The Genuinely Historic Opportunity Sanders is abt 2 Squander

[Wombaticus Rex]

Absolutely. Clintron pummels Sanders! Grab the popcorn and the Bud!

That's valid. I don't even resent the implication I drink Budweiser, that definitely happens.

Given the people who will be in the room when an Independent gambit gets discussed, I think things would center around the word "Nader" --the generational spectrum in that room (which skews mighty close to Hillary Clinton's demographic!) is only going to remember how divisive Nader was. Janet Sanders, in particular. Jeff Weaver, I think, will hark more towards how Ross Perot was treated, and contemplate the location of the nearest exits.

So watch Weaver, and watch to see what kind of national messaging campaigns get fired up in the next 14 days. A serious campaign would be prepping TV & YouTube spots if they're pivoting to focus on reaching independents and undecided voters going into the convention.

It will also have to involve a whole hell of a lot of Looking The Other Way re: ballot box fraud, election board fuckery and obvious malfeasance. Be interesting to see if their support base can weather that frustration & alienation over the next 60 days.

[Luther Blissett]

I am not certain what the right strategy is.

Any scenario wherein Sanders wins in 2016 is good.

My feeling is that Sanders as a third runner in this election means he loses & gets blamed forever for Trump. (Or for Clinton barely winning but not getting Congress, etc.) This will discredit third party politics. It will reinforce the two parties. It will split the left along the wrong lines.

(Then again, what if he beats Clinton? That would be hot. Just not happening.)

I'm hoping for a robust effort to build a third party starting Jan 2017, run in everything, build towards a genuinely democratic selection process in 2020.

Sucks. What else. Minus organizing, all meaningless.

This is exactly the same as the 2012 election cycle. Those pesky 3rd parties are never getting organized between the generals.

[brekin]

Go Bernie! You can do it!



You are going to make it! Go! Go man go!



You're almost there! This time it is different.



Not.

[Laodicean]

Jill Stein has been reaching out to Bernie Sanders. America cannot ask, who is Jill Stein?

[Wombaticus Rex]

This is exactly the same as the 2012 election cycle. Those pesky 3rd parties are never getting organized between the generals.

Well, this sounds like a very interesting line of operational research: why not?

What are the institutional barriers that keep any third party perpetually on the outside? Why can't they re-orient their mf'ing OODA Loops and start achieving victories?

Here in Vermont, our Democratic Party has had success working with a Progressive Party as a collaborator - an uneasy peace and frankly a problematic consensus that deficit spending with good intentions is always a good idea. Still probably a good case study.

[Novem5er]

Bernie will not run as a third party candidate, mark my words. Why not?

Because American politics is mostly about achieving minor victories for your own side while denying major victories to your opponent.

Bernie will not want to be remembered as the man who cost the Democrats the white house. He does not want to be blamed for 4 or 8 years of Donald Trump. He's been an Independent forever, but he caucuses with the Dems on 99% of all issues. He's not even a Ron Paul who broke with his own party enough times to claim a legitimate party-outsider status. Yet, just like Ron Paul, he will cave to the party platform and urge his delegates to support the party nominee. Ron Paul did this so that his newly elected son in the Senate wouldn't be blacklisted. Bernie will do this because he doesn't want Republicans to win the White House. He doesn't want to be Ralph Nader.

This is also why I've not vocally supported Bernie. I like him. I've liked him for years as I watched him on the news programs criticizing the Bush admin and, later, criticizing the early Obama administration. I support most of the ideas he's put forth. I'd vote for him if he was on the general election ticket. But I'm not a Bernie-bro. After Obama disappointed me, I swore never to get emotionally attached to another politician. We have no saviors.

[bks]

Jill Stein has been reaching out to Bernie Sanders. America cannot ask, who is Jill Stein?

#DROPHILLFORJILL

[justdrew]

our "democracy" CAN NOT HANDLE multi-party politics. It's crazy to think we could. The country is barely governable now. What happens when leadership goes to the guy with the mere plurality? or to the one who got 18% over the one who got 17% - who would consider that valid? Human nature dictates that, in maters of real political organizing, it's always TWO sides. Reality ain't that way, but human mobs ARE that way. Before you react and object to this, please think... how in hell would it really work? With the government as it's currently organized. Sure if we turned into a different form, where party doesn't enter into it until voting to organize in the legislature, or some shit, but it get's complicated and a majority can not or will not even understand how shit works as it is.

That is the Opportunity - to REFORM the democratic party by showing that it: Need Not and Must Not chase "conservative" voters and status-quo belligerent policies, that instead it's got to have a heart, some ideas and ideally a plan to "make things better and fix shit" - that is how this transforms us, the polarized wings both chase toward the new Center... The Bernie Consensus.


The Bernie Consensus

and that is the meme (ideally with some real meat behind it) to get out there.

[Project Willow]

See? Nobody can agree. Yet there's some madness in even haggling over a way forward. There's ample evidence of election fraud. As long as the parties and their partisan propriety software companies run our elections, (registration and voting machines) no one outside the favored circles (criminal networks) will win.

[RocketMan]

It can only be called "squandering" if it wasn't in the cards from the start.

[Harvey]

There is no script but there is inertia.

Is there a percentage share of the vote which couldn't be covered over even by a rigged election?

Edit: A sort of target to aim for? ... I don't really understand the US system.

[divideandconquer]

The only question I have about Sanders is this: why are the power elite's media conglomerates allowing him such a large platform? They could've treated him like Cynthia McKinney in 2008.

In my humble opinion, they're paving the way for the future, erasing the stigma of the socialist party. Why? In order to openly roll out--it's already here-- their Nazi like "socialist" government, whose topmost rungs will enjoy living standards and privileges far, far, far above the mode of life of the average citizen. Yes, lowest equality of life for everyone but the power elite. It is and will be the epitome of socialism for the rich.

I'm not saying Bernie Sanders knows that he's playing a role, but I think that's what he's doing. However, I believe Trump KNOWS he's playing a role, as I've said before, to ensure Hilary gets in and to divide and conquer the Republican party in order to build a party that will support the globalist agenda.

[Cordelia]

The only question I have about Sanders is this: why are the power elite's media conglomerates allowing him such a large platform? They could've treated him like Cynthia McKinney in 2008.

In my humble opinion, they're paving the way for the future, erasing the stigma of the socialist party. Why? In order to openly roll out--it's already here-- their Nazi like "socialist" government, whose topmost rungs will enjoy living standards and privileges far, far, far above the mode of life of the average citizen. Yes, lowest equality of life for everyone but the power elite. It is and will be the epitome of socialism for the rich.

I'm not saying Bernie Sanders knows that he's playing a role, but I think that's what he's doing. However, I believe Trump KNOWS he's playing a role, as I've said before, to ensure Hilary gets in and to divide and conquer the Republican party in order to build a party that will support the globalist agenda.

Why not? He's a very smart man; he must suspect that if he even tried to break up Big Banks that don't want to be broken up, they'd just kill him.

[Novem5er]

our "democracy" CAN NOT HANDLE multi-party politics. It's crazy to think we could. The country is barely governable now. What happens when leadership goes to the guy with the mere plurality? or to the one who got 18% over the one who got 17% - who would consider that valid? Human nature dictates that, in maters of real political organizing, it's always TWO sides. Reality ain't that way, but human mobs ARE that way. Before you react and object to this, please think... how in hell would it really work? With the government as it's currently organized. Sure if we turned into a different form, where party doesn't enter into it until voting to organize in the legislature, or some shit, but it get's complicated and a majority can not or will not even understand how shit works as it is.

That is the Opportunity - to REFORM the democratic party by showing that it: Need Not and Must Not chase "conservative" voters and status-quo belligerent policies, that instead it's got to have a heart, some ideas and ideally a plan to "make things better and fix shit" - that is how this transforms us, the polarized wings both chase toward the new Center... The Bernie Consensus.


The Bernie Consensus

and that is the meme (ideally with some real meat behind it) to get out there.

Coalition governments work when the legislative branch still requires a 51% majority to act. Thus, if the plurality winner only has 34% of the house seats, they'd still need to caucus with another party to get anything accomplished. One the flip side, a simple caucus of opposing parties is enough to block a single party for progressing any agenda. Coalition governments are often slower to react and affect real change, compared to American democracy where, if a party has the Legislature and Executive, shit gets done quick (and often wrong).

Now, that's the legislative branch. You are correct that our separate executive branch throws a wrench into the works. If a president was elected with only 18% of the vote, but still wielded the ultimate power of veto and other executive powers, then a small party could hold the country hostage. Most coalition governments elect their head of government from the plurality party, and their power is much diminished compared to our president.

[bks]

It can only be called "squandering" if it wasn't in the cards from the start.

True. But the opportunity didn't exist at the start. It exists because of the outsized response the campaign has drawn. There hasn't been this strong a left-ish opposition to a presumptive centrist Democrat nominee in more than a generation.

I'm not saying Bernie Sanders knows that he's playing a role, but I think that's what he's doing.

He is doing that, and he does know he is. He just gambled that he could win anyway, which would scrap the role in which he was cast and turn the tables.

But he lost, predictably. In losing, however, he won a huge following that far exceeded elite expectations and probably his own. It presents an opportunity. He won't take it.