Support NeoGAF

[vainglorious]

Video of Barney's comments at this link -
https://youtu.be/g4Xxk5wKz9c

“When it comes to an election this important,” Barney Frank said. “I think you have to be pragmatic. Mainly, who can best carry out your values.”

Frank scoffed at those who he believe put idealism over pragmatism. “The opposite of pragmatism is not idealism,” Barney Frank said. “It’s wishful thinking.”

Barney said he wishes Americans were not so phobic about the word socialism. He said Bernie Sanders has been a proud socialist for 40+ years. He then said for years when Republicans were attempting to clothe Democrats as socialists they ran away from it. “You are not going to turn around now,” Barney Frank said. “and say, ‘Oh by the way we’ve been socialist all along.’ and win the election.”

Summary article here for those that can't watch -
http://bit.ly/1R6gzCW

I miss Barney.

 

[neogaffer1]

who?

 

[thesoapster]

But they haven't been socialist all along...

 

[giga]

who?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barney_Frank

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

He's just falling in line with the party, and still, Hillary is "supposed" to be the nomination. I still like Frank, but people said the same about Obama and the country supported his message the first time around enough to over come the odds of what everyone thought his chances were.

 

[bomma_man]

who?

Post of the year

 

[ItIsOkBro]

And if America elected him he'd be a wishful doer.

 

[Pastry]

He's just falling in line with the party, and still, Hillary is "supposed" to be the nomination. I still like Frank, but people said the same about Obama and the country supported his message the first time around enough to over come the odds of what everyone thought his chances were.

What will it take for people to realize Sanders isn't Obama.

 

[vainglorious]

who?

Are you being facetious?

If not he was a Congressman from 1981 to 2013 and served as Chairman of the Financial Services Committee. Lead sponsor for Dodd-Frank and heavily involved in financial industry reform.

 

[Shao Kahn on the Lawn]

Bernie has never shied away from the Socialist Democrat moniker nor has he pretended that his being elected President would be the cure for all ills. Whatever support he has or will gain will be acquired underneath that banner.

 

[akira28]

I wish Barney would run. Well, I wish Barney would run and had a chance in hell of winning, I should say.

Hell, I wish Sanders had a chance of winning.

Bernie has never shied away from the Socialist Democrat moniker nor has he pretended that his being elected President would be the cure for all ills. Whatever support he has or will gain will be acquired underneath that banner.

well Barn is talking about the Democrats running away from socialism or anything that didn't look like red blooded American democratic Capitalism. Not Bernie shying away. It does look completely hypocritical, all these years letting socialism be a bad thing, and suddenly backing it with your party nominee?

 

[Slayven]

He not wrong, they think Bernie is going to turn the USA into Norway 2.0 by lunch on his first day.

They forget we have a Congress.

 

[way more]

who?

embarrassing

 

[WedgeX]

He not wrong, they think Bernie is going to turn the USA into Norway 2.0 by lunch on his first day.

They forget we have a Congress.

Who is this "they?"

 

[Arkos]

God forbid people vote their beliefs

 

[B-Dubs]

He's just falling in line with the party, and still, Hillary is "supposed" to be the nomination. I still like Frank, but people said the same about Obama and the country supported his message the first time around enough to over come the odds of what everyone thought his chances were.

Bernie isn't Obama dude. There's some big differences.

 

[Umibozu]

Good guy barney being so frank.



In all honesty barney's right though.

 

[Piecake]

Who is this "they?"

Bernie's wishful thinking supporters

 

[Orbis Tabula]

I'll never understand people bragging about their ignorance. Wikipedia takes like three seconds. He's a congressman. Was for 30 years. First openly gay member of Congress. First member of Congress to marry someone of the same sex while in office. Co-sponsor of the Dodd-Frank Act. He's not a guy to be proud about not knowing.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Technically, he called people who are against pragmatic compromise and/or incremental change, people who put idealism above all else, wishful thinkers.

 

[tokkun]

Who is this "they?"

Sanders' broad coalition of white slacktivists.

 

[brianmcdoogle]

Bernie isn't Obama dude. There's some big differences.

Maybe that poster wasn't old enough or wasn't paying attention to politics from 2004 to 2008 to realize how fractured the democrats were for three distinct candidates, and that people wanted and hoped and thought Obama would run after that 2004 DNC convention speech, or that Obama gained ground on Clinton only after Edwards quit the race, or all other reasons 2016 isn't like 2008.

 

[Abinash117]

Technically, he called people who are against pragmatic compromise and/or incremental change, people who put idealism above all else, wishful thinkers.

They are. They think a single person can fix America. Bernie Sanders would need to have more power and make massive changes than FDR to make any changes if the current state of Congress does is similar.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

The right and the left both have fanatic ideologues that would rather burn the whole thing down than make pragmatic choices. It's a very dangerous game they're playing.

 

[……forgetit]

He's not wrong.

The right and the left both have fanatic ideologues that would rather burn the whole thing down than make pragmatic choices. It's a very dangerous game they're playing.

No clue what you're talking about, the left compromises out the wazzoo.

 

[DUFFMCWALIN]

Technically, he called people who are against pragmatic compromise and/or incremental change, people who put idealism above all else, wishful thinkers.

So the extremist left basically.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

He's not wrong.



No clue what you're talking about, the left compromises out the wazzoo.

Not the left I'm talking about.

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

The right and the left both have fanatic ideologues that would rather burn the whole thing down than make pragmatic choices. It's a very dangerous game they're playing.

Serious question: what are you talking about?

 

[Euron]

He's actually right though. Bernie's just not somebody who could win a general election right now. Yes I know about the Electoral Map favoring the Democrats but there will be many people in the country who will be actively against voting for a Socialist.

If Bernie's beliefs and attitude most align with yours, go out and vote for him in the primaries. Just know that him actually getting to the White House is still indeed wishful thinking at this point.

 

[……forgetit]

Not the left I'm talking about.

So you mean the people who want complete Socialism and don't want to compromise with the right at all? They exist but I'd call the right extremists a much bigger problem atm.

 

[NeoXChaos]

He's not wrong. He wrote about in this article a few months ago.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/07/why-progressives-shouldnt-support-bernie-120484

 

[docbon]

Who is this "they?"

idk

He's been vocal about not being able to do it by himself in pretty much every single stump speech that he's ever given thus far.

 

[Geist-]

idk

He's been vocal about not being able to do it by himself in pretty much every single stump speech that he's ever given thus far.

Also in every interview as well. It's one of his biggest talking points.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

I have to agree. I like Bernie alot and think that we'll see credible contenders like him in 10-15 years, but for right now, I have to say that I can't see America turning around and supporting someone like him.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

He's not wrong.



No clue what you're talking about, the left compromises out the wazzoo.

The "my candidate or I'm voting for the other party/staying home" folks are the ones being chastised here. My way or the highway rarely works in politics, and certainly isn't reasonable for elections.

 

[Geist-]

The "my candidate or I'm voting for the other party/staying home" folks are the ones being chastised here. My way or the highway rarely works in politics, and certainly isn't reasonable for elections.

There are a few people who say that, but a majority of the people I know who support Sanders (and that includes a lot of the posters I interact with on /r/SandersforPresident) say they would absolutely vote for Clinton if she wins the nomination. But until the end of the Primary they (and myself) will be supporting Sanders.

 

[kirblar]

No clue what you're talking about, the left compromises out the wazzoo.

Because for years they nominated far-left candidates and lost elections repeatedly.

 

[Foffy]

They are. They think a single person can fix America. Bernie Sanders would need to have more power and make massive changes than FDR to make any changes if the current state of Congress does is similar.

What's funny about that is I don't see where these wishful people even assert Sanders will fix it all. He's outright fucking stated electing one person does not promote a solution, but a social movement, be it grassroots demands and upheaval of the blockages in the establishment.

The latter isn't happening with the upcoming election due to gerrymandering, and you would have to have a massive social trigger to create the social movement to help accelerate the desires of Sanders and those who support him in a model that for lack of a better term is a growing oligarchy. Unless you're a monied interest, in America, you are second-rate, and almost all of Sanders core points can be accounted more to humanism than corporate interest. He's a very un-American candidate in that sense.

We can't even do anything about guns in this climate. While I consider much of Sanders' points to be the most reasonable of any candidate running, our system does not run on reason.

 

[Elfforkusu]

Because the existing plan of ceding both parts of Congress to the GOP is working so well?

 

[EatinOlives]

There are a few people who say that, but a majority of the people I know who support Sanders (and that includes a lot of the posters I interact with on /r/SandersforPresident) say they would absolutely vote for Clinton if she wins the nomination. But until the end of the Primary they (and myself) will be supporting Sanders.

I haven't asked THE question to a friend of mine who is a giant Bernie fanboy ("Would you vote for Hillary if she won?") Now, he may say yes, he may say no now and eventually vote her her anyway after the fervor of Bernie losing dies down, he may actually just not vote at all. But every other day he goes on about Hillary is shitty, dishonest, up corporate's ass, saying and doing whatever just to get votes, she has no platform, etc. etc., that I think by the end of the primaries he'll be so far gone there's no chance he'd ever vote for her. He was even downplaying Bill's economic successes by saying "actually it's good for countries to have debts, not surpluses".

Anyway, that was my anecdote. Whether or not Sanders fans stay at home I think is largely irrelevant, because the small minority who may do that weren't really part of the electorate anyway.

 

[dramatis]

Because the existing plan of ceding both parts of Congress to the GOP is working so well?

The ones ceding both parts of Congress to the GOP aren't the Democrats.

 

[timetokill]

I guess people just have to wait until an "unimportant" election to vote for real progress.

I'm sure they'll let us know when a election is unimportant enough for people to vote for their beliefs.

 

[kirblar]

Because the existing plan of ceding both parts of Congress to the GOP is working so well?

That's state-level gerrymandering and rural states being over-represented.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

The ones ceding both parts of Congress to the GOP aren't the Democrats.

It's idealistic or apathetic democratic voters who believe that having a leftist president is the only thing that matters in politics that have ceded Congress to the right.

The left doesn't show up in midterms, and then clueless non voting leftists blame the President for not working miracles.

 

[shinra-bansho]

That's state-level gerrymandering and rural states being over-represented.

That's arguably also a function of the quest for ideological purity/pursuit of perfect candidates and/or apathy towards gubernatorial and state legislature elections.

 

[JesseEwiak]

It's idealistic or apathetic democratic voters who believe that having a leftist president is the only thing that matters in politics that have ceded Congress to the right.

The left doesn't show up in midterms, and then clueless non voting leftists blame the President for not working miracles.

To be fair, midterm turnout has always sucked going all the way back to the giving of universal suffrage, it's just that the midterm electorate being whiter and older didn't kill the DNC until the 90's.

It just wasn't so obvious because there were always good midterms for the Democrat's mixed in ('98 because of Monica and Newt being dumb and '06 with Iraq blowing up), so along with a more Republican-friendly contingent people being moved into the old age bracket getting radicalized by a non-white POTUS, boom - you get horrible midterms.

 

[JHoNNy1OoO]

I guess people just have to wait until an "unimportant" election to vote for real progress.

I'm sure they'll let us know when a election is unimportant enough for people to vote for their beliefs.

You have to change the American people's views of Socialism in order for someone like Bernie to win in the General Election. You know all that Super Pac money thanks to Citizen's United? It will be devoted to nothing but ad blitz's on how Bernie is a socialist and Americans hate socialism and it'll work. It is sad but true.

As a whole America has been making real progress. People are becoming less and less religious and once the baby boomer generation dies off I do believe America will have a very significant progressive future.

 

[kirblar]

That's arguably also a function of the quest for ideological purity/pursuit of perfect candidates and/or apathy towards gubernatorial and state legislature elections.

GOP working to actively limit minority votes is part of the "apathy" here as well.

 

[Abinash117]

What's funny about that is I don't see where these wishful people even assert Sanders will fix it all. He's outright fucking stated electing one person does not promote a solution, but a social movement, be it grassroots demands and upheaval of the blockages in the establishment.

The latter isn't happening with the upcoming election due to gerrymandering, and you would have to have a massive social trigger to create the social movement to help accelerate the desires of Sanders and those who support him in a model that for lack of a better term is a growing oligarchy. Unless you're a monied interest, in America, you are second-rate, and almost all of Sanders core points can be accounted more to humanism than corporate interest. He's a very un-American candidate in that sense.

We can't even do anything about guns in this climate. While I consider much of Sanders' points to be the most reasonable of any candidate running, our system does not run on reason.

A lot are not outright saying it, it is an impression. It is like when people believe that the president can fix a lot of the problems even if he has limited ability to do so and the ask why can't he do more. The problem is that none of this people says anything else besides wanting Bernie to be president, but completely ignore Congress or the fact he might have less support and influence that they think. For Bernie to enact any of these policies he will need Congress if he doesn't much won't get done. I heard he does not think he can do things himself, but his idea is to get many people to pressure Republicans to do what he wants to happen; which I find unlike to happen. By having him in office they think the "revolution" can happen.

Barney's comment is that there needs to be a person that can be pragmatic and not ideological like the Sander's supporters so certain groups can help get something done. The thing with Hillary that she might have the influence to make that happen.

 

[Citadelofmythoughts]

God forbid people vote their beliefs

I prefer to be a pragmatist.