Mediaboss Marketing

A year ago, many progressives told NPR they weren't so sure they wanted to see Bernie Sanders run for president again. But now, it appears those voters are coming back. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images hide caption

A year ago, many progressives told NPR they weren't so sure they wanted to see Bernie Sanders run for president again. But now, it appears those voters are coming back.

A year ago, some New Hampshire progressives, who had elevated Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders to a decisive victory in the 2016 Democratic presidential primary there, told NPR they weren't so sure they wanted to see him run for president again.

But with just days until the first votes of the 2020 presidential contest, in Iowa, it appears that progressives are coming back to Sanders. His polling has risen in recent weeks, as a number of progressive groups announced their support for him and as many voters on the left ultimately decided to stick with him.

Burt Cohen is one such voter.

He's known Sanders since the 1970s, and in the last presidential election he was a delegate for the Vermont senator at the Democratic National Convention.

But Cohen was initially skeptical of a Sanders sequel.

"I wasn't sure it was a good idea, to be perfectly honest," the former New Hampshire state senator-turned-podcast host said recently. "What held me back a little bit was, as Bernie says, 'It's not me, it's us,' and that so many other candidates were picking up what he was talking about."

Many progressives said similar things at the beginning of this campaign cycle. They felt the issues that Sanders has championed, such as "Medicare for All," were now part of the party's mainstream debate.

But as the campaign dragged on, some voters, like New Hampshire gubernatorial candidate Andy Volinsky, began to have doubts about other candidates.

"I am not convinced that Sanders' level of commitment to things like Medicare for All exists among very many other candidates," he said.

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren speaks during a campaign stop in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on Sunday. Stephen Maturen/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren speaks during a campaign stop in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, on Sunday.

In 2016, Volinsky was Sanders' New Hampshire attorney. But this year, he took months to make a decision. He said he was impressed with Elizabeth Warren and even introduced her at a rally.

But he was worried that the Massachusetts senator is "not as readily accepted by working people as Bernie is."

That was a common concern voiced by progressive voters who said they had considered Warren before coming back to Sanders.

"I had been for Warren back in 2015," Cohen said. "I had a sticker on my car 'Run, Warren, Run.' "

He said Warren would make a "terrific" president but, he said, Democrats need a candidate who can win back the voters the party lost in 2016.

"Frankly," he said, "the Harvard, professorial style, I don't know how well that would do in the Midwest."

But that same concern is what led Bill Stelling away from Sanders, whom he supported in 2016, and toward Pete Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Ind., this year.

"One of the things about Bernie is that I don't think he's evolved very much since 2016," said Stelling, of Manchester, N.H. "He's delivering exactly the same message, but the world has changed."

This notion that consistency might not always be a virtue is perhaps progressives' most common critique of the Vermont senator.

A Sanders-or-Warren family

"Maybe Bernie hasn't changed, but the times have," said Ron Abramson.

He and his daughter, Quincy, both supported Sanders in 2016. He held a house party for the senator. She volunteered for him.

But this year, they're not in sync.

Ron wants a leader who can effectively govern and adapt if needed. He said that's Warren.

Quincy wants drastic change. She thinks capitalism is the root of almost every problem in this country, so she told her dad how she sees Warren: "She does know how to work within the system more and play the game better and, for you, that's pragmatic, and for me, that's scary."

Quincy is supporting Sanders again. She said she came to that decision partly because of how he speaks, compared with Warren.

"The feeling I get from the way Warren talks about going into office is, you know, 'I have a plan for that. Vote for me. Trust me, and I'll handle it,' " she said. "While Bernie's is, 'We have to do this together.' "

But Ron is skeptical of his daughter's interpretation of Sanders as a more collaborative leader.

"I appreciate that he has created a movement," he said, "but there's a fine line between a movement and a cult of personality."

Read the original:
Why Many Progressives Say They've Come Back To Bernie Sanders - NPR

Lets start with a definition for each of these terms. Liberal means open to new behaviors or opinions and willing to discard traditional values. Progressives are known for favoring or implementing social reform or new liberal ideas. Conservatives hold onto traditional attitudes and values and are cautious about change.

Many in the United States have used these terms to denigrate people who they disagree with politically and socially. Yet we may find ourselves agreeing with parts of both viewpoints. For instance, you may be very conservative with your spending and liberal with your social beliefs. I personally know people I consider friends who are very conservative with their political beliefs but have accepted many liberal actions from the past. I also know people I consider friends who are very liberal with their social beliefs but are very conservative economically.

When we use history to study liberalism/progressivism and conservatism, we may see some hypocrisy in all of us. If you have or had a daughter who participated in high school sports, you really need to thank a liberal/progressive who pushed for this in the early 70s. If you appreciate women voting, you need to thank a liberal/progressive who pushed for womens suffrage over a hundred years ago. If you agree that children should be in school and not the work place, you need to give recognition to liberal/progressives. If you have taken your family to a national park, you need to thank liberal/progressives. If you believe that companies who prepare food products are liable for what they put in the product, thank liberal/progressives. If you believe corporations should not pollute our water, thank liberal/progressives.

If you believe traditional family structures have been a positive for society, you agree with conservatives. If you believe that individuals should take responsibility for their actions, you agree with conservatives. If you partake in traditional holidays, you agree with conservatives. If you believe the Constitution of the United States provides an ideal which we can follow, you agree with conservatives.

So, some liberals follow conservative practices and some conservatives accept the changes liberals have brought to the country. Can we really just be solely a liberal or solely a conservative when both sides have made contributions to the history of the United States.

The anger many individuals have toward others who hold differences of opinions is misplaced. To use the terms liberal and conservative as a means to belittle and demean others demonstrates ignorance of historical content and, more importantly, a blatant lack of respect for others.

I am a progressive. I cannot imagine that we cannot do better politically, economically and socially. As a progressive I have no business telling others how to pray, who to marry, or what to do with their money. It is not in my character to judge another human being. I would leave all the judging to the greatest progressive leader who changed the world over 2,000 years ago by teaching love, acceptance and sharing.

Read more:
Letter: We owe a debt of gratitude to liberals, progressives and conservatives - INFORUM

When Massachusetts voters head to the polls on Tuesday, March 3, most will have their minds fixated on their presidential candidate of choice. But as fierce as the 12-way race for the party nomination is, many Boston voters will face even more heated battles at the bottom of the ballot, where dozens of candidates are vying for seats on their local ward committees.

People need to know that the confusion on the rest of the ballot is worth paying attention to, said Rachel Poliner, an organizer with Progressive West Roxbury and Roslindale, who is part of an effort to diversify the Ward 18 Democratic Committee.

The Hyde Park-based Ward 18 is one of four in Boston where insurgent progressive slates of candidates are seeking to unseat incumbent members in the once-every-four-years committee elections. The other committees are Ward 1 in East Boston, Ward 3 in downtown Boston and Ward 9 in the South End and Roxbury.

Poliner said that in the last presidential primary, 74% of Ward 18 voters left at least some of the ward votes blank, indicating a lack of interest in the contest. She stressed the importance of ward committees, emphasizing their direct connection to neighborhoods across Massachusetts.

The ward committee can do a lot, Poliner said. Theyre supposed to be the grassroots of the party.

The hundreds of ward and Democratic town committees across Massachusetts function as the grassroots arm of the party, providing residents with direct access to the party apparatus. The committees elect delegates to the annual state convention, where they nominate candidates for statewide office and vote on the party platform.

A ward committee is the face of the political process in Massachusetts, and its the face of our political party, said Melvin Poindexter, a member of the Democratic National Committee.

Hyde Parks ward committee is the states largest, with 35 members. But its also seen as being somewhat insular. While Bostons more active ward committees maintain webpages, communicate with voters, host candidate forums and engage in get-out-the-vote activities, Ward 18 seldom does more than post the time and date of its annual caucus, as required by state party rules.

In many ward committees, candidates are elected as part of a slate. Most of those currently serving in Ward 18 are part of a slate made up largely of current or past city workers and elected officials. Current Ward 18 Caucus member and City Councilor, Michelle Wu, is one of 35 people on the insurgent progressive slate who say theyre committed to a committee that reflects the demographics of the majority-people-of-color neighborhood.

Right now we need engagement and activism in all levels, said Wu.

Wu noted the diversity of Ward 18s candidate slate, which includes members of the Haitian, Nigerian, and Latinx community including WBUR radio host Jose Mass and Councilor Ricardo Arroyo. Poliner said that the new slate was assembled using a specific formula to ensure representation, guided by the 2010 census. Most of the current ward committee members live in Hyde Parks whiter precincts, she said, but the district, which includes much of Mattapan, is 75% people of color.

Candidate Segun Idowu, also on the slate, ran against Hyde Park state Rep. Angelo Scaccia in the 2017 Democratic primary. He said he hopes that Ward 18s new slate reflects the citizens living there. He said that as an African American, he doesnt feel like the local Democratic party is particularly representing his principles.

This particular committee has been dominated by a very small and select group of people that have never represented my views and my values, he said. In fact, theyve never even asked me.

A broader push for change

Roxbury resident Armani White is currently running for Ward 9s new slate and the 2nd Suffolk District state committee seat held by current Ward 9 Chairman Jeffrey Ross, who last year mounted an unsuccessful bid for an at-large seat on the City Council.

White says he wants to make the committee more open to voters who are currently not involved with the party, and to push the committee to hold events to educate voters on the Democratic election process.

Im transparent and easy to reach and committed to [encouraging] broad participation and getting more people involved, he said during a fundraiser for his state committee campaign.

Vanessa Snow, a community organizer for a Massachusetts union, is helping to chair Whites campaign for the state committee seat. She said that she wants the Democratic party to invest more in people of color, and she hopes that the ward committees can help shape the partys platform to focus on issues in our community. These issues include gun violence, justice reform, and housing matters that White hopes to prioritize.

In East Bostons Ward 1, Brian Gannon also hopes to see some changes. Although Gannon has previously been involved in ward committees, he is now promoting the Fresh Slate Eastie movement. For years, Gannon has seen a need for a stronger ward committee.

A lot of us feelwe just want better representation in local government, Gannon said. He hopes that an organization of neighbors, activists, and Democrats can act as a better voice for Ward 1.

Were really looking for it to be an active force representing East Boston and supporting a rich discussion of some of the issues that East Boston has, he said.

Gannon said that ward committees act as a great unifier for people with like ideas, which is especially important as East Boston has faced issues around transportation, housing, and even the proposed development of a casino.

Gannon said that if elected, the Ward 1 slate hopes to engage with more of the neighborhood and have a big say in how the city operates. He said he expects to see better attendance at ward committee meetings, with the whole neighborhood being represented.

The committee should also be aware of what the community needs from elected officials. Local residents can leverage the ward committee to meet their needs, Gannon said.

Were just trying to really be a more transparent committee and communicate broadly with the neighborhood on what were doing, he said.

Gannon said that he was surprised that other movements similar to Fresh Slate Eastie were surfacing throughout Boston. Ward 1s movement is independent of any other groups, he said.

We did this independently and then learned through other groups that there were other actions happening elsewhere in the city, Gannon added.

Idowu, however, saw a greater pattern emerging.

Theres definitely a connection, he said. This is part of a larger movement. After years of disengagement, things are beginning to change. Idowu said that this transformation is a culmination of many, many years of frustration

Idowu said that the fresh slate in Ward 18 is mostly a new group of people who have never had a voice in the ward committe, reflect the diversity of all Ward 18s neighborhoods and focus their efforts on their own communities.

We see whats happening on a national level, said Idowu. And its very easy to say we need more transparency and diversity on a national level. But people running in wards know that these things also dont exist at home.

If the slate wins, Idowu wants to start with what he called the basic thing talking to neighbors and educating them about what the ward actually does.

Some say the lack of visibility of ward committees benefits current incumbent committee members.

For many of the existing office holders, that is the best arrangement, Wu said. Theres no threat to whos in office, because people dont turn out to vote as much.

On March 3, voters will decide the outcome of the ward elections but only if they pay attention to the choices at the bottom of the ballot. At stake is whether committees that represent new neighborhood demographics can function better as a direct route to electoral transformation.

The ward committee represents you. Its your voice, Poindexter said. You have just as much or a right to play a role as anyone else.

Erratum:An earlier version of this article attributed Brian Gannons comments to Patrick Coyne.

Read more:
Progressives push for takeovers of Boston ward committees - BayStateBanner

Denis McDonough, best known for serving as President Barack Obamas chief of staff (though cinephiles may also recall John Hamms portrayal of McDonough in The Report, which depicted his effort to slow-walk the release of information related to the CIAs torture program) also made the cut. Appointed as co-chair to the platform committee, McDonough also sits on the vultures perch at Rework America Task Force, a bipartisan leviathan of corporate interests attempting to, unsurprisingly, remake Americas workforceall with the help of its dedicated founding partners at Walmart, Boeing, Kaiser Permanente, McKinsey, and Microsoft. Danielle Gray, senior VP and chief legal officer for Blue Cross Blue Shield, holds a vice-chair seat on this committee, alongside Jake Sullivan, a senior adviser to Hillary Clinton and the former national security adviser to Joe Biden.

Other notable committee appointments went to former senator Heidi Heitkamp, who now sits on the board of the hawkish neoconservative (John) McCain Institute; former Obama official Carol Browner, who voted down radical climate change initiatives in 2016; Harold Ickes, described by the Times as Bill Clintons Garbage Man, for both selling access to the president and whipping support after the Gennifer Flowers incident; Alex Padilla, accused of suppressing progressive independent voters in California; and Michael Steed, founder of the Paladin Capital Group, which settled with the state of New York in a pay-to-play scheme involving a New York pension fund. Paladin Capital has also invested hundreds of millions of dollars in a homeland security fund headed by a former CIA leader and an assortment of military generals.

Regardless of committee members explicit or covert preference for presidential candidates, the corporate affiliations of these appointees and their outspoken refusal to cede any ground to progressive policy positions are wildly at odds with the preference for integrity valued by the majority of Democratic voters. Additionally, Perezs appointment strategy introduces a slew of risks ahead of the inevitable general election showdown. For a political party that has presented the electoral defeat of President Trump and the greed and corruption he embodies as its highest priority in 2020, champions of democratic transparency and corporate accountability are few and far between on the DNCs latest roster.

Moreover, health care reformthe issue consistently ranked as most important among Democratic votersgets short shrift in this roster of appointments, outside of the former health care industry lobbyists who have steadily moved up within the DNCs ranks. Climate change, also consistently ranked as a top issue for voters, has few advocates among these committee appointments. The movers and shakers of a nascent labor resurgence, fighting for fair compensation and workplace protections, are also found in short supply. With the Sanders campaign painting itself as the vanguard against the forces of corporate concentration and machinelike party rule, Perezs appointments seem as though they were engineered to fan those flames, instead of neatly defanging the Vermont senators argument.

Read the original:
Tom Perez Stacks the DNC Deck Against Progressives - The New Republic

On the eve of the Iowa caucuses, what should progressives whether inside or outside the Democratic Party be doing? I am not one to advocate voting for the lesser evil. But, to my mind, Bernie Sanders is not a lesser evil. He is the real thing. No, he is not perfect. People like Kevin Zeese will insist that he made errors in connection with Venezuela and other issues, and perhaps Kevin is right. But if you look at Bernies history and his platform, anyone can see that he follows the same road at all times. He will do the best that he can to have a progressive America. And he is far more trustworthy than Elizabeth Warren or Amy Klobuchar. The fact that the New York Times endorsed them is proof enough that they are really centrists.

So what road should progressives be taking? They can cut their own throats and vote Green again or vote for some other party that stands no chance of winning. Or they should vote for Bernie. At the moment where we are, he is leading in the polls. On the other hand, if he gets only 30% of the Democratic vote, then at the nominating convention the DNC will haul out the super delegates and use them to choose Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Warren, or even Biden. Anyone but Bernie. Once again, they will cheat him out of victory.

Should that happen, then that is the time to decide the next step. What? Support Warren if she can be nominated? Or abandon the Democratic Party for good and all and try to found a New Party which is totally progressive? In my view, progressives should wait and see because Bernie may win.

And how might he win? By accepting the support of Greens and other progressives. By making every attempt to form a coalition of progressives, using votes from within the Democratic Party in order to outmaneuver the DNCs super delegates strategy.

If this strategy fails, then it may be time for Bernie to run with another party, or to form a New Party with all progressives in it. That party can bring The Squad and other Democratic progressives into it and seek the support for progressive candidates for Congress.

But now is not the time to make a final decision. It is the time to support a candidate who can win, who will support the Greens and other progressives, and who can truly make America progressive. Lets not demand the impossible. Instead, lets all band together and throw out Trump, the neoliberals, and those who want ever more wealth for the already wealthy.

FALL FUNDRAISER

If you liked this article, please donate $5 to keep NationofChange online through November.

Original post:
What road should progressives take? - NationofChange