Even Republicans are now jumping on the Bernie Sanders bandwagon

[arcane1]

The unexpected rise of Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders in the presidential election has taken some people by surprise. While Hillary Clinton is still the front-runner in the Democratic primary, Sanders is putting pressure on her and doing so with the backing of millions of Americans.

Openly called a Democratic Socialist, Sanders has a firm grasp on the progressive wing of the Democratic party, and has many progressive Independents by his side. Where some of his support is actually coming from has taken many by surprise, as many Republicans have decided to back the Independent from Vermont, stating that Sanders would put the government back into the hands of the people. As Salon pointed out on July 12, Sanders appeals to many across the political spectrum because if his consistency over the years.

"Part of Bernie’s appeal is his unvarnished language and his willingness to just come across as a straight shooter taking on the big guys," the article states, and it's resonating with many. During a Facebook discussion on the USA Today Facebook page on July 12, Republicans voters admitted that they are putting their support behind Sanders, with some even donating to his campaign.

"I've been a Republican all my life, things are out of wack so bad we do need Bernie," one Facebook user wrote, before posting again and admitting, "I just gave Bernie $100. First non-GOP donation ever." Another user wrote that his life-ling Republican father is not supporting Sanders, stating, "I know it's hard from his experience, but if it's best for this country, then it's best for this country."

-snip-

http://www.examiner.com/article/even-republicans-are-now-jumping-on-the-bernie-sanders-bandwagon


I found this artile on the "Republicans for Bernie Sanders" Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/republicansforbernie?fref=nf


Awaken!!!

[SamKnause]

1. I think there are some mistakes in your post.

Another user wrote that his life (ling) long Republican father

is (not) now supporting Sanders,................

[arcane1]

3. I copy and I paste. Examiner isn't very good as proof-reading

[billhicks76]

44. Pathetic Article

The fact is that the Clintons (both) were always the hand selected democrat back up in case a Bush family member didn't win. The Clintons are supported by Bush Sr to maintain the grip on our oligarchy. They have the rare title of being "honorary Bush family members" as stated by GW and his poppy and never disputed by the Clintons. There is nothing more sickening than these two appalling families facing off in another election. As conservative and damaging as Ross Perot was he understood Bushes treachery especially regarding drug importation and he did what he could to prevent him from winning. Unfortunately Bush had an ace up his sleeve and retained a surrogate....Bill Clinton. And watch it all happen again. Yuk

[udbcrzy2]

52. Scary thought Bush-Clinton-Bush-Hillary-Jeb-Chelsea n/t

[billhicks76]

64. Hillary Lovers Aren't Paying Attention

They don't understand history.

[udbcrzy2]

69. Apparently not

If we continue electing the same kind of people that we have been we will become an oligarchic form of society and I want more than that for my grandchildren, we are better than that. It's like one of those abusive relationships where you just keep picking the same kind of person each time you have a chance to get away from that crap.

[Renew Deal]

2. National Review: Republicans Should Help Bernie Sanders to Weaken Hillary

Support Bernie Sanders!

This is a call to action for every Republican anxious to win back the White House in 2016.

Bernie Sanders, the socialist U.S. senator from Vermont, is now surging in his quest to win the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination. He is attracting media attention and large crowds, and is invigorated by a New Hampshire–primary poll showing him only 10 points behind frontrunner Hillary Clinton.

After a GOP power player sent me a piece from left-leaning Salon headlined “Hillary Clinton is going to lose: She doesn’t even see the frustrated progressive wave that will nominate Bernie Sanders,” my heart went pitter-patter, beginning to sense an opportunity.

But it was not until I saw a headline in The Hill warning that the “Sanders surge is becoming a bigger problem for Clinton,” accompanied by “It may be time for Hillary Clinton to take the challenge from Sen. Bernie Sanders more seriously,” that I was truly motivated to join Team Bernie and rally my fellow Republicans to do the same.

So I sent Bernie a donation and visited his campaign store, where my favorite bumper sticker was Vote for Bernie . . . you know you wanna!
<snip>

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420262/bernie-sanders-republicans-myra-adams

[PatrickforO]

29. I remember this coming out in 2008 - hey, Republicans, vote Obama in the Dem primary

because he can't win and we'll capture the White House.

It didn't work to well for them then, and for those who are getting behind Bernie with that in mind, I don't think it will turn out too well now. The problem with this position is that there is simply too much of a ground swell of frustration with the status quo. People across the spectrum feel they are getting the shaft.

So, they are starting to turn to Bernie so they can get a Real Deal.

[Rod Beauvex]

83. Shhhhhhh.

:^)

[virtualobserver]

32. they might say they will, a rare person might donate

but they would never vote for Bernie, because the clown car is too crowded.

Every vote counts in the Republican primary.

[Bobbie Jo]

49. BINGO

[billhicks76]

65. Hillary=Jeb

It would make no difference is she beat Jeb. Wall St knows this. They are definitely afraid of Bernie.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

81. Wall Street should be afraid of Bernie, be VERY afraid. Hillary?...not so much.

[kenfrequed]

70. Yeah...

If they were going to do it I think they would be quieter about it and keep their fingerprints off. If anything a big article in a major conservative magazine like this is more likely to scare democrats off. I think the republicans are starting to realize that there are more frightening things than having to run against a candidate they have spent ten years preparing for. Bernie Sanders actually scares them more.

[stevenleser]

77. Except these are Republicans here. They don't do subtle. nt

[kenfrequed]

87. Uhm...

Right...

The can pretend to be trolls that support either Hillary or Sanders on a website but one of the more prominent establishment magazines of the right wing can't manage to be written strategically.

[JaneyVee]

5. This is a rightwing tactic. Don't fall for it.

Numerous articles on this subject about astroturfing. I even saw some posts at Discussionist from vile wingers stating "I'm a conservative, how can I help Bernie defeat Hillary?"

[arcane1]

6. I'm sure there is some of that going on, but his crossover appeal is genuine and real.

I know it's hard for some to admit that, despite her pro-corporate positions, Clinton just doesn't have that crossover appeal. I get that.

There is also no shortage of pro-Clinton people using astroturf tactics to turn people against Sanders. We see it every day.

All this means is that he's connecting with people, and the corporatists are nervous

[MADem]

9. No, it isn't. People who are Republicans are the natural enemies of people like Bernie.

Bernie Sanders likes social programs, he supports workers. Republicans HATE social programs and they want to pay workers as little as possible in 'right to work' scenarios.

You're trying to suggest that a lion will lie down with a lamb, and sacrifice basic instinct for...what? That part can't be explained--it's not logical.

What's happening here is that the lions are going to befriend the lamb, in order to put him in a position where they believe they can eat him alive.

[arcane1]

11. You're wrong. While that applies to some republicans, it's not all.

I see conservatives share Sanders quotes on Facebook, long before he started running.

Also, see post 8.

[MADem]

14. Sorry, I know I am not wrong. You might be able to find the occasional oddball outlier to "prove"

your thesis, but I promise you that the platform of the GOP is completely INCOMPATIBLE with the views of Senator Sanders.

It's important to understand when the GOP is running a con game. This is one of those instances.

Now, we can go back and forth, and say "Yes, they like him/No, they're screwing with him" all the live long day, but that will accomplish nothing.

Time will give us our answers.

[jalan48]

38. How do you explain the signs at Tea Party rallies saying,

"Stop Obama the Socialist" and another that says, "Keep your hands off my Social Security"? These folks don't always get it.

[MADem]

66. If they don't like Obama, they're not going to like Sanders, either.

If Obama is a socialist, Sanders is a socialist on steroids.

The minute those Tea Party ralliers hear his views on equality and choice, they'll be screaming "Darksided!!" faster than you can say "Keep your hands off my social security." They may not "get it" but those types, the ones who don't "get it," do get how to vote the way their religious leaders tell them.

[jalan48]

75. Very true. LOL @ socialist on steroids.

[thesquanderer]

39. On foreign policy and civil liberties, Sanders can have Republican appeal

They would probably be Rand Paul supporters in a primary, but might see Sanders as the second best choice out of the rest (from both parties). If Paul doesn't get the nomination, they might like having the Sanders option over whoever else the Republicans nominate. Or even if they like the Republican candidate, knowing they might lose, they might still prefer losing to Sanders over losing to Hillary.

[MADem]

50. How? Sanders is in line with those praising this Iran deal, the GOP are furious with

those lousy stinking peacemakers, because they want to Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb-bomb Iran.

Sanders is not in the "War Without End, Amen," camp. The GOP is. Even Sanders' stance on Israel isn't as GRR, GRR as the GOP--and he's certainly sympathetic on that score.

He's not "with" them on foreign policy, he's not "with" them on social programs, he's not "with" them on subsidized education or health care, he's not "with" them on unions or worker rights, and he sure as hell isn't "with" them on cultural issues like gay rights or choice or the role of women in public life.

I just do not see any nexus. All this "It could happen~~!!!!!" stuff reminds me of a comedian who used to be popular named Judy Tenuda. I don't see a "Sanders option" save astroturfing like hell to fake his supporters out. It will be made apparent if there are calls to vote strategically for him in open primaries--they won't be able to hide that game. Of course, that will likely annoy the hell out of super delegates, if the GOP tries a ruse on those lines.

[aggiesal]

43. You may be right ...

But the problem with, I believe most republicans, is that they're
told what to believe in.

When Bernie comes around, they suddenly feel like, "Wait, I agree with that.
How come Faux News never mentions this?"

I've run across conservative that say they hate socialism. But when you tell
them that the military, VA, police & fire departments, ... are all socialistic programs,
first they scratch their heads, then they argue that these are not social programs,
then they agree that they are. Ask a hardcore Vet, who's voted republican his
whole life because he's been indoctrinated in the military that way, if he would give
up his VA benefits. Most, if not all, will say "No".

The True Republican (i.e. Rich, Businessman, "Job Creators", ...) are completely
incompatible with Sanders views. But the Faux News hypnotized republican might
actually start to wake up, after hearing Senator Sanders. Until of course they're
told not to agree with him.

[MADem]

48. Bernie wants to raise taxes. It doesn't matter if it's a one cent tax per

thousand dollars spent and the penny goes to cure cancer, the GOP will veto it.

Their world view is not compatible with Senator Sanders' emphasis on working class people. They view working class people as lazy slobs who are poor through their own 'fault,' who should be gratefully working two jobs at eighty hours a week, who deserve nothing more than the absolute minimum wage; Sanders views them as individuals worthy of a living wage, subsidized advanced education, and universal health care. Those things must be paid for, and the GOP does NOT want to pay.

There is no nexus there.

[aggiesal]

58. You seem to be lumping every republican ...

under the GOP flag.

Yes the party as a whole probably do represent what you're saying.
But I believe that there are those that are hypnotized by Faux news
that don't believe in everything you're stating.

The True Republican doesn't want to raise taxes, but when you poll
them, they want the wealth to pay their fair share.

The True Republican does view the working class as lazy slobs, but when
you poll them they all want their minimum wages raised.

You only have to look at the 2014 election.
Every ballot measure that was remotely liberal got passed.
These were republican voters. How do I know? Because they proceeded
to vote for candidates that were against these liberal ballot measures.

How do you explain that?

[MADem]

61. Well...you do realize that GOP and Republican are SYNONYMOUS?

I don't know where you live, so I can't speak to ballot measures on your local ballots...but if they're "libertarian" measures, like smoking pot or selling booze on Sunday, those are not necessarily "liberal" positions, they're more "anti-government" positions.

Bernie is not "anti-government." In fact, in many respects he is a BIG government candidate. You can not run huge social program efforts like health care and senior pensions and "minimum income for all" efforts without a MASSIVE government intrusion into everyone's lives.

[Jackilope]

42. Just saw Bernie FB post from otherwise RW nutcase on my FB feed

She lives in TX to boot. He makes sense. Just have to keep on getting the message out.

[MADem]

53. What does this nutcase agree with him on? Iran? Gay marriage? Choice?

Raising the minimum wage? Universal health care? Raising taxes on the rich? Free college for all?

I mean, come on--anyone who is a "RW nutcase" hates all that shit. Otherwise, they aren't a "RW nutcase." In most cases, they're called DEMOCRATS.

[Duval]

37. With help from our MSM, no doubt.

We have to be louder than our media and get out the vote for Bernie.

[MADem]

62. Not really. The Republican Party platform has nothing in it that Senator Sanders would find

acceptable. They want to give people less, he wants to give them more.

[humbled_opinion]

51. Although I understand your point

outside of the rich elites and business types there are large portions of Repubs that are not happy with corporations juking the middle class and I think they are looking at alternatives, if you keep explaining to them that it is the fat cats that are the problem passing costs on to hard working middleclass families you probably get allies against the status quo... I am cynical too but you never know there may be ways to finally get people to see the truth...an awakening of a national consciousness Bernie gets 80 percent of the vote most popular President elected in history and he fixes the problems..... .

[MADem]

60. I just don't believe it. It's whistling in the dark.

The GOP admonition that "Corporations are people, too!" will morph into

"That Sanders guy wants to give our jobs to foreigners....foreigners who aren't WHITE....and they'll be NON-WHITE GAY foreigners....and women who will spend all day getting ABORTIONS that WE will have to PAY FOR! And then we'll have to send all these gay non-white foreigners, and their gay non-white foreigner children (oh--and none of 'em speak English, or know the Pledge of Allegiance), to college on OUR dime!!! And he wants to raise the minimum wage so high that we will be paying fifty dollars for a pizza!!!"

Hell, that's off the top of my head--believe me, they'd rip him to shreds if they could find a way to jam him into the nomination. Even if they don't succeed, they benefit from a divided Democratic party. They love spreading the FUD. It's their only weapon, really--they've long lost the war of ideas.

But Sanders? He doesn't have friends in Congress. Close to half of the PROGRESSIVE Caucus alone has already formally endorsed Clinton (they remember who has helped them get elected, you see). He has never helped anyone there, never lifted a finger to fundraise for anyone, to speak on behalf of their re-election, to form a PAC and share his largesse with anyone...he just hasn't demonstrated any loyalty to his peers that would motivate anyone to return the favor. That's what happens when you go it alone--you do, in fact, go it ALONE.

People don't like to remember this, but Clinton gave Sanders money to help him get elected to the Senate. She's very interested in helping the party (or people who pledge to caucus with the party) out--and she always has been thus. It's why she gets loyalty--she gives it.

[kenfrequed]

71. Maybe...

However there have been transitional political figures that have pulled people away from previous political alignments. FDR managed to do so and brought a lot of people over to the New Deal and more than a few Republicans ventured his direction. Sadly, Reagan also did it and permanently shifted the debate and the axis in politics to the right. The DLC was packed with so-called "Reagan Democrats."

Is that what is happening here?

I don't know. I don't think anyone can be absolutely certain. It is hard to imagine people just suddenly switching, but it does happen. I have cousins that were firebreathing limbaugh conservatives that had a crisis and suddenly realized they were lied to by the right. And Cenk Uygur (of TYT) used to be a Republican in college and law school. Ed Schultz used to be a Republican too. People can switch and a lot of people do when confronted with the right motivation and the issues laid out properly. Bernie might manage this.

I know he can win the presidency.

I don't know if he really is a transitional figure and I don't know if Republicans are going to vote for him or not. I doubt a lot of them would vote for any Democrat at all.

[MADem]

73. Democrats and Republicans weren't all that different back in the FDR era.

In fact, the biggest difference between them is that most of the RACISTS were in the Democratic Party. People complain that the parties are "too much alike" nowadays, it was worse back in those bad old days. There was comity amongst politicians; Democrats didn't consider Republicans to be hated enemies, or vice versa. Republican Senators would go out to dinner and drinks with their Democratic counterparts--that doesn't happen anymore.

It only started to get ugly around the Reagan era. Oddly enough, Mistah Speakah, Tip O'Neill (a friend of one of my relations from years gone by), managed to maintain a friendly relationship with Saint Ronnie of Raygun, even though they agreed on almost nothing. They'd get together and have a few pops, and tell "good old days" stories.

I don't think Bernie Sanders will appeal to many--if any--Republican voters. I just don't. It's as likely as suggesting that Democrats will suddenly find something to like in Scott Walker. They just don't want the same things.

[kenfrequed]

86. Eh...

The new deal was a Massive shift from business as usual and many of his policies Did get tagged with red-baiting and smears that are familiar today. When it was passed in 1935 it was called socialism or communist. Of course red-baiting wasn't really new and had taken place earlier in Amerinca history than most people tend to think.

[MADem]

88. Divisions in that era often did not fall along party lines.

That is the point I am making. There was much more comity back then. When it came to race, for example, there were a bunch of Democrats who were determined to prevent black people from getting anything approaching equal treatment. There were also Democrats who didn't feel that way, and they teamed with Republicans on those sorts of issues.

We play this game nowadays that the parties are too similar, but they're actually more different in many ways than they were back in the day. The 'camps' do not mingle at all.

Back in the day, Republicans and Democrats in the legislature could go out to dinner and over-eat at a fancy restaurant, and then go to a bar and party all night, all the while hashing out their differences and making a deal. That does not happen anymore, and it's part of the reason we have so much gridlock and the pace of legislation has slowed to a constipated crawl.

[Mojorabbit]

78. I know a couple who are hard core right wing

who told me last week they were looking at him. They thought he was a "communist" at first but now are liking what they see. Could have knocked me down with a feather.

[MADem]

79. No offense, but I discount anecdotes.

And these friends of yours? They might have been looking at him because they both had a great laugh reading this article published in one of those "right wing" magazines, written by a virulent and vicious "hard core" right-winger:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420262/bernie-sanders-republicans-myra-adams

Operation Chaos, Redux.

[Mojorabbit]

80. No.. there may be others but not these two

They are good people but lack the guile to do something like that. I think if he can actually get someone who watches FOX and thinks communist equals socialist to even stop and see what he is about that is pretty amazing.

I am keeping my mind open. We have several great candidates. I may lean one way but it is early yet.

[JaneyVee]

16. You really think people who hate Obama for being a 'socialist'...

Are going to vote for an actual socialist?? These people have anarcho-capitalist Donald Trump as their frontrunner.

[thesquanderer]

41. Republicans are not monolithic.

You're right, those who talk of Obama as a socialist are not likely to take well to Sanders. But there are planty of Republicans who don't think Obama is a socialist. They are not all fox news parrots.

[PatrickforO]

34. Yeah, I'm thinking that Bernie has the corporatists shaking in their boots, because IMO

he'll be MUCH harder to defeat than Clinton in a general election. I think a lot of people perceive Clinton as Republican lite - socially liberal, hawkish, for 'free' trade and corporatist. With the exception of socially liberal, Bernie's not any of those things. He's something America hasn't had in almost 60 years - someone who tells it like it is.

[think]

13. Was the Republicans for Obama Facebook page also bogus?

https://www.facebook.com/RepublicansforObama

[MADem]

15. Ha ha ha....guess what happened when I went to that page?

Up popped the profiles of a bunch of my "facebook friends" --all of whom are ardent DEMOCRATS.

I can see where Democrats would "like" a Republicans for Obama site. Hell, I think the idea is a nice one, too!

[think]

18. Yes. I don't doubt that Dems would "like" such a page. But of course

So would Republicans that preferred Obama.

You might also read the posts and see the content for what it is. Unless you can't actually believe that some people chose a candidate from another party because their party isn't representing them.

On the Republicans for Bernie page many Dems state they are Dems and support the person's effort who started the page.

But if you think it's just some right wing scam so be it.

[MADem]

19. I'm sorry, but I do think it's some major astroturf.

I've seen this before, I'll see it again.

[think]

20. Why would a right wing astroturf group started in 2006 still be posting things positive of Obama?

If anything would it not be a left wing effort. No?

In the same breath; yes I believe many of the "likes" are from Dems. The person starting the page and those that claim to be Republicans that switched or just support Obama may or may not be legit.

But we even have many here on DU who have switched parties. Hell Elizabeth Warren switched as have many other politicians especially since the Bush years.

I'm sure I haven't changed your mind nor does it matter.

We'll see how you feel about the Republicans for Hillary page if it gets traction:

https://www.facebook.com/RepublicansForHillary

[MADem]

72. Well, that HRC page's last post is from 2013.

You know, anyone can fire up a facebook page suggesting that they are an organization in favor of a politician--there's no proof required. So sure, some poster who was, in fact, a liberal, could have fired up a website to be a meeting place for Republicans, and then just kept slapping stuff up on it, for their own personal amusement.

There will always be crossovers; they just don't often constitute a critical mass, and they rarely impact primaries except in open primary states.

The last time we saw a candidate get a lot of crossover votes was the year I got one of those "Don't Blame Me: I'm From Massachusetts" bumper stickers. That election was part of the reason why we now have super-delegates.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/10/22/george-mcgovern-indelible-mark-massachusetts-politics/lRRZ5LTa4NP0OQBtxPahGM/story.html#

[London Lover Man]

24. How about Alabama for Bernie

300 people organized themselves and are recruiting supporters for all of Alabama. Yes. 300. And it'll double in a matter of days, septuple by next week.

[MADem]

68. A few hundred people in a tiny liberal enclave of a very RED state does not a movement make.

Sanders isn't going to win Alabama. That will never happen.

Look--Alabama has TWO Republican Senators. Of seven representatives, SIX are Republicans.


You can find liberal pockets in Alabama--but they are few and far between, and they haven't been able to translate themselves into ANY electoral power, save one small district represented by the lone black representative, who is the lone Democrat, and one of only two women, in the Congressional delegation from AL: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/AL


The GOP owns Alabama--in 2012, those nine electoral votes went to Mitt Romney. He SPANKED Obama in that state. Alabama will not be feeling any "Bern" in the general election, no matter how much you may want that to happen. There simply is no path for him there.

[madokie]

26. Discussionist, what?

I wouldn't go there on a bet.

Hillary isn't going to win this election I can promise you that. Some one will but it won't be Hillary Clinton
Hillary is not one of US she is one of them, them being the rich and corporations and anyone should be able to see that. I know I sure do

[sufrommich]

7. ........

[MADem]

10. BOOM....!!! nt

[arcane1]

12. Well that was a mature response.

See post 8 too. Or is LA Progressive a satire site?

[arcane1]

8. "There Really Are Republicans for Bernie"

So who are these Republicans who want a very left independent for President? Take Darren Remington, age 49, from Memphis, Tennessee. He is a college graduate and ex-military, registered Republican in 1994 when he left the Air Force, and describes himself this way:

“I am an Eisenhower Conservative. My personal outlook is most closely aligned with that of three presidents (two Republican, one Democrat): Teddy Roosevelt (“Square Deal”), Truman (“the buck stops here”), and Eisenhower (five balanced budgets out of eight, understood that we must have adequate infrastructure to support a thriving economy).”

-snip-

https://www.laprogressive.com/republicans-for-sanders/

[JaneyVee]

17. Is this a good thing?

[Qutzupalotl]

30. Yes. It means fewer Republicans for Walker/Trump/Bush/etc. eom

[Renew Deal]

21. Hey arcane, sorry your post got hidden.

I know your post wasn't meant to be personal. I like you and thought twice about posting my link , but thought it was informational and not a personal attack on you.

[Agschmid]

22. It was aggressive but not worth a hide.

Bummer.

[DanTex]

23. Republican lobbyists and operatives love Bernie. They'd love to see him nominated.

They've made no secret of it. Most understand that he's got no chance of actually winning, but they are encouraging attacks on Hillary from the left in order to weaken her for the GE. Of course, nobody here on DU would fall for anything that obvious...

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/14/bernie-sanders-republican-operatives-hillary-clinton

[London Lover Man]

25. Perhaps the attacks aren't from the left, but from the right

and Clinton is a very, very weak sauce candidate, and will repeat her 2008 history AGAIN.

[DanTex]

27. Of course they're from the right, but they pretend they are from the left.

[NanceGreggs]

54. "From the right ...

... but pretending they are from the left."

Yeah, there's a LOT of that going around lately.

[Agschmid]

28. History does seem to repeat itself...

Over, and over, and over.

[mmonk]

31. I've been saying if you want some votes from red states, run a New Deal type of Democrat.

The Third Way was ultimately wrong.

[K lib]

36. Yet leadership and some on this board cant seem to figure that out

Democrats keeping running these Republicans candidates and surprised when they lose because no one came out to vote for them.

[jschurchin]

56. +1,000 nt.

[mmonk]

85. Precisely.

The Democrats always most in trouble are the ones the party runs and backs seem to be "centrists" as they call them.

[Number23]

33. Ummm... the Republicans for Bernie FB has twice the numbers of POCforBernie and BlacksforBernie

and this is a good thing????

[Thinkingabout]

35. The GOP only has its clown car running, I would probably jump ship also.

[SoapBox]

40. Poo-poo it all you want...

There is a storm brewing and it's in support of Bernie Sanders.

[WillyT]

45. I Know... The Denial Here Is Astounding...

There have been cross-over votes as long as there have been elections.

The question is... at what numbers.

And just as the Democratic Party Poo-Bahs started off by snickering, laughing, and deminishing Bernie... so it begins with the Republican Party Pooh-Bahs,

As Jon Nichols of The Nation said... There is something big happening...

[WillyT]

46. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!

[secondwind]

47. FEEL THE BERN!!!!!! GO BERNIE! K&R

[RoccoR5955]

55. I know of plenty of conservative republicans

who are on board for Bernie. The LEAST of which is his reputation of honesty, and working for what he believes in. These folks tell me that even though they do not believe in everything that Bernie is for, they are for him, because of his integrity, which is sorely missing in their own party, as well as the rest. They tell me that what this country needs is a dose of integrity and honesty, and it does not matter where it comes from. They are behind Bernie.

[redstateblues]

76. Plenty? I'll bet. I still can't believe Nixon won. Everyone I know voted for

McGovern!

[Evergreen Emerald]

57. Or course they are!

They want to run against Bernie in the general.

[NanceGreggs]

59. This HUGH!!! I'm SERIES!!!

Because there's NO WAY that Republicans would want to encourage people NOT to support the frontrunner (who kicks their asses in the one-on-one polls) and instead encourage them to vote for the guy it's easier to beat in the general.

Republicans are, as we all know, scrupulously honest people who would NEVER, EVER do such a thing.

Besides, it's FaceBook - and you can't get a more reliable source than that.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

63. FDR

3 letters that u should remember

[Trajan]

67. So, republicans are playing Democrats for fools?

Maybe DUs Hillary supporters are playing Bernie supporters for fools ...

The circle keeps a-turnin ...

I believe Bernie can win ... The whole shebang ...

We NEED Bernie ... We do not need the same ole same ole ...

I'm voting for Bernie because I believe in his policy pronouncements ... NOT because I am part of a GOP plot ....

[kenn3d]

74. Sanders holding Town Meetings in "Red" States?

Hi all,

I couldn't help but notice that Bernie Sanders is visiting a number of southern, western, and otherwise republican states... even ones not early on the primary calendar... Virginia, Alabama, Arizona, and now Texas. I found this brief announcement piece in the Dallas Morning News, which rather begrudgingly reports a Town Hall meeting there this weekend. It is replete with scoffs and scandalous diversions into the candidate's personal history, and opens with this invitation:

"Saw this Bernie Sanders-for-president sticker in Preston Royal this weekend, so I assume that’s at least one RSVP for the Democratic presidential candidate’s “town meeting” Sunday afternoon"

http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/07/democratic-presidential-candidate-bernie-sanders-holding-dallas-town-meeting-sunday.html/

The interesting part though, is the surprisingly long comment list beneath the article... it seems the readers are pretty overwhelmingly pro-Bernie. It will be interesting to see reports on attendance.

hmmm....

Kenn

[kenn3d]

95. Follow-up to the DallasMorningNews article

Seems there was indeed more than one RSVP down there in Dallas this afternoon...

:large

He'll be in Houston later tonight btw

[emsimon33]

82. This may work against Hillary

In many states there are open primaries, such as Virginia. Republicans and the Democratic base voting for Bernie could make a significant difference for Bernie. By the way, no women in my circle of activist Democratic women are supporting Hillary. This is not a huge sample, but I find it interesting that so many activists I know support Bernie and none....and this is over several states...support Hillary.

[emsimon33]

84. Also, my brother and his Republican family-life-long Republicans- are for Bernie

I was shocked when they approached me at my nephew's wedding, telling me how impressed they are with Bernie.

[Jefferson23]

89. 9 million Republicans voted for Obama in 2008..the comments in this thread seem to have

been unaware of that.

[LWolf]

90. Or they just don't want to acknowledge it,

since that makes it harder to scoff at.

[Jefferson23]

91. Yes, that is a possibility too. There are millions upon millions of votes up for grab.

We'll see what develops.

[NCTraveler]

92. He has a message that resonates with the rural white voter.

It is his constituency. The more of them on the republican side he can get to think about what he is saying for a minute, the better. Sanders, Chaffee and Webb serve a great purpose for our party in this respect. They can and are taking republicans of different stripes and at least making them think. These actions expand the party and make people previously not willing to listen more comfortable with progressive rhetoric. With Hillary, their mind is already made up. Republicans view her as the devil.

[Jefferson23]

93. People should consider what we already know, how Obama won in 2008:

To dismiss Republican voters is foolish..why would anyone do that?

snip*Barack Obama captured the White House on the strength of a substantial electoral shift toward the Democratic Party and by winning a number of key groups in the middle of the electorate. Overall, 39% of voters were Democrats while 32% were Republicans — a dramatic shift from 2004 when the electorate was evenly divided. The Democratic advantage in Election Day party identification was significantly larger than in either of Bill Clinton’s victories.

While moderates have favored the Democratic candidate in each of the past five elections, Barack Obama gained the support of more voters in the ideological “middle” than did either John Kerry or Al Gore before him. He won at least half the votes of independents (52% vs. 49% for Kerry), suburban voters (50% vs. 47% for Kerry), Catholics (54% vs. 47% for Kerry), and other key swing groups in the electorate.

Economy Was Dominant Issue

As expected, the economy dominated the voters’ agenda this year: More than six-in-ten (63%) voters, including comparable majorities of Obama supporters (65%) and McCain backers (60%), cited the economy as the most important issue facing the country. Economic issues and personal financial concerns consistently cut in Obama’s favor. Among those who said they are very worried about economic conditions — half the electorate — 59% voted for Obama; those who expressed less concern about the economy favored McCain. One-in-three voters said they are very worried about being able to afford the health care services they need, and these voters backed Obama by a 65%-to-32% margin.

http://www.pewresearch.org/2008/11/05/inside-obamas-sweeping-victory/

[Jefferson23]

94. Why a grassroots campaign matters for Bernie:Why 90 million Americans won't vote in November ( 2012)

snip*Call them the unlikely voters.

A nationwide USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll of people who are eligible to vote but aren't likely to do so finds that these stay-at-home Americans back Obama's re-election over Republican Mitt Romney by more than 2-1. Two-thirds of them say they are registered to vote. Eight in 10 say the government plays an important role in their lives.

Even so, they cite a range of reasons for declaring they won't vote or saying the odds are no better than 50-50 that they will: They're too busy. They aren't excited about either candidate. Their vote doesn't really matter. And nothing ever gets done, anyway.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-08-15/non-voters-obama-romney/57055184/1