revolutionActress Susan Sarandon has said “some people feel that Donald Trump will bring the revolution immediately, if he gets in. Then things will really, you know, explode.” She made similar comments on The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore.

Then last week, on Late Night with Stephen Colbert, “Sarandon took her argument a step further, all but encouraging [Bernie] Sanders supporters to sit out in November should Clinton become the Democratic nominee.”

I know other people willing to vote for DJT rather than HRC, because Trump will either make things better or so much worse that people will get off their duffs and have mass protests. Whereas Hillary will be an incrementalist, picking off a couple Sanders issues to placate the left. More than one person has suggested that Hillary would make a good Republican from the era before many of them (Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina) went guano crazy.

I keep vacillating between expecting the revolution, the political one that Bernie Sanders keeps talking about, or perhaps worse, and… almost nothing.

In response to a comment from an old acquaintance of mine, a fellow named Max Dee wrote:

At one point, I thought riots would be breaking out all over. I figure the American people had finally been pushed to their limit and they would take to the street to express their displeasure at being treated like garbage by their elected leaders. Didn’t happen. I wanted to find out why.

Then there was a huge demonstration in Chicago. People were coming from all over to protest. But what the cause? Macy’s was removing the name Marshall Field from the store. And in looking, I see it again and again.

Huge outbreak of civil disobedience. The cause? Sporting events. Black Friday. Lotto Fever. What would really upset the masses? Dropping the Super Bowl coverage. What would get people riled up and shouting? Delay shipping in the latest smart phone. At one point I didn’t think we could have a president as bad as Dubya Bush. Now I don’t think we’ll have one any better. You get the government you deserve.

Now rioting does happen, when the social contract gets broken. But it’s usually in marginalized communities, and onlookers scratch their heads and say, “What’s wrong with THOSE people? They’re burning down their own neighborhoods!”

Given the continuing inequality that Occupy Wall Street began addressing a half decade ago, where do you think we’re going as a country:
1) If Trump wins (which many people dismiss as a possibility, but I’m not one of them)
2) If Clinton wins

A bunch of religious leaders have issued a Call to Resist Bigotry — A Statement of Faithful Obedience. DJT is the target.

Oh, a note to you rabid Clinton supporters: these belligerent calls for Bernie to drop out of the race, since he has no likely path to the nomination, are not helpful. He maintains leverage going to the convention as a candidate, to formulate the party platform. Of course, NO ONE EVER remembers much what’s on the platform. Frankly, Hillary’s folk cannot fathom the depth of the true left’s contempt for her family.

Those Bernie supporters are not Bernie’s just to hand over. They’re committed to HIM, not the Democratic party, which he only recently joined. His supporters are grieving his, and their, probable loss, and you’re over there hectoring, “Get over it!” Please Stop It.

In time, some will vote for Clinton; I will, even though she’s more of a war hawk than I’d like. I know I’m reacting, in part, as a response to some blatant sexism. What IS the “woman card” that Drump has accused Clinton of playing? Is it like the race card, only with estrogen instead of melanin?

A few Bernie supporters will vote for Trump. A bunch of them will cast their ballot for Jill Stein from the Green Party. A fair number will stay home in November. Hill fans: your nagging WILL NOT HELP your cause; give it time.

9 Responses to “Where is the revolution?”

  • uthaclena says:

    The Conservative Democrats who support Hillary
    don’t seem to recognize the depth of Hillary’s negative.
    I would not feel conflicted is, say Joe Biden had run
    and was beating Bernie. Not only do I dislike Hillary’s
    POLICIES (Iraq: “misled” my @$$!), but I dislike her
    imperious personality, much as I do the Donald’s. Now
    Conservative Dems are saying we “owe” the Party
    our votes, we should be Afraid of the Republicants,
    and feel Anticipatory Guilt if we “cost” her the election.
    Screw that.

  • Jaquandor says:

    Casting Hillary Clinton as some kind of conservative, or even a Republican, makes so little sense to me I can’t even figure out how to discuss things with people who think that way, and if I have to suffer through another disaster of an ACTUAL Republican presidency because Bernie Sanders’s supporters feel the need to do Ralph Nader 2.0, well…the idea then was, “Hey, let the country find out what Republican governance is really like and then we’ll have the REAL liberal awakening in the US!” Didn’t work then, and I’m not loving the idea of repeating it.

    This is how nomination fights work. Multiple people run, and someone WINS. Sanders supporters can pout over this if they like, but if they wind up giving us President Trump because of either direct action OR inaction? President Trump signing Tea Party policies into law? Nominating Tea Party judges, so that I’m likely to never see a liberal-leaning court for the rest of my life (and I’m 44)? Screw THAT.

  • Roger says:

    I thought Bill was far more of a centralist, at best, cutting welfare, 3 strikes, et al. That lukewarm Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. The problem with the REpublicans, virtually all of them who ran this year for President, is that they are SOo right-leaning, that it skews the left-right dynamic (if it’s of any use, which I often wonder).

  • Jaquandor says:

    Well, he was, but you have to keep in mind those times, too. Even as George HW Bush’s popularity sank, liberalism and liberal Democrats really didn’t start becoming more popular again, and his first real attempt at doing something that was honest-to-goodness progressive (health care reform) went down in flames, and then he almost immediately had a Republican Congress to deal with.

    Presidents don’t exist in vacuums, and I think it behooves us not just to think in terms of what we want but what can be actually done given circumstances right now (and to judge things that happened by circumstances that existed then). Along those lines, while I agree with Sanders on many a policy issue (and I suspect HRC does to a greater extent than is usually conceded), I don’t think he’d get much of it enacted.

    The conservative movement in this country spent many years doing the low-level work necessary to create their policy infrastructure. The progressive movement simply has not done the same, and I’m not seeing evidence that it has any intention of doing so, and that frustrates me. The “revolution” can’t just be voting Bernie in; it has to be showing up for every election and getting progressive candidates on town and city councils and school boards and county and state legislatures. That’s what the Right has focused on in this country, while the Left has been pitching tents on Wall Street. I said someplace else that the Sanders supporters seem to think ‘revolution’ is showing up with muskets at Concord, and then the British surrender. Are they up for eight years of slogging through the mud, starving over winter, freezing at Valley Forge, and losing many battles along the way? I’m not seeing it. All I’m seeing is wishful thinking in which Sanders is elected and the US pivots farther to the left than it’s been in eighty years. I’ve even had Sanders supporters tell me that it doesn’t matter if the Republicans keep Congress because they’ll be so scared of the Sanders revolution that they’ll fall in line. Huh?!

    (Sorry to get long-winded, but the “Bernie or Bust” business really angers me.)

  • Roger says:

    There is a similar irritation among Bernie supporters. Literally, I see both sides every single day. Bernie himself has said REPEATEDLY that he would do everything he could to keep the GOP from the WH. But his supporters are not his just to hand over to HRC; they are invested in Bern, not the Democratic party. There needs to be a mourning period once Bernie is mathematically eliminated. It can happen after the convention.

  • Roger says:

    The Bernie folks DO want some members of Congress, e.g., Zephyr Teachout –

  • Awesome post, and great discussion, too! As you know, at every opportunity I’ve repeated my pledge that “I’m voting Blue, no matter who,” and I mean that: BOTH Clinton and Sanders are light years better than any of the Republicans—it frustrates me that some of Bernie’s fans argue otherwise.

    Be that as it may, I think Sanders should remain in the race, but for a very a different reason: As long as there’s some sort of contest, the media will have to give it some attention. The minute it’s decided, they’ll turn ALL their attention to the Donald Drumpf Travelling Fascist Circus. If Clinton really is the nominee, then one of the best things Sanders can do to help her is to stay in the race. The fact that some of Hillary’s fans can’t see that just goes to show, I think, that fans of ANY candidate aren’t necessarily the best folks to turn to for rational political advice.

  • Diana ONeill says:

    I’m a “buster”. I’m doing a Bernie write in if necessary, even if it means nothing, or, that Trump gets it because so many others do so as well.

    Could a BUSTER campaign to write in Bernie win him the popular vote in the November election? Think about it. ANYONE of any party can do it. (Vote for anyone) Democrats who had voted for HRC in primaries, or, not at all, Independents, even Republicans, who do not want Trump (nor HRC)……all can write in for Bernie.

    because u r correct: Sanders cannot “give” his backers to HRC.

    Fuck the 15% of the Total “Democratic” primary vote being 715 DNC assigned SUPER PEOPLE (….including Bill Clinton). Really? Total state Popular vote earned delegates 4,051 and 715 DNC assigned supers?
    And well over 400 of them IMMEDIATELY pledged to HRC to start her off on the road…. (while Bernie has picked up only 41, despite being neck and neck; LARGE GROUPS of primaries with Sanders beING 5-10% of popular vote behind HRC, to his being 30% AHEAD OF HER (yes, when he won the 8 of 9 states).
    That’s why there are burners Burning and feeling burnt, and beyond pissed the fuck off. Even right now the pledged count is C:1665; S:1370. But she only needs 218 pledged or supers to win nomination of 2,382, because she has 498 super delegate votes. Really. Fuck the DNC.
    The popular vote in Feb [4 states] totalled C: 50.2% S: 45.9%
    The popular vote 3/1 [12 states; 7 southern] C: 51% S: 43%
    The popular vote in mid March (12 states) C: 53.5% S: 43.9%
    The popular vote end Mar/early Apr(9 states) S: 65% C: 34.5%
    The popular vote mid-late April (6 NE states) C: 55% S: 48.4%
    This last in a contested race in NY where 100’s of thousands (particularly 1st time voters) were not on, removed from records, no alt. ballot forms available for them, voting sites not openeed for 2 hrs in am, etc etc with call for re-vote to be decided by Federal authorities, as opposed to DNC in NY…..for obvious reasons, like how MA, and AZ handled their attrocities.
    LOL didja see how PA was called for HRC with 2% reporting, but CT had Bernie ahead all day, thru 6pm when at 61% reporting, HRC suddenly became ahead by 0.4%. I was informed by a reliable source in CA (Alan Hahn) watching with me, that DE was called for HRC with no % of any precincts reporting.
    Oh, this capaign is a laugh RIOT.

    WHEN BERNIE won his 8/9 states with ave 65% to her 34.5% The heat was on, and it got ugly fast; the DNC shut down 140 of 200 polling sites in AZ. It worked. At least as well as Bill going to polling sites in MA on election day)

    (play yourself “won’t you please come to Ohio” and sit quietly without any screens or sounds for just 5 minutes)
    Peace, out. Diana

  • No independent candidate, no third party candidate, and no write-in candidate has even the remotest chance of winning the presidency because the system is set-up to ensure that only a Democrat or Republican can win. A winning candidate must have a majority of the Electoral College—270 Electoral Votes—to win the presidency. No independent will get on the ballot in enough states to make that possible, and no write-in candidate will win in any state, in part because it’s asking too much of voters, and also because the barrier is so high. No third party has won the presidency since 1860, and I guarantee they won’t this year.

    The winner of the November election WILL be a Democrat or Drumpf, and there’s absolutely no way I’d EVER vote for Drumpf or do anything that would allow him to win. The stakes are FAR to high! The next US President will nominate two or three Supreme Court justices, and that will set the course of the court for a generation. Republicans want to outlaw all abortions and to outlaw marriage equality, as well as further restrict voting rights, and they plan on doing that through the Supreme Court by only nominating extremists.

    In my personal view, it’s only the privileged and entitled among Bernie Sanders’ fans who can afford to risk a President Drumpf. But for all the rest of us—especially those us who are at risk from the crypto fascistic agenda of Drumpf—the stakes are far too high to resort to a temper tantrum.

    I’m voting Blue, no matter who—because elections have consequences, and a Drumpf presidency would be about as dire as it gets.

Leave a Reply

Contact me
  • E-mail Contact E-mail; Blog content c 2005-2018, Roger Green, unless otherwise stated. Quotes used per fair use. Some content, including many graphics, in the public domain.
  • Privacy policy Privacy policy of this blog
I Actually Know These Folks
I contribute to these blogs
Other people's blogs
Popular culture
Useful stuff
wordpress analytics
Please follow & like us :)
Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial