Sanders Wins New Hampshire Primary | Talking Points Memo

TPM Article Topics
#562

I agree with you that all on the same day does a disservice. However this piecemeal primary process over such a long period is also a disservice to the voter. My personal take is for a regional primary system, say 6, over a 3 month time period followed within a couple of weeks by the convention. Ideally the whole process, primaries, conventions and general election could be compressed into no more than 6 months. It is emasculation for the candidates as well as voters to have this thing stretch out for well over a year and does absolutely zilch in the way of finding the person who will win.

Another suggestion is to have meaningful debates held by other than self serving “news” organizations. Debates that ask substantive questions and a moderator that would not allow any one individual to avoid a direct answer to the question, answers with some meat on them.

#563

If you look closely at what I wrote you’ll see I wasn’t calling for you to justify yourself and there is no need for you to do so.

#564

I somewhat doubt that what Sanders is calling for is in the same category as those other revolutions.
After all the vehicle he’s suggesting for implementing it is through voting and the Constitution.

#565

my question regarding Leap Year Bernie is, if he so confident about his Socialist agenda…why doesn’t he run as the Independent he has always been? why does he attach himself to the Democratic Party…he registers as a Democrat every 4 years…Leap Year Bernie…i want a candidate who is a genuine , liberal Democrat.

1 Like
#566

I am not justifying myself. I was simply wondering if you brought up an irrelevant analogy fully understanding that it is irrelevant or you still don’t understand that. Neither case is conductive to a productive discussion.

#567

That would be a worthwhile discussion to have (unlike comparisons to American Revolution).

Yes, surely, his preferred methods are quite different from the violent revolutions of the past. But the goals include a revolutionary change in the society, no less revolutionary than the changes thought by those other revolutions. Most importantly, these goals are opposed by significant portions (if not by plurality) of the society. And that means Sanders’ revolution will be either unsuccessful or will lead to a lot of strife and suffering in the society.

Now, it is conceivable that Sanders will manage to control his supporters (no evidence at the moment) and moderate the revolution so that society will not be fractured (even more than it is now) along the way. In which case we are not talking about a revolution – then why all the revolutionary rhetoric?

P.S. Btw, the Russian revolution started peacefully – the tsar was forced to abdicate and the country had a provisional government that could have led to a democracy. But that was way too fast for some and way too slow for others. The provisional government was ovethrown in a matter of months and the violent revolution started. My point is – those who start a revolution never manage to keep it under control.

Comments are now Members-Only
Join the discussion Free options available