Joe, Chuck and All Others Wanting a Say in the Presidential Election.
We Americans have become so accustomed to this Two Party System, that
we forget it was never envisioned by our "Fore Fathers".
Even though the vote was limited to White Land-holding Males over the
age of 21, it was intended that voters would cast their support for
individuals, not for Parties. Even so, if you glance back through
American History, you will see a time when a number of political
parties vied for major state and federal offices. But as time passed,
those in control began to find this multi political system to be
messy and hard to control. Remember, control is the name of the game.
The present "Two-Headed, One Party" System did not come about by
chance. In the mid 50's to the mid 60's, when I was at my most
politically active, the struggle was on. The two major parties in my
state of Washington, wanted to demand that voters register as either
Democrat or Republican, and at election time they would be handed a
ballot containing only the candidates of the Party of their choice.
We fought this concept again and again.
You must admit that the American Corporate Oligarchy has done a pretty
fair job of looking like a democracy while maintaining tight control
in those issues that matter to it. The Oligarchy Citizens are doing
just fine. Their government takes good care of them. They have
control of the money, the factories...both here and abroad, the
military...and more and more that means the local Military Police, the
Educational Criteria, the Mass Media, and a never ending supply of
Labor and Cannon Fodder. While we, the working class, go about
grumbling over what we think is an incompetent government, that same
government is managing to rake in the world's wealth.
And the Oligarchy can afford to allow "Third Parties" to spring up, as
long as they can be controlled and rendered ineffectual. Our history
is strewn with the bodies of dead "Third Parties". In my lifetime I
have seen such far-sighted men and women as Henry Wallace, Ralph
Nader, Jill Stein and many others, pushed aside by the power of the
Two-Headed Monster. And as we wander about with our thumbs up our
hinies, believing that we might be able to squeeze in a candidate or
two and make changes to the System, the Republicrats go about cinching
down our restraints.
Complete change is the only answer. But change to what? Do we want
to toss out the oppressive gang of Corporate Robbers and put ourselves
in their posh homes and offices? If all we want is to exchange
places, then forget it. Trading our overalls for suits will only
start the clock ticking, counting the minutes until we are tossed
aside.
We need to rethink our place in Nature. We need a System that enables
us to live relatively free, independent, comfortable lives as members
of this Planet, not Masters. To do this will take a revolution. But
not a revolution of guns and murder. A revolution within our minds.
A different road to success than the one we are now traveling. This
road is the road to Hell.
Carl Jarvis
On 4/4/16, joe harcz Comcast <joeharcz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
He joined the Party for what that is worth Chuck! He is running in theYouthful Supporters [5] http://www.alternet.org/ [6]
Democratic Party.
By the way both Parties have welcomed "defectors" from the other Party. For
example, Republicans took in a swath of Southern Democratts from Thurmond to
Graham and many of them ran as Republicans in their primaries.
Democrats welcomed in folks like Arlen Spector even recently.
This said, and while Irespect you highly I disagree with your core
contentions. I simply disagree.
I vote, and organize, personally not on Party loyalty, but rather on
issues.
While by far the bulk of folks I've worked for from John Glenn, to Tom
Harkin, to Obama in presidential campaigns were/are Democrats I have been
known to pull the lever for members of other parties especially if my local
or state Democrats were proven to be corrupt and against ourinterests.
Oh, I almost forgot my active support and my role as a Democratic Party
state delegate while I was 19 for McGovern.
Forgive the ramble but often the Party or individuals within it haven't been
loyal to us, and most especially those of us with disabilities.
Now, I'm not per say a third party guy in most cases but I've sure been
known to vote Green or even some other party in protest as a sort of a vote
for "none of the above".
And I'll tell you their is a social democratic wing in the Democratic Party.
And if they split off and created a third party I'd join it in a heartbeat.
But, on this you might disagree with me.
----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Krugman (Redacted sender "ckrugman" for DMARC)
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2016 11:03 AM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard
Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
The issue is that technically Sanders does not claim to be a Democrat. He
is registered as an “independent” Senator although he caucuses with the
democrats. I feel let down by the Democratic party because it has allowed
Sanders to take over as an independent and as a long standing party member I
strongly believe that does make a difference. This is why I say that I feel
let down by the Democratic party as this undermines party membership and
loyalty. For those of you who are members of third parties would you be
satisfied if an outsider someone who might be an ally on some issues is
given carte blanch opportunities to run without actually being a party
member? I believe that it is rationale like this that causes us to get stuck
with “top Two” primaries like we now have shoved down our throats in
California.
Chuck
Chuck
From: Alice Dampman Humel
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 4:45 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard
Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Chuck,
I seem to be missing messages, so I only saw yours now below Frank’s
reply.
I copy from your message:
"I feel that as a loyal longstanding Democrat I have been let down by the
democratic party when they gave him a carte blanche pass to run and say
whatever he wants. While I sympathize with people who are struggling
economically I don't think that Bernie Sanders is the answer”
You feel let down by the Democratic Party because they allowed a candidate
to speak his outh without muzzling him or otherwise dictating what he is
allowed to say, restricting what he can declare his platform to be? I don’t
understand that.
If Sanders does not provide the possibility of an answer to the things he
has outlined as big problems, in his candidacy, where do you think any other
possibility lies?
And, another question, if he is indeed still technically an independent in
Vermont, so what? And I do believe he is the Democratic senator from
Vermont, but you may be aware of some technical detail that I”ve missed…
Alice
On Mar 29, 2016, at 4:51 PM, Frank Ventura
<frank.ventura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Chuck, while my heart wants to disagree with you my head reluctantly
acknowledges that you probably are correct.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charles Krugman
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 5:29 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard
Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Well Frank, this is how I've always felt about Bernie and Jill. While
Sanders has caucused with the democrats in the Senate he is still
technically registered as an independent in Vermont as I understand it. I
feel that as a loyal longstanding Democrat I have been let down by the
democratic party when they gave him a carte blanche pass to run and say
whatever he wants. While I sympathize with people who are struggling
economically I don't think that Bernie Sanders is the answer.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Ventura
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 1:08 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard
Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Chuck, while I did vote for Sanders in the primary, I am already
regretting it. Sadly, Sanders is starting to sound more and more like Jill
Stein; that is someone who merely wants to derail the democratic party and
put a Republican in the oval office out of some sort of protest. The sad
truth is that after Stein and Sanders get their jollies with their protest
against the mainstream Democratic party they will go back to their comfy
suburban homes and sit back with a glass of wine; while the rest of us
working class suffer the onslaught of President Trump or President Cruz and
all the horrors for our nation that it has brought. So a year from now when
President Trump's death squads are roaming the streets killing the working
class Bernie and Jill will be sitting back watching it all on Foxnews while
their private security forces guard their nicely manicured lawns.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charles
Krugman
Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2016 2:00 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard
Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Miriam, in 2008 you voted for a typical Chicago politician. Spending
time in Chicago growing up in the sixties I found the political machine in
power fascinating. My problem is that I just don't like or agree with Bernie
Sanders and don't believe he is electable nor does he possess the image of
an American president. While There are lots of things I didn't like about
the Clinton Administration and I believe that Hillary was an active
participant in the decisionmaking process and since I don't support the
extreme principles of third parties I feel that in this election I'm voting
for the lesser of the evils. I guess that there is still part of me that
buys in to the capitalistic mentality.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: Miriam Vieni
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 11:43 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard
Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
I live in New York which, probably, will continue to be a blue state.
However, whatever kind of state it is, my vote, if Bernie isn't the
Democratic candidate, will go to Jill Stein. It won't go to Trump and it
won't go to the Clinton machine. In 2008, I thought I was voting for a
Democratic candidate who represented the values in which I believed. I knew
that he was a bit to the right in terms of Afghanistan, but I tought he was
a Liberal Democrat who believed in the rule of law, in open government. I
discovered that I'd voted for an opportunist, an elitist, for a President
who would ignore the constitution whenever it got in the way of his
appeasement of the security state, of a President who was ready to cut
social security benefits, and who made unacceptable bargains with
Republicans before it was necessary to do so. And he is the more
Ppogressive of the two. If I vote for Hillary, I'd be voting for someone
whose Neo Liberal policies are more warlike, who is even more comfortable
with the elites, who will increase the US appeasement of Israel, whose
concern about African Americans is pure fiction, and who uses her femaleness
as a means to gain support from femininsts. I can't, in good consciience do
it. No, I don't want Trump as President. But the fact that Clinton uses
whatever words , she thinks, will get votes from the Democratic base,
doesn't reassure me. I listened to Robert Sheer's discussion with Thomas
Frank this morning on an audio clip on Truthdig. Are you aware that Bill
Clinton was about to privatize social security? What stopped him? The Monica
Lewinsky scandal. These Democrats, aside from social issues, LGBT rights,
abortion rights, are not anymore the party of the working people.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charles
Krugman (Redacted sender "ckrugman" for DMARC)
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2016 2:07 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard
Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
whether we might like it or not any vote that doesn't go to Hillary
including those on principle to minor candidates could very strongly result
in the trump presidency that no thinking person wants.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: Miriam Vieni
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 8:21 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard
Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
Well, voting for Clinton means voting for more of what we have now which
means more wealth going to the 1%, more power for trans national
corporations, larger even less regulated banks, and an escalation of war.
Voting for trump may very well mean and out and out war at home on
minorities along with what I outlined above. One can't tell what Trump will
actdually do in terms of international policy because his statements are
contradictory. I caught a short interview with the author of a biography of
Trump on NPR last night. Briefly, he said Trump never reads books, does not
focus on one subject when you talk with him, but thinks just the way he
sounds in his speeches, and his basically and ego maniac, although he didn't
use that term. I can't visualize myself voting for Hillary because I can't
think of any positives in her favor. But certainly, the prospect of a Trump
Presidency is unthinkable.
Miriam
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 10:27 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard
Questions For Sanders Campaign and His Youthful Supporters
As the World turns...so turn firm resolves.
Of course it's early yet, but winning the primary appears to be slipping
from the old, experienced hands of Senator Bernie Sanders.
To date I have held to my resolve to vote for Sanders, and then if he
does not win the Party nomination, to vote for Jill Stein, of the Green
Party.
But that was before the Republicans trotted out their Party's Best, the
Clown Crew.
And, as we all guffawed and chuckled over their noisy sideshow, an awful
thing happened. One of the clowns began to look like something out of the
1940's. A full blown Fascist!
Ranting and raving and telling one big lie after another, Donald Trump
rose like the Phoenix, out of the ashes of the Third Reich.
Despite the Republican Party's denial that he has the popular Party
support, Trump stomps about, stirring up the rank and file, and winning in
state after state.
We now are upon the brink of National disaster. One direction leads to
a Fascist State, and the other leads to a Corporate State. And we have only
ourselves to blame.
If the choice comes down to Clinton or Trump, or even Clinton or Cruz,
we will need to decide if we hold to our original plan to support Stein, or
to "throw away" our vote in an effort to block the takeover of our emerging
Corporate State by the Fascist State. What a choice!
Just a fair warning that I am not ruling out a vote for Hillary
Clinton.
Carl Jarvis
On 3/16/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org) Home > Trump and
Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His
Youthful Supporters ________________________________________
Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders
Campaign and His Youthful Supporters By Steven Rosenfeld [1] /
AlterNet [2] March 15, 2016 Bernie Sanders' historic and
expectation-surpassing bid for the Democratic presidential nomination
ran into hard reality in several pivotal primary contests Tuesday,
where he could not break Hillary Clinton's hold on voters in several
critical battleground states needed to win in the fall-notably Ohio
and Florida.
While Sanders supporters will point to his narrow victory in Missouri,
and overwhelming support among independents who voted in the
Democratic primary, Clinton's victories in those fall battleground
states-as well as South Carolina and Illinois-means that it is
virtually impossible for Sanders to win the delegates needed [3] for
the party's nomination. That fact undoubtedly will take days to seep
into his remarkable grassroots campaign, where it remains to be seen
how Sanders will continue his quest or align himself with Clinton-who
he's criticized for some stances but praised as a person of
integrity.
The backdrop for that as-yet unknown calculation is the deeply
disconcerting continuing rise of Donald Trump toward the Republican
nomination, who has continued to amass a delegate lead-winning in
Florida, Illinois, South Carolina and Missouri. Although Ohio Gov.
John Kasich beat Trump in his home state, his first victory on 2016,
his chances-based on the GOP's delegate nomination math-are an even
longer shot than Sanders catching up with Clinton and wresting the
nomination. Under the current Republican National Committee rules, a
candidate needs to have won at least eight states to have their name
placed in nomination for the presidency. That renders Kasich's pledge
to supporters that he will win this fall as little more than campaign
magical thinking.
"Only one campaign has beaten Donald Trump over and over and over
again,"
said Sen. Ted Cruz, also striking a defiant tone despite losing in
every state Tuesday, including by several thousand votes in Missouri
to
Trump.
Cruz recited his pledge to recast the federal government and judiciary
in the most ideological right-wing mold possible, go after enemies
abroad, and said he was the only alternative to Trump. "Starting
tomorrow morning, there is a clear choice," Cruz said, posturing
before supporters in Texas.
Trump's victory in Florida prompted Marco Rubio to suspend his
campaign, telling his backers that it was not in "God's plans" for him
to win "in
2016
or maybe ever." He also implored Republicans to reject the hateful
politics pedaled by Trump, saying, "I ask the American people, 'Do not
give into the fear. Do not give into the frustration.'"
Tuesday's top two storylines-Trump's rise and Clinton all-but ending
Sanders' chances of winning sufficient delegates to be the
nominee-came together in her remarks, where she underscored that she
had won fair and square but tried to reach out to Sanders' team. "Our
campaign has won more votes than any other campaign-Democrat or
Republican," began Clinton, in remarks from Palm Beach, "and I want to
congratulate Sen. Sanders for the vigorous campaign he has waged."
Clinton said she needed the support of Democrats across the country,
and then focused on Trump but cited many issues raised by Sanders.
"Tonight, it is clearer than ever that this may be one of the most
consequential campaigns of our lifetimes," she said. "The next
president will walk into the oval office next year in January, and sit
down at that desk, and start making decisions that will affect the
lives and the livelihoods of everyone in this country and indeed,
everyone on this planet."
Clinton said the next president has three major challenges: making
positive differences in people's lives, keeping America safe and
bringing the country together. The first example she gave was a direct
nod to Sanders and his popularity with voters under age 35. "Young
people across America struggling under the weight of student debt find
it difficult to imagine the futures they want," she said, "and they
deserve a president who will relieve them of that burden and help
future generations go to college without borrowing a dime." Clinton
continued with another issue that he raised first. "And you know
grandparents who worry about retirement deserve a president who will
protect and then expand Social Security for those who need it most-not
cut or privatize it."
Her to-do list continued: affordable child care; paid family leave;
equal pay for equal work for women; good jobs with rising incomes-in
construction, manufacturing, small business and renewable energy;
standing up for workers and the middle class-"not China, not Wall
Street and not overpaid corporate executives." She said that she knows
how to make these promises become realities, and then slammed Trump,
especially his anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim stances, and his embrace
of torture and threatening adversaries.
"That doesn't make him strong, it makes him wrong," she said.
"We have to take on all forms of inequality and discrimination,"
Clinton said. "Together, we have to defend all of our rights-civil
rights and voting rights; worker's rights and women's rights; LGBT
rights and rights for people with disabilities. And that starts with
standing with President Obama when he nominates a justice to the
Supreme Court."
Whether or not Sanders' supporters will buy Clinton's words and see
how much he has sharpened her embrace and articulation of a
progressive agenda remains to be seen. There is no doubt that the
short-term messaging from the Sanders' campaign will be that they will
keep plowing ahead and fight for delegates in the remaining states. As
of Tuesday, half the states have voted. The math has Clinton with 300
more [3] pledged delegates than Sanders. That is not counting
super-delegates, the elected officers and party officials, where she
has 427 to his 26 [3]. Sanders reportedly spent
$12 million in ads for Tuesday's contests, compared to Clinton's $7
million.
Many of Sanders' supporters have not been involved in political
campaigns before, and will have a hard time immediately processing
Tuesday's results.
But there are some big unanswered questions about what is next for
them in 2016-and what Clinton will also do to bring these two
campaigns
together.
Sanders has taken positions that appeal to the disaffected voters who
have been drawn in by Trump and Cruz. One can only hope that the
Democratic Party knows it will need the millions of young economic
progressives to turn out in November. And they may not unless they
have a candidate they can believe in.
Steven Rosenfeld covers national political issues for AlterNet,
including America's retirement crisis, democracy and voting rights,
and campaigns and elections. He is the author of "Count My Vote: A
Citizen's Guide to Voting"
(AlterNet Books, 2008).
Share on Facebook Share
Share on Twitter Tweet
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [4]
[5]
________________________________________
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/trump-and-clintons-big-night-pos
es-har d-questions-sanders-campaign-and-his-youthful
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/steven-rosenfeld
[2] http://alternet.org
[3]
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar-
and-re
sults.html?action=click&contentCollection=Election%202016&regi
on=Foo
ter&module=WhatsNext&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext
&m oduleDetail=undefined&pgtype=Multimedia
[4] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Trump and
Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His
Youthful Supporters [5] http://www.alternet.org/ [6]
http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org) Home > Trump and
Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His
Youthful Supporters
Trump and Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders
Campaign and His Youthful Supporters By Steven Rosenfeld [1] /
AlterNet [2] March 15, 2016 Bernie Sanders' historic and
expectation-surpassing bid for the Democratic presidential nomination
ran into hard reality in several pivotal primary contests Tuesday,
where he could not break Hillary Clinton's hold on voters in several
critical battleground states needed to win in the fall-notably Ohio
and Florida.
While Sanders supporters will point to his narrow victory in Missouri,
and overwhelming support among independents who voted in the
Democratic primary, Clinton's victories in those fall battleground
states-as well as South Carolina and Illinois-means that it is
virtually impossible for Sanders to win the delegates needed [3] for
the party's nomination. That fact undoubtedly will take days to seep
into his remarkable grassroots campaign, where it remains to be seen
how Sanders will continue his quest or align himself with Clinton-who
he's criticized for some stances but praised as a person of
integrity.
The backdrop for that as-yet unknown calculation is the deeply
disconcerting continuing rise of Donald Trump toward the Republican
nomination, who has continued to amass a delegate lead-winning in
Florida, Illinois, South Carolina and Missouri. Although Ohio Gov.
John Kasich beat Trump in his home state, his first victory on 2016,
his chances-based on the GOP's delegate nomination math-are an even
longer shot than Sanders catching up with Clinton and wresting the
nomination. Under the current Republican National Committee rules, a
candidate needs to have won at least eight states to have their name
placed in nomination for the presidency. That renders Kasich's pledge
to supporters that he will win this fall as little more than campaign
magical thinking.
"Only one campaign has beaten Donald Trump over and over and over
again,"
said Sen. Ted Cruz, also striking a defiant tone despite losing in
every state Tuesday, including by several thousand votes in Missouri
to
Trump.
Cruz recited his pledge to recast the federal government and judiciary
in the most ideological right-wing mold possible, go after enemies
abroad, and said he was the only alternative to Trump. "Starting
tomorrow morning, there is a clear choice," Cruz said, posturing
before supporters in Texas.
Trump's victory in Florida prompted Marco Rubio to suspend his
campaign, telling his backers that it was not in "God's plans" for him
to win "in
2016
or maybe ever." He also implored Republicans to reject the hateful
politics pedaled by Trump, saying, "I ask the American people, 'Do not
give into the fear. Do not give into the frustration.'"
Tuesday's top two storylines-Trump's rise and Clinton all-but ending
Sanders' chances of winning sufficient delegates to be the
nominee-came together in her remarks, where she underscored that she
had won fair and square but tried to reach out to Sanders' team. "Our
campaign has won more votes than any other campaign-Democrat or
Republican," began Clinton, in remarks from Palm Beach, "and I want to
congratulate Sen. Sanders for the vigorous campaign he has waged."
Clinton said she needed the support of Democrats across the country,
and then focused on Trump but cited many issues raised by Sanders.
"Tonight, it is clearer than ever that this may be one of the most
consequential campaigns of our lifetimes," she said. "The next
president will walk into the oval office next year in January, and sit
down at that desk, and start making decisions that will affect the
lives and the livelihoods of everyone in this country and indeed,
everyone on this planet."
Clinton said the next president has three major challenges: making
positive differences in people's lives, keeping America safe and
bringing the country together. The first example she gave was a direct
nod to Sanders and his popularity with voters under age 35. "Young
people across America struggling under the weight of student debt find
it difficult to imagine the futures they want," she said, "and they
deserve a president who will relieve them of that burden and help
future generations go to college without borrowing a dime." Clinton
continued with another issue that he raised first. "And you know
grandparents who worry about retirement deserve a president who will
protect and then expand Social Security for those who need it most-not
cut or privatize it."
Her to-do list continued: affordable child care; paid family leave;
equal pay for equal work for women; good jobs with rising incomes-in
construction, manufacturing, small business and renewable energy;
standing up for workers and the middle class-"not China, not Wall
Street and not overpaid corporate executives." She said that she knows
how to make these promises become realities, and then slammed Trump,
especially his anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim stances, and his embrace
of torture and threatening adversaries.
"That doesn't make him strong, it makes him wrong," she said.
"We have to take on all forms of inequality and discrimination,"
Clinton said. "Together, we have to defend all of our rights-civil
rights and voting rights; worker's rights and women's rights; LGBT
rights and rights for people with disabilities. And that starts with
standing with President Obama when he nominates a justice to the
Supreme Court."
Whether or not Sanders' supporters will buy Clinton's words and see
how much he has sharpened her embrace and articulation of a
progressive agenda remains to be seen. There is no doubt that the
short-term messaging from the Sanders' campaign will be that they will
keep plowing ahead and fight for delegates in the remaining states. As
of Tuesday, half the states have voted. The math has Clinton with 300
more [3] pledged delegates than Sanders. That is not counting
super-delegates, the elected officers and party officials, where she
has 427 to his 26 [3]. Sanders reportedly spent
$12 million in ads for Tuesday's contests, compared to Clinton's $7
million.
Many of Sanders' supporters have not been involved in political
campaigns before, and will have a hard time immediately processing
Tuesday's results.
But there are some big unanswered questions about what is next for
them in 2016-and what Clinton will also do to bring these two
campaigns
together.
Sanders has taken positions that appeal to the disaffected voters who
have been drawn in by Trump and Cruz. One can only hope that the
Democratic Party knows it will need the millions of young economic
progressives to turn out in November. And they may not unless they
have a candidate they can believe in.
Steven Rosenfeld covers national political issues for AlterNet,
including America's retirement crisis, democracy and voting rights,
and campaigns and elections. He is the author of "Count My Vote: A
Citizen's Guide to Voting"
(AlterNet Books, 2008).
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [4]
Error!
Hyperlink reference not valid.[5]
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/trump-and-clintons-big-night-pos
es-har d-questions-sanders-campaign-and-his-youthful
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/steven-rosenfeld
[2] http://alternet.org
[3]
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar-
and-re
sults.html?action=click&contentCollection=Election%202016&regi
on=Foo
ter&module=WhatsNext&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext
&m oduleDetail=undefined&pgtype=Multimedia
[4] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Trump and
Clinton's Big Night Poses Hard Questions For Sanders Campaign and His
http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2For what it's worth, our "Founding
Fathers" never envisioned a Two Party System of government.
