Reasons Why Bernie Might Be Able To Govern

[What Would Jesus Do?]

As Bernie gains support, we are already hearing some say "but if he wins, he won't be able to do anything."

Is that true? Does it matter?

Off the top of my head, there are a few reasons why that may not be true.

The most obvious is that he can do some things by executive order. We've seen enough of that under Bush and Obama to know that such power isn't trivial.

Then there's the power to veto. He can't govern by veto, of course, but he may at least be able to keep some things from going the wrong way.

We're assuming he won't have the enthusiastic support of the Dem leadership on his more radical reforms, but all that should mean to most voters is that he won't be able to govern as far to the left as his rhetoric might lead you to think. Disappointing to us lefties, but reassuring to the rest.

No matter who's in the White House, corporations will still call most of the plays. With Bernie there, they won't be calling them from the WH, but they'll still be calling them in Congress.

Bernie will be a 1-term president. He's just too old to run again. We know what kind of toll that job takes on people. Point being, since he won't be running again, there's no reason for the GOP (or other Dems) to engage in obstruction and character assassination and the other ploys we sometimes see aimed at first term presidents. They can just wait him out. If he manages to do things the public likes, the GOP can always let him take the credit and say those aren't really Dem things, they are Bernie things.

Needless to say, I don't expect him to get the D nomination. Or to win the general election if he does get the nomination. But if that should happen, I imagine he'll muddle through and will probably do some good, before we go back to business as usual.

 

[binsfeldcyhawk2]

As Bernie gains support, we are already hearing some say "but if he wins, he won't be able to do anything."

Is that true? Does it matter?

Off the top of my head, there are a few reasons why that may not be true.

The most obvious is that he can do some things by executive order. We've seen enough of that under Bush and Obama to know that such power isn't trivial.

Then there's the power to veto. He can't govern by veto, of course, but he may at least be able to keep some things from going the wrong way.

We're assuming he won't have the enthusiastic support of the Dem leadership on his more radical reforms, but all that should mean to most voters is that he won't be able to govern as far to the left as his rhetoric might lead you to think. Disappointing to us lefties, but reassuring to the rest.

No matter who's in the White House, corporations will still call most of the plays. With Bernie there, they won't be calling them from the WH, but they'll still be calling them in Congress.

Bernie will be a 1-term president. He's just too old to run again. We know what kind of toll that job takes on people. Point being, since he won't be running again, there's no reason for the GOP (or other Dems) to engage in obstruction and character assassination and the other ploys we sometimes see aimed at first term presidents. They can just wait him out. If he manages to do things the public likes, the GOP can always let him take the credit and say those aren't really Dem things, they are Bernie things.

Needless to say, I don't expect him to get the D nomination. Or to win the general election if he does get the nomination. But if that should happen, I imagine he'll muddle through and will probably do some good, before we go back to business as usual.

The logic is sound but I think it's pretty unrealistic to think that there won't be obstructionism...it's just the way things work nowadays.

 

[strummingram]

I'd like to see he criticism of Bernanke go further into, at least, an audit of the Fed. Socialists believe in a central bank, so there's no chance for him ending the Fed. The Fed is the biggest impediment to the country, culture and society.

I don't think Bernie lacks the ability to govern at all. Their executive traits are not as visible when they're a senator instead of a governor. I don't think we've had a senator-turned-president since JFK.

 

[IMCC965]

You want this guy to be president? An old white guy is the best choice who's on death's door?

Rrrrrriiiiiiiggggghhhhhhht.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I'd like to see he criticism of Bernanke go further into, at least, an audit of the Fed. Socialists believe in a central bank, so there's no chance for him ending the Fed. The Fed is the biggest impediment to the country, culture and society.

I don't think Bernie lacks the ability to govern at all. Their executive traits are not as visible when they're a senator instead of a governor. I don't think we've had a senator-turned-president since JFK.

I seem to recall Bernie introduced or sponsored a bill to audit the Fed.

By all accounts he was a good mayor. But that's a very different size pond.

 

[strummingram]

I seem to recall Bernie introduced or sponsored a bill to audit the Fed.

By all accounts he was a good mayor. But that's a very different size pond.

I think Ron Paul introduced and sponsored the bill. Sanders may have co-sponsored. I need to look closer at Sanders' stance on the Fed. He might gain a more fervent supporter if he wants them out of business.

 

[IMCC965]

What part of "Bernie is a socialist" do you people not understand?

If he's elected, he will drive this country down the crapper even faster than it is today. He's a freaking socialist for God's sake!!!

 

[naturalmwa]

What part of "Bernie is a socialist" do you people not understand?

If he's elected, he will drive this country down the crapper even faster than it is today. He's a freaking socialist for God's sake!!!

We're all socialists now. Get over it.

 

[Torg]

Y

What part of "Bernie is a socialist" do you people not understand?

If he's elected, he will drive this country down the crapper even faster than it is today. He's a freaking socialist for God's sake!!![/

What part of "Bernie is a socialist" do you people not understand?

If he's elected, he will drive this country down the crapper even faster than it is today. He's a freaking socialist for God's sake!!!

yeah, give him a few years and he will turn us into Denmark or Norway or Germany

 

[shank hawk]

Just because the other 434 congress critters and senators weren't ballsy (or stupid) enough to run as socialists, doesn't mean they aren't essentially all the same. Socialists, fascists, communists, oligarchists, corporatists, etc.

It's such a fine line separating them all it may as well not even exist.

Oh, crap. I left out republicans and democrats too!

Don't worry. If Mr. Sanders wins any opposition he faces will be strictly for show. He's perfectly fine with our pursuit of empire and his record shows it.
https://www.popularresistance.org/lets-not-be-fooled-by-bernie-sanders/

 

[IMCC965]

Y


yeah, give him a few years and he will turn us into Denmark or Norway or Germany

I like how you progressives ALWAYS bring up those countries when it comes to Bernie. The three combined don't add up to our population. And all three take advantage of their own resources in order to provide the giveaway cash you guys so desperately want.

And with the out of control immigration, we will NEVER have the money or resources that would demand the results you think we could get for instituting the same system that those three countries have.

Look no further than the favela-laden countries to our south. That is how we would end up if we adopted socialism in this country.

 

[joelbc1]

What part of "Bernie is a socialist" do you people not understand?

If he's elected, he will drive this country down the crapper even faster than it is today. He's a freaking socialist for God's sake!!!

What socialist laws are governing this country today, IMCC? How do you think Bernie will put the country on the expressway to "socialism" without Congress granting him permission to so? The last "socialist" POTUS this country had was the greatest POTUS this country has seen in the last 150 years.

 

[22*43*51]

What socialist laws are governing this country today, IMCC? How do you think Bernie will put the country on the expressway to "socialism" without Congress granting him permission to so? The last "socialist" POTUS this country had was the greatest POTUS this country has seen in the last 150 years.

His ideas are all "Trickle Down Government".

Sounds like Socialism to me.

 

[TexMichFan]

As Bernie gains support, we are already hearing some say "but if he wins, he won't be able to do anything."

Is that true? Does it matter?

Off the top of my head, there are a few reasons why that may not be true.

The most obvious is that he can do some things by executive order. We've seen enough of that under Bush and Obama to know that such power isn't trivial.

Then there's the power to veto. He can't govern by veto, of course, but he may at least be able to keep some things from going the wrong way.

We're assuming he won't have the enthusiastic support of the Dem leadership on his more radical reforms, but all that should mean to most voters is that he won't be able to govern as far to the left as his rhetoric might lead you to think. Disappointing to us lefties, but reassuring to the rest.

No matter who's in the White House, corporations will still call most of the plays. With Bernie there, they won't be calling them from the WH, but they'll still be calling them in Congress.

Bernie will be a 1-term president. He's just too old to run again. We know what kind of toll that job takes on people. Point being, since he won't be running again, there's no reason for the GOP (or other Dems) to engage in obstruction and character assassination and the other ploys we sometimes see aimed at first term presidents. They can just wait him out. If he manages to do things the public likes, the GOP can always let him take the credit and say those aren't really Dem things, they are Bernie things.

Needless to say, I don't expect him to get the D nomination. Or to win the general election if he does get the nomination. But if that should happen, I imagine he'll muddle through and will probably do some good, before we go back to business as usual.

You might be overlooking the chance that the Democrats and Republicans won't work with him.

 

[terrehawk]

Just because the other 434 congress critters and senators weren't ballsy (or stupid) enough to run as socialists, doesn't mean they aren't essentially all the same. Socialists, fascists, communists, oligarchists, corporatists, etc.

It's such a fine line separating them all it may as well not even exist.

Oh, crap. I left out republicans and democrats too!

Don't worry. If Mr. Sanders wins any opposition he faces will be strictly for show. He's perfectly fine with our pursuit of empire and his record shows it.
https://www.popularresistance.org/lets-not-be-fooled-by-bernie-sanders/

Let’s not be fooled by “progressives” who can’t find their spines when the colonial regime in Israel bombs the crowded ghetto of Gaza.
Bernie Sanders ends his recent column “Let’s Stand Together” with this piece of advice: “Let’s not be fooled.”

Quite right. Let’s not be fooled by any politician appealing to high ideals when they are in the business of war and empire.

Sanders not only defends military contracts that benefit his constituents in Vermont, he also joined the 100 to 0 vote in the Senate to give unalloyed moral and political support to the state of Israel during its most recent bombing campaign against Gaza.


Above: Sanders confronted at town hall meeting in Vermont on his support for Israel’s attack on Gaza.

Elizabeth Warren, the other darling of “progressive” Democrats, also joined that vote. Her brand of populism amounts to a campaign against corruption and for regulation of big banks and high finance. In other words, capitalist utopianism.


Above: Elizabeth Warren runs from question about Israel.

My job in this miniature column is not to argue about the definition of such words as liberal, progressive, or even socialist. Once in a while the blatant contradictions not only speak for themselves, but make any thinking person cry out for justice.

Did the “progressives” of the Democratic Party learn any lessons from Obama’s campaign for hope and change? Nothing at all. They go right on debating the fine points of the stupid horse race between Hillary Clinton and any “left” contender among career Democrats who might run a symbolic campaign against her for the presidential nomination.

Sanders is the lone avowed socialist in Congress, though in official partisan terms he was elected as an independent. This has two practical consequences, neither good. In Congress, Sanders caucuses with the other career Democrats. And Sanders does nothing to build the base of any independent party of anti-corporate resistance. Thus any challenge he might raise against Hillary for the presidential nomination amounts, first and foremost, to a vanity campaign.

Let’s not be fooled by “progressives” who can’t find their spines when the colonial regime in Israel bombs the crowded ghetto of Gaza.

Independent political action against the corporate state is the single most important issue, not only in every big election but also in day to day resistance against capitalism and militarism. Otherwise every other issue of great importance— yes, including fossil fuels and climate change, the militarization of police departments, the ruling class war of attrition against the working class— will gain no traction. In class struggles, there is a law of nature: No friction, no traction.

Not one cent and not one vote for the parties of war and empire.

More on the history of Bernie Sanders and militarism as well as his alliance with the Democratic Party:

Liberty Union Party, Bernie the Bombers Bad Week.

Counterpunch, The Myth of Bernie Sanders

Counterpunch, Bernie Sanders Cannot Save US

 

[strummingram]

Just because the other 434 congress critters and senators weren't ballsy (or stupid) enough to run as socialists, doesn't mean they aren't essentially all the same. Socialists, fascists, communists, oligarchists, corporatists, etc.

It's such a fine line separating them all it may as well not even exist.

Oh, crap. I left out republicans and democrats too!

Don't worry. If Mr. Sanders wins any opposition he faces will be strictly for show. He's perfectly fine with our pursuit of empire and his record shows it.
https://www.popularresistance.org/lets-not-be-fooled-by-bernie-sanders/

You're a good man! Thanks for all your help!

 

[strummingram]

Let’s not be fooled by “progressives” who can’t find their spines when the colonial regime in Israel bombs the crowded ghetto of Gaza.
Bernie Sanders ends his recent column “Let’s Stand Together” with this piece of advice: “Let’s not be fooled.”

Quite right. Let’s not be fooled by any politician appealing to high ideals when they are in the business of war and empire.

Sanders not only defends military contracts that benefit his constituents in Vermont, he also joined the 100 to 0 vote in the Senate to give unalloyed moral and political support to the state of Israel during its most recent bombing campaign against Gaza.


Above: Sanders confronted at town hall meeting in Vermont on his support for Israel’s attack on Gaza.

Elizabeth Warren, the other darling of “progressive” Democrats, also joined that vote. Her brand of populism amounts to a campaign against corruption and for regulation of big banks and high finance. In other words, capitalist utopianism.


Above: Elizabeth Warren runs from question about Israel.

My job in this miniature column is not to argue about the definition of such words as liberal, progressive, or even socialist. Once in a while the blatant contradictions not only speak for themselves, but make any thinking person cry out for justice.

Did the “progressives” of the Democratic Party learn any lessons from Obama’s campaign for hope and change? Nothing at all. They go right on debating the fine points of the stupid horse race between Hillary Clinton and any “left” contender among career Democrats who might run a symbolic campaign against her for the presidential nomination.

Sanders is the lone avowed socialist in Congress, though in official partisan terms he was elected as an independent. This has two practical consequences, neither good. In Congress, Sanders caucuses with the other career Democrats. And Sanders does nothing to build the base of any independent party of anti-corporate resistance. Thus any challenge he might raise against Hillary for the presidential nomination amounts, first and foremost, to a vanity campaign.

Let’s not be fooled by “progressives” who can’t find their spines when the colonial regime in Israel bombs the crowded ghetto of Gaza.

Independent political action against the corporate state is the single most important issue, not only in every big election but also in day to day resistance against capitalism and militarism. Otherwise every other issue of great importance— yes, including fossil fuels and climate change, the militarization of police departments, the ruling class war of attrition against the working class— will gain no traction. In class struggles, there is a law of nature: No friction, no traction.

Not one cent and not one vote for the parties of war and empire.

More on the history of Bernie Sanders and militarism as well as his alliance with the Democratic Party:

Liberty Union Party, Bernie the Bombers Bad Week.

Counterpunch, The Myth of Bernie Sanders

Counterpunch, Bernie Sanders Cannot Save US

Big thanks to you, too.

You're raining on most everyone's parade, though. They really think they're making a difference by voting for these mf'ers. And, they argue intensely with each other as if they were these individuals they claim to support. Fact is, if these folks here were in government, themselves, it might be a legitimate argument. These bought-off shills that they vote for really couldn't care less about them. Rather than admit that, and address it, they'd much rather go on convincing themselves that the few crumbs that fall are actually a banquet.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I think Ron Paul introduced and sponsored the bill. Sanders may have co-sponsored. I need to look closer at Sanders' stance on the Fed. He might gain a more fervent supporter if he wants them out of business.

Ron Paul in the House, Bernie in the Senate? Something like that.

 

[shank hawk]

You're a good man! Thanks for all your help!

No problem: we just gotta keep exposing the hell out of them all.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

You might be overlooking the chance that the Democrats and Republicans won't work with him.

I'm not overlooking that. That's the assumption of everyone who says he won't be able to govern. I'm just pointing to reasons why that might not be true,

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Just because the other 434 congress critters and senators weren't ballsy (or stupid) enough to run as socialists, doesn't mean they aren't essentially all the same. Socialists, fascists, communists, oligarchists, corporatists, etc.

It's such a fine line separating them all it may as well not even exist.

Oh, crap. I left out republicans and democrats too!

Don't worry. If Mr. Sanders wins any opposition he faces will be strictly for show. He's perfectly fine with our pursuit of empire and his record shows it.
https://www.popularresistance.org/lets-not-be-fooled-by-bernie-sanders/

The Republican and Democratic parties, or, to be more exact, the Republican-Democratic party, represent the capitalist class in the class struggle. They are the political wings of the capitalist system and such differences as arise between them relate to spoils and not to principles. With either of those parties in power, one thing is always certain, and that is that the capitalist class is in the saddle and the working class under the saddle. -- Eugene V Debs, 1904

Today Debs would probably say "corporations" instead of "capitalist class" and "oligarchy" or "fascist system" instead of "capitalist system" but the idea is the same.

Actually you could make the argument that Debs's claim is even more true today. In fact that argument has been made - and proved, according to this Princeton study:

http://www.pdamerica.org/component/k2/item/662-princeton-study-u-s-no-longer-an-actual-democracy

 

[strummingram]

No problem: we just gotta keep exposing the hell out of them all.

I don't think exposure has much of an effect. As I said, most of these people who consider themselves politically active are just as married to this corrupt, broken system as the corrupt, broken candidates they support and vote for, or against. Revealing the truths about how they're corrupt, flawed, ineffective, etc., won't do any good to someone that is totally vested in the system. In that sense, politics is like a religion.

 

[bagdropper]

If you think we got gridlock now, elect Bernie or Warren and see what Obama on steroids looks like. Not only would then not get a single thing done with republicans, half the dems will also bail on them.

He'll be able to govern just fine. He'll also not get one single solitary thing passed that he wants other than the rainbows and unicorns type stuff nobody disagrees with.

 

[strummingram]

If you think we got gridlock now, elect Bernie or Warren and see what Obama on steroids looks like. Not only would then not get a single thing done with republicans, half the dems will also bail on them.

He'll be able to govern just fine. He'll also not get one single solitary thing passed that he wants other than the rainbows and unicorns type stuff nobody disagrees with.

I only like the multi-colored Unicorns and Single-color rainbows.

 

[hooper56]

He lacks even a very basic knowledge of economics. It is really disturbing. I honestly think he is a lunatic.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

He lacks even a very basic knowledge of economics. It is really disturbing. I honestly think he is a lunatic.

 

[Vroom_C14]

We could just absorb Mexico, Jamaica,

His ideas are all "Trickle Down Government".

Sounds like Socialism to me.

Bernie's ad for his campaign.

 

[joelbc1]

You might be overlooking the chance that the Democrats and Republicans won't work with him.

You mean like the GOP won't work with Obama?

 

[moral_victory]

I don't think exposure has much of an effect. As I said, most of these people who consider themselves politically active are just as married to this corrupt, broken system as the corrupt, broken candidates they support and vote for, or against. Revealing the truths about how they're corrupt, flawed, ineffective, etc., won't do any good to someone that is totally vested in the system. In that sense, politics is like a religion.

Who are you libertarians touting this go around?

 

[naturalmwa]

If you think we got gridlock now, elect Bernie or Warren and see what Obama on steroids looks like. Not only would then not get a single thing done with republicans, half the dems will also bail on them.

He'll be able to govern just fine. He'll also not get one single solitary thing passed that he wants other than the rainbows and unicorns type stuff nobody disagrees with.

I sort of like this scenario. Bernie unites the nation and returns Congressional control over the legislative agenda. This is a reason for constitutionalists to vote Bernie.

 

[shank hawk]

Who are you libertarians touting this go around?

As a libertarian/anarchist, and obviously not speaking for anyone else, I am not voting. Again.

The one person that should have some libertarian credentials, Rand Paul, is an absolute sellout: to his own dad. He ignorantly assumed that the base his dad built over decades would automatically lead him to the front of the pack. And for a while they seemed to give him the benefit of the doubt.

His flip/flops and lack of passion apparently made it hard for libertarians to accept him, so I guess the majority of them are marching in Trump's parade now???? The country is so effed anyway, but deep down I'm hoping for anybody but Bush v. Clinton.

Just my $.02 worth man.