MyDD :: Sign up, Sanders for Senate

Sign up, Sanders for Senate

by Jerome Armstrong, Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 03:31:19 PM EST

You miss Paul Wellstone? Well, Bernie Sanders is going to run for the Senate in Vermont. Sanders held a conference call with BlogPac today. As the first chairman of the Progressive coalition (now with over 50 members in the House), I don't think we can ask for a better Senator to represent the progressive values in contrast to the conservative agenda.

I've been told that Schumer and Reid have both indicated that the DC Dems are fine with the Independent Sanders running without a Democratic challenge. The Vermont Guardian has a recap of the shuffling going on in Vermont. Sanders doesn't accept corporate Pac money, and we can count on him to be the peoples voice in the Senate on issues like the concentration of wealth & media, and unequal trade. Everyone, go and sign up on Bernie's website, this is a seat we have to get behind.

Tags: Senate 2006 (all tags)

Permalink :: 35 Comments :: Post a Comment

I'll be sending my check (3.00 / 1)

He could be even better than Wellstone.

by Drummond on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 03:43:53 PM EST

Re: I'll be sending my check (none / 0)

I'm waiting to support him, too.

by morris1030 on Sat Apr 23, 2005 at 05:56:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sanders for America? (none / 0)

If it turns out that Evan Bayh or someone like him is our nominee, I'll be pushing pretty hard for it.

by craverguy on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 03:44:39 PM EST

Hmmm... (none / 0)

How do we spin Vermont as part of the West?

by Frontier PAC on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 03:45:30 PM EST

Re: Hmmm... (none / 0)

Um...it's very rural?

by craverguy on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 03:47:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It almost has mountains. It's... (none / 0)

just east of a "big" body of water. (They want to call Lake Champlain the sixth Great Lake). It borders Canada like Idaho?

Jeff Wegerson - PrairieStateBlue

by wegerje on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 05:01:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you crazy? (none / 0)

Silence, whelp!

by craverguy on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 04:03:06 PM EST

what an idiot (none / 0)

If we run a Dem, we'll split the vote and give the Republicians the seat. Why we're at why not challenge Ted Kennedy, we don't want to be associated with ANYONE who dares stand up for something

Tennesseans for Feingold

by ben114 on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 04:08:39 PM EST

Not really (none / 0)

In the last few election cycles, Bernie has faced dem and republican challengers at the same time. The dems only got about 5-10% of the vote, with the repubs getting anbout 25-32% and Bernie winning with a landslide in the 64-69% range.

by edgeplot on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 04:42:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not really (none / 0)

I really meant a serious challenge.

Tennesseans for Feingold

by ben114 on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 04:51:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not really (none / 0)

Well I think someone needs to run as a Democrat, just so the Republican can't get both nominations, hell the Democrat can even endorse Bernie Sanders.

Councilman Bill Painter

by Painter2004 on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 04:56:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not really (none / 0)

how about someone starting a "write in Bernie" campaign for the Democratic nomination?

by johnny longtorso on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 05:16:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not really (none / 0)

This has happened before and Sanders respectfully declined the Democratic nomination.

by blogswarm on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 06:19:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not really (none / 0)

his 2004 Republican challenger raised over $650,000, about 80% of what Bernie raised. doesn't that count as serious?

by johnny longtorso on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 06:29:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not really (none / 0)

He meant a serious challenge from a Democrat. You know, someone who might split the vote with Bernie just enough to let the Republican win.

by craverguy on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 06:40:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you crazy? (none / 0)

You happen to know squat.

And it shows.

The 10,000 Things

by Andrew C White on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 04:08:49 PM EST

From Bernie's website: (3.00 / 2)

Bernie Sanders not only has a 100% labor voting record, he always stands with working people in their efforts to achieve fairness and dignity.

Daniel Brush
President
Vermont AFL-CIO

by craverguy on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 04:10:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: From Bernie's website: (none / 0)

Exactly so.

The 10,000 Things

by Andrew C White on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 04:16:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: From Bernie's website: (none / 0)

Methinks the guy lost his little green football somewhere.

The 10,000 Things

by Andrew C White on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 04:16:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

WE need to vote our consience! (3.00 / 1)

Knock it off! We don't need to look for any excuses for not doing what we think is right!

Even though Jeffords was an independent, he caucused with the Democrats. Same with Bernie.

Face it, it's not too hard to look outside the Democratic party for people who exibit real Democratic values...

"The only way to ensure a free press is to own one."

by Rico on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 05:01:48 PM EST

Re: WE need to vote our consience! (none / 0)

Vote our consience? What tosh! That might lead to STANDING UP FOR OUR PRINCIPLES, and we can't have Democrats doing that, now can we?

by craverguy on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 05:05:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you crazy? (none / 0)

We're already "associated" with him. I don't believe Vermont Democrats run or support serious candidates against Sanders, and he caucuses with the Democrats.

Why run "our own" candidate when he or she would not only lose, but also potentially give the seat to the Republicans? I'm a loyal Democrat, but running a serious candidate against Bernie is stupid, stupid, stupid. If, as you say, the AFL-CIO is searching for a candidate to run against someone with a 100% pro-labor record, then it really is clear that they're more interested in propping up the Democratic Party than in actually working for workers.

by punishinglemur on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 05:02:32 PM EST

Re: Are you crazy? (none / 0)

He is more 'our candidate' than our candidates... if that makes sense.

by dryfly on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 11:59:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you crazy? (none / 0)

very true

by punishinglemur on Sat Apr 30, 2005 at 06:08:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What is the "Progressive coalition"? (none / 0)

Why haven't I heard anything about the "Progressive coalition" or "Progressive Caucus"? Are they not weilding much power? They sound like a group that could really use our support.

From Bernie Sanders' site:

"The Progressive Caucus... has helped lead the effort in Congress to protect the interests of the ordinary citizens of this country who cannot afford to contribute large sums of money to buy political influence. They have also played an active role against the war in Iraq."

Right on! From someone who doesn't believe Democrats really stand for the issues that are most important, for instance a alternative energy (a massive problem) and global warming, higher gas taxes, rejuvenation of unions, less defense spending, more spending on education and mass transportation, a much higher top tax bracket, fairer globalization policies, and a realigned foreign policy which respects international law, a 50-member progressive coalition within the Democrats could be a very appealing network to support.

For anyone trying to access Bernie's site but finding it unavailable, here's a link to Google's catalog of the site's pages. (Click the links labeled "Cached" of course)

Alas, the Progressive Caucus' web site doesn't appear to really be that progressive or even that active. Back to Zmag for me!

by Scott Teresi on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 05:04:18 PM EST

Re: What is the "Progressive coalition"? (none / 0)

Well, even though it's the largest majority-Democrat caucus, it's not very powerful because it's the only caucus in Congress to have no senators as members. Paul Wellstone was in it, but he died.

by craverguy on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 05:07:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm surprised... (none / 0)

...that Feingold, Boxer, or Kennedy isn't a member.

by Geotpf on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 07:57:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Then again... (none / 0)

...scratch Boxer. She's in the movie and music industy's pockets. I forgot.

(Yeah, yeah, everybody is going to yell at me, but check her voting record-it's true.)

by Geotpf on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 08:00:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What is the "Progressive coalition"? (3.00 / 1)

The Congressional Progressive Caucus has little power in the current Republican-dominated House (and no presence in the Senate), but it does have observeable effects sometimes. It organized the Democratic house revolt against the Iraq war bill, that led to 2/3 of the Democrats in the house voting no despite their leadership supporting the bill (and Gephardt being almost a co-author :/). Kucinich was chair of the progressive caucus and that was one of his claims to leadership experience, when he ran for president.

by cos on Sat Apr 23, 2005 at 02:48:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I would be proud ... (3.00 / 1)

of the Dems if they decided to cooperate with someone not offically in the fold.

And, though I have never heard of this guy, the idea that a committed pro-labor guy would lead the way would be balm to my soul.

Charge!

by Thresholder on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 05:12:36 PM EST

Generational problem (3.00 / 1)

There seems to be an entire generation (if not worse) of Americans who've been taught that socialism is bad -- you know, like capitalism never is! Those of us who've grown up without suffering severe Reagan hallucinations or Fox dependency have also experienced some of the better, infrequent moments in US history -- when "socialism" and "capitalism" have been in some sort of political balance.

Sanders is my kind of guy. More power to him. Literally! The Dems should be so lucky!

Next stop: his website.

by Bean on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 06:13:02 PM EST

Did he actually declare? (none / 0)

He was pretty adamant this morning that he was not going to declare at this time, but that he is seriously considering a run, as he has said for several years would be the case if Jeffords retired.

by mataliandy on Sat Apr 23, 2005 at 02:49:43 AM EST

Re: Did he actually declare? (3.00 / 1)

"Declaring" is an act that marks the start of your "Candidate Campaign", which is subject to a different set of legal rules than a "Candidate Committee" (what a candidate can form before they "declare". It takes some preparation to be ready for that. I doubt he'll declare right away. He has said he is going to run.

by cos on Sat Apr 23, 2005 at 02:53:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Go tell DFA to endorse him. (3.00 / 1)

Here's the link.

I realize he's not an official candidate yet, but it's never too soon to start this sort of thing.

by craverguy on Sat Apr 23, 2005 at 03:00:39 AM EST

Re: Go tell DFA to endorse him. (3.00 / 2)

Go tell DFA to endorse him [Sanders]. . . .Here's the link.

It looks like MoveOn.org is already on the case. Yesterday my wife got a call from them asking how she felt about Sanders. They mentioned a few other possibilities among Democrats with state wide recognition but the list was not long or impressive. It seems clear that Sanders is the one. The state Democrats at the county level are now filled with DFA types like me and so it is unlikely that there will be a major challenge to Sanders from that side. The real question is whether or not Vermont's second term Republican Governor James Douglas will give up a very strong chance to be reelected once again to go to the aid of his party.

According to today's Rutland [Vermont] Herald editorial Race of the century

Douglas has been less forthcoming about his plans for next year than Sanders has. He has business to take care of as governor before thinking of a Senate race. But the White House and the Senate campaign organization have already been in touch with him, knowing that he is the likeliest candidate among Vermont Republicans for returning Jeffords' seat to the Republican column.

Last night on the Vermont Public TV show "Vermont this Week" the journalist panelists seemed to agree that Douglas, unlike many other Vermont Republicans, was a real Republican loyalist and in the end probably would answer the call of his party.

Of course in such a race it would be very difficult for Douglas to successfully distance himself from national Republican issues in the way he has so far succeeded in doing here in Vermont. As the Herald editorial puts it

that may be Douglas' biggest burden as a candidate. His brand of Republicanism has not put him at odds with Vermont voters. He is a pro-environment, pro-choice Republican. But as a member of the U.S. Senate, he would bolster the strength of the national party, which has an agenda that most Vermonters, even many Republicans, find to be repugnant.

Of course it would be much better for Republicans if Jeffords would just disappear now and let Douglas name some other Vermont Republican as his successor -- someone who could then run in 06 as an incumbent. In fact there is a letter to that effect printed in today's Rutland Herald Jeffords should leave office now. It says Senator Jeffords' should resign now since

It is apparent that the senator is no longer physically capable of representing our state in Washington. Some good friend should explain this to him, rather than wait until he can't remember who he is, and further explain that now is the time he should be with his wife. It is obvious he is unable to rationalize his own mental situation.

I think that whatever Jeffords personal situation (his wife does have cancer and he has admitted he "sometimes forgets things") it is very unlikely that he will soon forget how the GOP has treated him over the years and do anything to let them off the hook so easily.

So if it is Douglas vs. Sanders in 06 then we have almost everything wide open here in Vermont.

The only real reason Douglas was able to win the first time was that the Progressives split the liberal vote when Howard Dean left office. This last election the Democrats avoided a serious split by nominating a former Progressive as their candidate for governor , but he was not a strong contender and it hard to unseat an incumbent governor in Vermont (and always has been). And in the last Lt. Governor race the Progressives once again succeeded in splitting the liberal vote and a not-to-impressive young Republican Brian Dubie won with 41% the vote after Progressive Anthony Pollina got 1/4 of the vote and Democrat Peter E. Shumlin got about 1/3.

So we liberals of Vermont have a strong chance getting a total of four open seats in 06. Of course we can expect a lot of out of state money to come in but it probably will not all be on the Republican side and there are real limits to what you can do with TV ads when it comes to Vermont politics.

by Fred in Vermont on Sat Apr 23, 2005 at 08:33:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.