - raise wages - train students for today's and tomorrow's jobs- tax corporations that ship jobs abroad and those who relocate abroad - she also proposes to tax corporations to repay all the tax welfare they've gotten over the years -
 
 
-15 # Robbee 2016-08-14 15:15
load of crap, part 2

- tax the rich and their estates (costing rump $4 bil - if he's worth what he claims) - on healthcare she will fight for public option

rump's plans, hill notes - including raising tariffs and deporting over 5% of our workforce - are study-estimated to cost our economy recession and over 3.4 million jobs during his presidency - hill projects creating 10 million new jobs herself - positioning our economy for the future - including renewable energy production for which we will be in competition with china and germany

if hill had spoken at the det econ club like rump - rump got only 2 boos - she would have been booed thru-out - she had to speak at a hi-tech tooling plant in warren, mi - where raising worker wages, healthcare and childcare are extra popular

- an all-around rousing progressive plan - but no one credibly denies hill's plans are progressive? do they? - only by comparison to some - not including rump
 
 
+9 # AshamedAmerican 2016-08-14 21:53
As always, when running for office, she will say what she perceives that her audience wants to hear.
 
 
+14 # Ted 2016-08-14 15:17
OR...

Sanders supporters can continue to carry our strong lead in the polls against clinton OR trump (and achieve the Progressive executive branch we need) by simply voting Stein.

Jill2016.com/plan
 
 
-16 # Caliban 2016-08-14 17:19
Sorry, Ted and Sunflower-- although Jill Stein has some positive ideas in her program, she has never shown the ability to persuade meaningful numbers of voters to cast their ballots her way.

And she has tried...often.
 
 
+17 # Ted 2016-08-14 17:54
Yea, corporate media black out has nothing to do with it, it's all Stein's fault.

You know, there was a REASON Sanders had to bite the bullet and run on the dem ticket, and that reason is the stranglehold of the corporate backed two-party system that WE NOW HAVE AN EXCELLENT OPPORTUNITY TO BREAK!

Support and Vote Green.

Jill2016.com/plan
 
 
+11 # Caliban 2016-08-14 18:57
Ted, I did not mean to imply that Jill Stein was at fault for anything. I have great admiration for her and those who believe in both Stein and the Green Party.

In my opinion, the real problem for 3rd party candidates from the left, right or center is the modern national habit of thinking about US politics only in two party terms. And this is a genuine problem, for the longer we stay habituated to two-party dominance, the harder it will be to ever have something else.
 
 
-20 # Robbee 2016-08-14 19:39
Quoting Caliban:
Sorry, Ted, I did not mean to imply that Jill Stein was at fault for anything.

- but i do! - she's too full of herself! she's trying to elect rump! - we progressives need to stop infighting that only elects repugs!

if stein were not so lazy and stupid, she would run for office as a dem! sorry!
 
 
+17 # Ted 2016-08-14 19:43
Lazy and stupid?

You do know she holds two degrees from Harvard, Right?
 
 
+9 # PCPrincess 2016-08-15 11:44
Robbee - What the Hell man? Lazy and Stupid? I stopped reading your posts a while back, but somehow this one still reached my eyeballs.

P.S. Do you really really honestly think that just because words come from a person's mouth, they must be speaking truths? Why do you have so much unconditional love for Hillary? Cmon, be truthful.
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2016-08-15 19:29
"Do you really really honestly think...?"

You could have stopped right there. The answer is apparent.
 
 
+5 # DaveEwoldt 2016-08-15 18:51
Robbee, on the political spectrum you are so far from being progressive that it might be on the other side of infinity.

It's Stein's intelligence that took her out of the Democratic Party.
 
 
+1 # Patriot 2016-08-19 01:06
Right, Caliban, so join us and vote for Stein. Help to break the two-party dominance!
 
 
-18 # Robbee 2016-08-14 19:29
Quoting Ted:
Sanders supporters can continue to carry our strong lead in the polls against clinton OR trump (and achieve the Progressive executive branch we need) by simply voting Stein.

- lie! Sanders supporters DO NOT VOTE STEIN! THEY VOTE HILL!

YOU MUST MEAN Sanders QUITTERS? ex-Sanders supporters? Sanders PRETENDERS?

bernie never told his supporters to vote hill just because he says - he explains his reasons fully! ex-Sanders supporters just don't listen!

ted, please do us Sanders supporters the courtesy of not calling yourself a Sanders supporter! it's dishonest! thanks!
 
 
+15 # Ted 2016-08-14 19:45
I have been a strong Sanders supporter from day one.

He is no longer running, my choice now is Stein.
 
 
+17 # Sunflower 2016-08-14 15:24
Voting for Jill Stein is our best hope!
 
 
-17 # Robbee 2016-08-14 19:32
Quoting Sunflower:
Voting for Jill Stein is our best hope!

- of what?
 
 
-5 # Keep up the good work 2016-08-14 15:59
When the actual voting comes, I have these concerns: Only one of the prominent polls (according to Michael Moore) limited it's data to participants that said they were going to vote. And that one put HRC just 3-4 points higher than Trump. The rest of the polls are based on the general public. So MM is warning progressives and liberals not to be so confident that HRC will win in 2+ months. No other 2nd or 3rd tier candidates are polling close to Trump. So progressives are in a bind. If progressives and liberals bail out and Trump wins, the straight ticket voting will result in more progressive down ballot candidates losing to far right candidates. Any hope of addressing climate change will be lost altogether. Solar and wind power will take a hit. Conditions in many areas will get much worse. Voter sabotage and suppression by Repubs will skyrocket to lock in their long term control.
If you look at the research on the sociology of demagogues, Trump is using the tactics identified: scapegoating, identifying groups to hate/blame, outright lies and disinformation, proposing policies that will increase the suffering of minorities and the poor, using nationalism to whip up anger at other cultures/nation s, inciting crowds against the media, etc. Sanders isn't going away. He is still organizing.
Chomsky, Sanders, Warren, Michael Moore, are all telling us to vote for Clinton and keep working for progressive goals.
 
 
+11 # Ted 2016-08-14 16:07
"If progressives and liberals bail out..."

When you consider the strong support in the polls that Sanders held while in the race, if Progressives and Liberals simply change their support to Stein from Sanders, we will win and actually ACHIEVE progressive goals.

I don't consider that "Bailing Out".
 
 
+14 # kundrol 2016-08-14 16:19
"Keep working for progressive goals." Fortunately I live in a community that does a lot of that. However, I don't see any reason to vote for Clinton. She doesn't need our votes, since the election will be rigged same as the primary. However if we vote for Stein, that is at least a protest vote, and if enough people protest, we could start to see some progress.
 
 
+20 # Ralph 2016-08-14 16:49
What all those people fail to tell you is that the Democratic president has delivered endless war; conflicts in the Ukraine, Syria and Libya; regime change in Honduras; predatory policing practices that kill thousands of citizens; corporate healthcare reform first proposed by the right wing Heritage foundation; mass torture as evidenced by the use of solitary confinement in our prisons on a vast scale; the continuation of the school-to-priso n pipeline that makes us the most imprisoned populace on the planet; bailouts for bankster criminals; illegal confiscation of working class assets by a police state run amok to the tune of billions of dollars each year; the list is endless.

Vote Green, vote Stein, vote early, vote often. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
 
 
+14 # lorenbliss 2016-08-14 19:33
@Ralph: Hear, hear!
 
 
+14 # Ted 2016-08-14 18:06
"Chomsky, Sanders, Warren, Michael Moore, are all telling us to vote for Clinton and keep working for progressive goals."

Telling us who to vote for?

Here's a clip of Sanders telling us that he ever tried to tell us who to vote for, WE SHOULD NOT LISTEN TO HIM;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uAvqnoAjII
 
 
-6 # Keep up the good work 2016-08-14 16:30
Well, it is a social experiment in the making. We'll see how it works out.
 
 
+2 # Observer 47 2016-08-16 14:43
If sHIll gets us into WWIII, nobody will be around to see how it works out.
 
 
+14 # Mainecoon 2016-08-14 17:20
To fully understand what Frank is talking about, one needs to read his book, "Listen, Liberal." I host a political talk show on public access cable here on Cape Cod, and we devoted an entire show to discussing his book, in my view, the best book ever written about what has happened to the Democratic party since the 1970s. It's all about the abandonment of the middle class, working class and poor, and the unmitigated embrace of the new professional class uninterested in unions, living wages, social security or support for those less well off.
 
 
-14 # Rain17 2016-08-14 17:55
Does anyone remember the landslide losses of the 1970s and 1980s, when the GOP won five of the six presidential elections becore 1992?
 
 
+14 # Ralph 2016-08-14 18:52
I certainly do. I also remember the Democrats winning the next 4 or 6 and sealing the right wing deal. Who needs enemies when you have the Democratic party as friends. You clearly aren't paying attention.
 
 
+14 # Vardoz 2016-08-14 17:45
Of course. I would not expect anything else. HRC stole the election and reminds me of a mafia Don rather than a president. Too bad, Bernie would have made a great president but the Democracy haters prefer an Oligarchy and HRC fits the bill.
 
 
+13 # Ted 2016-08-14 17:58
"Too bad, Bernie would have made a great president..."

As Sanders constantly reminded us, it isn't about the person who is elected president, it's about the ideology of the citizens that band together to elect that person.

If you lean Left, Vote Green.
 
 
-14 # Robbee 2016-08-14 19:49
lie! - # Ted 2016-08-14 16:07
if Progressives and Liberals simply change their support to Stein from Sanders, we will win and actually ACHIEVE progressive goals

- when it comes to running more progressives against lesser progressives - other than in dem primaries - greens only slow "our revolution" - bernie's group - down!

when more progressives run against lesser progressives - other than in dem primaries - that tactic results in conservatives winning seats

are greens really that stupid? - yes! - it's who they are! full of themselves!

THE BIG IDEA:
By David Weigel
A specter is haunting the Green Party – the specter of Ralph Nader.

This morning, as America’s fourth-largest party gathers in Houston to nominate a presidential ticket, it’s struggling to capture the progressive voters who supported Bernie Sanders. Jill Stein, the party’s likely nominee, was rebuffed when she asked Sanders to head the party, and rebuffed again when she asked popular Sanders surrogate Nina Turner to be her running mate.

Why is progressive frustration with Hillary Clinton not boosting the Greens? It’s because sixteen years ago, Green Party nominee Ralph Nader won 2.9 million votes, and at least 2 million of those voters came to blame themselves for the victory of George W. Bush over Al Gore. (The combined vote for Nader and Green candidates since 2000 has never exceeded 900,000.)
 
 
-16 # Robbee 2016-08-14 19:51
big idea, part 2

The 2000 election was one of the founding traumas of the modern center-left. It’s no accident that Stein polls best with voters under 30; liberal voters who remember 2000 are likely to associate “voting your conscience” with giving away the presidency.

That’s most evident in the list of Nader supporters from 2000 who have never come back to the Green Party. Nader's running mate that year, Winona LaDuke, endorsed John Kerry in 2004 and then disengaged from politics. Michael Moore, who introduced Nader at some of his rallies, later apologized to Al Gore and has endorsed Democrats for president ever since. Many of the celebrities, academics and intellectuals who backed Nader went on to support Sanders; the only prominent one to support Stein this time is Cornel West.

“There were three claims made by Nader in 2000,” said Charles Lenchner, who voted for Nader that year but went on to found the grassroots group People for Bernie. “The first was that there was no substantial difference between Al Gore and George W. Bush. The second was that the campaign would be a boost to local organizing. The third was that the Green Party could emerge as a viable force in our politics. And none of that came to pass.”

so, you see - every reasonable rsn reader admits that inside america life with prez hill is better - so, except for our crowd that fears hill starting war but gives rump its free pass - what could go wrong? how bad could he be? - going green is efdup!
 
 
+6 # intlprofs 2016-08-14 20:05
People won't stop pushing for a fairer deal because Trump is a racist and xenophobe, no matter how much the media-industria l complex and elites try to paint the progressive movement in a bad light.

The horse is out of the barn.
 
 
+10 # Sunflower 2016-08-14 20:53
I hear this is a solid and informative book:

https://www.amazon.com/Queen-Chaos-Misadventures-Hillary-Clinton/dp/0989763765

Queen of Chaos,
Diana Johnstone

Review
"Veteran journalist Diana Johnstone captures the imperial worldview of Hillary Clinton in memorable detail. Hillary the Hawk, as U.S. Senator and Secretary of State, never saw a weapons systems she did not support nor a U.S. war practice she did not endorse. This included her hyper-aggressiv e launch of the war on Libya (against the opposition of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates) and the resulting sprawling chaos, violence and weapons dispersal spilling beyond Libya's war-torn society to larger regions of central Africa. Johnstone documents Hillary Clinton as 'the top salesperson for the ruling oligarchy' and 'the favorite candidate of the War Party.' That is what is at stake in November 2016." --Ralph Nader, author of Return to Sender: Unanswered Letters to the President
 
 
-13 # Robbee 2016-08-14 21:23
Quoting Sunflower:
--Ralph Nader, author of Return to Sender: Unanswered Letters to the President

- why on earth would nader write bush2cheney? - if nader hadn't run with bush2cheney in 2000, bush2cheney woulda lost to gore!

so ralph? bush2cheney never answered your letters? - just goes to show! - NO GOOD DEED EVER GOES UNPUNISHED!

ralph!
don't ask me what i think of you
i might not give the answer that you want me to
 
 
-11 # Robbee 2016-08-14 21:15
lie! - # Sunflower 2016-08-14 20:53
Hillary never saw a U.S. war practice she did not endorse.

- hill never endorsed torture or waterboarding! - while she was sec'y - obama ended torture! - frankly it's hill's opponent, rump, who insists on bringing back torture!

how did you happen to overlook this detail? did it make for a better lyin' comment?
 
 
+5 # keenon the truth 2016-08-15 01:21
You're such an offence. Hope you don't live anywhere near.
 
 
+1 # Lloyd Wagner 2016-08-15 01:32
"Trump Certain to Lose, You Can Forget About a Progressive Clinton"

I have been saying that all along, and if I had a nickle for every (anonymous) thumb down I've gotten on this site for saying that the s-election is a sham, I'd damned near be a millionaire already.
The wilder Trump talks, the more plausible Hillary's "election" will look, and look what "the Donald" is doing, eh? Wilder and wilder ... I read a comment on Facebook suggesting that he may next appear naked on stage in black-face, to lend Hillary even more plausibility.
And in November, they'll all get together for laughs and drinks. "Bernie" will be there too.
Smh at the people who still believe this Big Circus Show is for real.
 
 
0 # Patriot 2016-08-19 01:17
Not Bernie Sanders, I think. Not his style, not his ethics.
 
 
-5 # hkatzman 2016-08-15 08:56
Yes, the Democratic Primary was ugly.
Progressives can get upset and disengage, or vote 3rd party, but this won't help make the change.

Yes, we are dealing with Clinton. Even her logo announces that she points to the right. But she is finely tuned with maintaining her position. Progressives should turn out and vote for her. (Before you get angry, listen to the rest!) Let her know that progressives got her elected.

THEN! For the 2018 midterm elections, work as hard as you did for Bernie to get progressives elected to Congress. Turnout for midterms is light, so Progressive impact WILL be felt if we organize, put up Progressive Candidates and VOTE. Progressives in Congress will ensure Clinton's adherence to the Progressive ideals in the Democratic platform. A Progressive windfall in Congress will lead the way for a Progressive 2020.

Yes, 2018 was disappointing. NO IT WAS NOT! Who would have thought that a Socialist could get this close. After a Progressive revolution, there is always a counter-revolut ion where the power-elites again take over. Progressives must persist and not give in.
 
 
+3 # SusannaDana 2016-08-15 10:55
Fine piece, but here's the problem I have with Frank's analysis: Trump is no populist, and his followers are not populists. Bernie Sanders was the only populist in the race, and we, his supporters, are not going away. Only if the media characterizes Trump as a populist will populism be doomed. So, Thomas, wash your mouth out with soap! And the rest of us, object when you hear the words "Trump" and "populist" together!
 
 
-6 # DavidThree 2016-08-15 14:01
There is a huge positive in Hillary’s moderation, by avoiding the dysfunctional polarization that has limited progress. The issues most people care about and support are not extreme. Let’s get to work on the important things most of us agree on, not extreme agendas on the left or the right. Things like:
- Responsible gun laws
- Fairer taxes, with less loopholes for the wealthy
- Serious action on climate change
- Protect women’s right to choose an abortion
- Respect LGBT rights
- Economic policies that help lower and middle income families, such as raising the minimum wage
- Expanding access to health care
- Better education for all, including more affordable college
These are not extreme positions. It’s not building a wall, or tearing down Wall Street. It’s the middle ground, where most of us are.
 
 
0 # Caliban 2016-08-15 15:12
Excellent reminder of those issues that are more important than our debates on RSN, as informative and entertaining as these undoubtedly are.
 
 
+7 # Aliazer 2016-08-15 15:41
Quoting DavidThree:
There is a huge positive in Hillary’s moderation, by avoiding the dysfunctional polarization that has limited progress. The issues most people care about and support are not extreme. Let’s get to work on the important things most of us agree on, not extreme agendas on the left or the right. Things like:
- Responsible gun laws
- Fairer taxes, with less loopholes for the wealthy
- Serious action on climate change
- Protect women’s right to choose an abortion
- Respect LGBT rights
- Economic policies that help lower and middle income families, such as raising the minimum wage
- Expanding access to health care
- Better education for all, including more affordable college
These are not extreme positions. It’s not building a wall, or tearing down Wall Street. It’s the middle ground, where most of us are.






And that is why your proposal is doomed from the start!!

There might be some changes about 1.LGBT 2.Abortion rights. But that is only because the establishment doesn't give a crap about any of that. If anything, it serves them to divide and conquer the rabble that they see under them!!

And, regardless what you positively think about Hillary, she is a walking disaster for America and it will continue being so if she seizes the precidency!
 
 
+7 # A_Har 2016-08-15 17:13
Quoting DavidThree:
There is a huge positive in Hillary’s moderation, by avoiding the dysfunctional polarization that has limited progress. The issues most people care about and support are not extreme.
You forgot all about her project to try and start a NUKE war with Russia. Once she gets into that, all other projects are dust. Did you know that Europe is preparing for war?

Europeans Are Quietly Preparing for War with Russia
http://www.newsweek.com/europeans-are-quietly-preparing-war-russia-487307

By Nolan Peterson On 8/6/16 at 6:00 AM

As for all the talk about movements and change, one nuclear bomb can ruin your whole day.
 
 
+6 # Radscal 2016-08-15 19:39
The majority of USians are quite progressive on specific policies, including most you list and many others. Have been for decades.

And yet, the Democratic Party keeps shifting ever further to the right, and has actually convinced a goodly number of voters that this is necessary, and even good.

Now, they are trying to convince us to vote for the most conservative, warmongering, Wall Street servant ever, and only because the other party flavor got hoodwinked into nominating Trump is she even competitive.
 
 
-2 # Activista 2016-08-15 23:01
Think that Guardian should analyse BREXIT and the consequences.
Brexit damage to UK economy will outweigh wage gains, study finds
The Guardian‎ - 8 hours ago
A reformed migration system after Brexit is likely to be more dependent on temporary ...
Clinton is/will be progressive on health care - her record is there.
 
 
-4 # Brice 2016-08-16 15:15
I think Frank and his books are brilliant.

> Come November, Clinton will have won her great victory – not as a champion of working people’s concerns, but as the greatest moderate of them all

But he is overly pessimistic here, this is how it has to start. Nothing ever starts with perfection or at the end. Even FDR was not FDR when he took office for the first time.

It is and always has been up to the people.
 
 
+4 # diamondmarge7 2016-08-16 23:55
She wss never going to be "Progressive." See Disns Johnstone, Wueen of Chsos: The Missdventures of Hillsry Clinton."[orry for typo] Clinton reponible for ch o in Liby & Hondur [think I need ne keybord]
 
 
0 # Johnny 2016-08-17 15:56
Quoting Majikman:
You're new here. Apparently the MO of you Shillery trolls is to enter a house, shit on the floor, and leave laughing.

Just like the IOF.
 

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