Should Sanders Run As a Third Party Candidate?

The Democratic Party and media has rigged the election against Sanders.

51% of Americans know the primary process is rigged.

More than half of Americans want a third party.

42% of Americans now think of themselves as independents … only 29% identify as Democrats, and 26% as Republicans.

Even the Founding Fathers warned us about the threat from a two-party system.

Should Sanders run as a third party candidate?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in Politics / World News. Bookmark the permalink.
  • kimyo

    1) the same apparatus which has just coronated clinton will still be in place in november
    2) he utterly failed to convey the gravity and severity of clinton’s numerous crimes to the voters.
    3) he has no accomplishments and many flaws (va scandal, f-35, drones, lack of support for snowden/manning)

    plus, based on the script roll out, it looks like we’re in for (staged) protests and violence galore, which will serve to allow tptb to shut down any real attempt to speak up against this obvious fraud of an election. heinous acts will be attributed to sanders supporters and the media will clamor for him to step down.

    ps: why didn’t sanders inform his california supporters of the ‘placebo ballot’ issue? he really doesn’t appear to be taking the whole thing seriously. 130,000 fraudulently disqualified voter affiliations in brooklyn? not worthy of mention. six coin tosses serving to decide who gets the 3am phone call? well, these things happen.

    • cstahnke

      The Democratic voters would not have responded to those accusations and Sanders would have been relegated to the “fringes” as a madman. He knew that to get what little air-play he got that he had to play it the way he did. Is HRC “crooked Hilary” ya betcha but the “liberals” I know simply will not believe it because their political focus is not pro-social democracy but anti-Republican, i.e., their views are based on tribalism–we good/they bad. Clinton is seen as “us” and attacking her is attacking “us.” My very smart liberal friend only says that any attack on Clinton as crooked is based on Republican lies–that’s it. Most people today even with graduate degrees from major universities and vast experience as my friend has, are unable to apply critical thinking skills to politics because it is not about ideas but about identity! Sanders attempted to change that and has succeeded after a fashion. But Sanders cannot change American culture which is in crisis mode and I see, as most of us here do, a very bumpy ride wherein the whole false-nature of the picture of the world the propaganda organs with their mighty Wurlitzers have been grinding out will dissolve into dissonance.

      • Steven

        Great analysis! (My only quibble is with the “dissonance” thing – should be ‘the vapor of exploding hydrogen bombs. Nuclear winter – Killary’s plan to to confront global warming?) Anyhow it isn’t really about Bernie so much as a choice between the lesser of at least three evils. I suppose we have that now with Stein and the Greens, at least in theory. But in the MSM the Greens are almost as much of a secret as the problems threatening human civilization and the planet.

        “Which way out of here said the joker to the thief. There’s too much confusion. I can’t get no relief.”

      • kimyo

        the voters are just not as stupid as you imply. sanders had ample floor time at the debates to say: check the facts re: boeing/saudi contributions to the clinton foundation just prior to state department approval of massive weapons sales. he could have spent a few moments describing what saudi arabia is and what they’re doing with those weapons.

        sure, he’d have been furiously attacked by dailykos/huffpost. but, the facts are the facts. clinton’s trust rating is miniscule for a reason. the people aren’t nearly as dumb as you paint them to be.

        you seem to imply that losing california is some kind of strategic move. he had ample time to alert his supporters to the need to specifically demand a certain ballot. he would have won california handily, were the votes properly counted. he said bupkiss. he abandoned his supporters at the very moment where he could have turned the tide.

        this is not a master strategist in action. this is not ‘primary colors’. this is what happens when mr. magoo runs against the most evil/corrupt/connected politician in the world.

  • Sunny

    The Grand Lie: How The Deadlight Of The Black Pope And the Jesuit Militia Distort The History Of The United States Of America!!!
    http://www.themoderngnostic.com/?p=78650
    wow

  • diogenes

    to answer your question, yes, absolutely.

  • Carl_Herman

    He won’t because he is part of the theater for We the Sheeple. The “Emperor’s New Clothes” facts of unlawful and lie-started wars that Hillary participates in, bankster looting, and continuous lies would be obvious points to hammer for any honest candidate.

    Sanders refused to demand Hillary’s arrest over obvious criminal acts with her “secret government” e-mails as Secretary of State; instead he defended her. As kimyo comments, he could have hammered the election fraud that has been ongoing, and refused; choosing to follow the script.

    That said, perhaps Sanders would prefer a “Scrooge conversion” if given an opening. Perhaps his very soul will become more important than his life, and the lives of millions by surrendering the most powerful military on Earth to the .01% monsters led by Clinton. But, he’ll have to prove by his actions. So far, my conclusion is that he is a pathetic puppet of controlled opposition.

    • cstahnke

      I don’t think it’s that simple. I think Sanders, basically, understands the reality of the power-structure which you an I would probably agree has resembled Kubrick’s vision in *Eyes Wide Shut* but I think all that is crumbling from within mainly because of its stunning success. Sanders knows that he has to play within a limited field and he drew that limited field out a bit by his candidacy–I believe that was his goal and he played the only game he could play masterfully in my view. Calling out Clinton would not have worked and would have blunted the message, that is, the introduction to the basic ideas of social-democracy that the mainstream media has systematically ignored since the seventies. What’s next is why Sanders has to stay in the race–without him at this point the movement collapses–the longer it is there the more the mainstream narrative has to shift slightly and that’s the only hope we have that the next few years may get a real dialogue among those of us who have been hurt by neoliberalism/neoconservatism, i.e., Trump and Sanders voters to try something new. A slender thread to be sure but that’s all we’ve got.

      • Kansas_Voter

        “Calling out Clinton would not have worked and would have blunted the message”

        He couldn’t be too aggressive or he’d risk turning off democratic voters but if he chooses to join the Green Party he’d be freed from those constraints.

    • jo6pac

      CH did see this map? The state of Jefferson voted for Bernie. My thought what he should is keeping to Philly. The hillabilly people won’t give him anything. I don’t want him in the Greens.
      http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/primaries/2016-06-07

  • Just Watching

    Sanders was never a real opponent of the Clinton Cult/Crime Gang. Sanders campaign was merely and outgrowth of the fake agitprop group “Occupy Wall Street”. The depraved actors who strut the fake left/fake progressive political stage are going to get the “BIG ENDING” they so crave.
    *
    Problem is, they take everyone else with them.

  • cstahnke

    Yes–it is critical that Sanders continue–the fact he is still running describes his true intention of running. I do not think he thought he could win the nomination, in my view, but he thought he could bring ideas of social democracy and what is possible before a wide audience that the media was forced kicking and screaming all the way to cover. The fact remains that if we had general primaries or just a three-person race today, Sanders would defeat the other two candidates–this is clear and will mean something not just to Sanders voters but to those drawn to Trump. The outrageous actions of the media vis a vis giving Clinton the crown before Tuesday’s primary showed how brazenly they can act and how worried they were. Now Trump will be the new 24/7 “other” that the mainstream can howl against for month–the cartoon villain that will guarantee their Queen be Queen and anyone who opposes her is a racist and a hater of women.

  • TroubleBaby

    Democracy is a farce anyway, people need to abandon the political system as a means to improving everyone’s lives and embrace free markets & private property.

    Bernie running third party might move things along, but I hate to encourage socialists as they dislike private property and free markets for the most part.

    • cstahnke

      No offense but there is no such thing as a “free market” all markets depend on political authority of some kind, though I’ll probably vote Libertarian

      • TroubleBaby

        No offense taken. Markets work fine without “political authority”, in fact, they work better.

        Too bad the Libertarian party hasn’t fielded actual libertarian candidates.

        • cstahnke

          We probably would disagree about the definition of “political authority.” For example, if I could go to a market with a bunch of bikers I know and just take everything who would stop me? As Perot used to say, “it’s just that simple.”

          • TroubleBaby

            ” if I could go to a market with a bunch of bikers I know and just take everything who would stop me? ”

            If everybody operated under the notion of personal responsibility and that responsibility included personal security I could almost guarantee you there’s be privately paid armed guards in any such market place.

            But because there is no private property society that encourages personal responsibility, most people can’t conceptualize of such a thing.

          • cstahnke

            The private group would act for the association that met in order to hire those guys–that would be a “government.” Most libertarians accept the idea of limited government how to work that is a problem–but we both know what we don’t want which is what we have now.

          • TroubleBaby

            “The private group would act for the association that met in order to hire those guys–that would be a “government.””

            No, the difference is that people contracting with private security do so on the basis of a voluntary transaction- unlike government, which takes money from people involuntarily(most people).

            So those scenarious are completely different things.

            Libertarians that promote “limited government” are not yet philosophically consistent. Maybe one day they’ll come around.

    • jadan

      It is not true that democratic socialists dislike private property. This is Communism. Quite a different animal, and yet many Americans, probably the most politically ignorant people in the west, cannot distinguish between a social democracy and the USSR, which has been rotting on the dung heap of history for 25 years now. It is quite dead.

      • TroubleBaby

        They all share the same need for other people money(aka private property), just to different degrees. Their operating principles are fundamentally the same.

        • wunsacon

          In the dark, all cats are grey.

          • TroubleBaby

            So are you acknowledging that all those that promote wealth confiscation are a form of cat in your analogy? Or are you just pointing out that other color cats don’t steal as much(or steal more, take your pick) as grey cats in an attempt to ignore the theft itself?

  • ICFubar

    No. Sanders is one of the Washington D.C. crowd so if anything he should just go away and be quiet and if he can’t and has to endorse anyone then the closest to a social democratic stance would be the Greens and Jill Stein. He could campaign for them or just go home and write his memoirs.

  • MrLiberty

    Does anyone fully appreciate just how HORRIBLE the two major parties have made it to even try and run outside of their duopoly? Even well-established parties like the Libertarian, Green, and others have a miserable time even getting a candidate on the ballot in every states thanks to outrageous ballot access laws that insure minimal to NO competition for the establishment criminals. People act like this is a free country. It most certainly is NOT. Then there is the media. The entire mainstream media is controlled by a handful of global corporations. They will NOT cover any other candidates if they are told not to. Then there are the polls. The alternative options are NEVER even mentioned in by pollsters simply to insure that the names of alternatives to the two-party crime family are never heard by voters. Then there are the “debates.” Every debate is now controlled by the two-party crime family. Every round they alter the “barriers” to entry for 3rd party candidates to insure that none will ever make the stage. And if one were to actually poll (see my previous point) high enough to make the stage, one or both of the major party candidates would simply refuse to debate, thus insuring the public never has the chance to see the alternatives available. Courageous folks like C-Span and others occasionally will cover a “3rd party” debate, but guaranteed this “generosity” will dry up if any candidate truly posed a real threat to the establishment and their control of the political “process.”

    I have nothing positive to say about Bernie except that he doesn’t sound like he wants WW3 unlike the she-devil he is running against, but the discussion about 3rd party is pointless as THEY will simply NOT let it happen. For more on the real background story on ballot access and related issues, there is NO better source than Richard Winger and his site ballot-access.org. If you REALLY want to see just how RIGGED the process is, check out his site.

  • Kansas_Voter

    Yes. The Green Party is a perfect fit for him and they’re already on the ballot in 20 states. I’ll be voting for Bernie in November no matter what.

  • Mike Meyer

    Bernie should continue running stronger and harder into the convention, providing an alternative for anti-Clinton democrats and forwarding the mission of the voting block that he has organized and assembled.
    If an un-prosecuted war criminal who is also an electoral system crime gang leader[Hill] gets the D-nomination,Sanders should lead his voting block[those that voted for him in the primary] to
    vote for an honest candidate with a reasonable and patriotic platform; Jill Stein.
    He should also seriously consider offering himself to her
    as a Green Party Vice Presidential running mate with the intention to bring his voters with him .

    I am a registered California [lifelong] democrat and voted for Sanders in the primary and will vote
    ONLY for Sanders and/or Stein in the presidential election in November 2016.

    My answer to the question posed by the author of the article is ;Yes,Bernie should run as a third party
    candidate…… as the green party-VP,
    BUT of course, only if he does not win the democrat[ic!] party nomination during the convention.

  • ClubToTheHead

    Sanders should run in whatever capacity the Green Party will have him.

    This may split the Democratic Party vote, but that is no catastrophe.

    Hillary is not the lesser evil candidate, but the more effectively evil candidate. She is proud of her association with Kissinger and hides her conspiratorial Wall Street transcripts from the people she wants to voter for her.

    She is a blood spiller and a blood sucker of the working people. She supports more wars and the TPP.

  • profmarcus

    “Re”introducing the basic ideas of social democracy, as cstahnke points out, has been extremely valuable, but not nearly as valuable as Sanders simply being a man of unimpeachable principle and integrity, honestly the first such I’ve seen in my nearly 70 years. Yes, Sanders has his flaws and, yes, he’s clearly as much a part of the system as anyone else and, yes, he had to play the Democratic Party game in order to get as far as he has. Should he stay in? Absolutely, but the question is, stay in as what? Democrat? Third party? I think a third party bid would doom his chances but it might be his only option.

    On the other hand, I’m convinced that another shoe is going to drop on HRC (yeah, ok, that may be just wishful thinking) and, if it does, Sanders will be the last man standing. Trump’s jet already has engine trouble so HRC’s chances of beating him are growing, but we can’t forget just how much baggage (and I mean CRIMINAL baggage) she carries and, depending on how much of a spine the FBI really has, I wouldn’t bet that Obama, who is totally dedicated to covering his ass and establishing his legacy, would fall on his sword for her. He’s always looking to see which way the wind is blowing. Yes, he wants to ride on the Clinton Foundation gravy train in his post-presidential years but not if it means defending criminals to do it.

    Keep the popcorn handy. It’s going to be an interesting next few months.

  • USA_objector

    No. He won’t do it.

    Bernie laid down his weapons early on when during one of the first debates he told the MSM to stop focusing on Hillary’s “damn emails.” – http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/13/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-damn-email-server

    Clinton immediately returned the favor by accusing Bernie of “artful smears” when he asked about her speeches before Goldman Sachs. Thanks a million, Bernie: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders_us_56b40db3e4b01d80b245c7ea

    The raw video from the Nevada primary demonstrated a brazen communist-style theft of the results that left Bernie’s supporters infuriated. Bernie got pushed around by Debbie Wasserman Schultz for a few days until his campaign manager Jeff Weaver stepped up. But they let the DNC control the narrative with an “artful smear” of their own against Bernie’s supporters. Pathetic. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/05/17/cenk_ugyur_cnn_never_showed_you_what_really_happened_at_nevada_dem_convention.html

    When Trump said the Republican process was rigged, the GOP elite backed off and he started winning state after state. Bernie took a different road. Even when it was clear the system was rigged against him, he denied that it was rigged: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/bernie-sanders-agrees-democratic-process-not-rigged

    Bernie never fought hard enough on behalf of the millions who supported him. I never agreed with Bernie’s politics, but his ascendancy against the Clinton machine was truly something astounding.

    Yes, Hillary might get indicted. Maybe. If so, the DNC will plug in Biden. Sanders doesn’t have the cojones to go third party.

    • wunsacon

      Agree overall. But, this:

      >> raw video from the Nevada primary demonstrated a brazen communist-style theft

      reflects the lies oligarchs have been spreading for a long, long time.

      It’s difficult to tell. But, “capitalists” very likely steal elections at least as often as “communists”. And if I were forced to place a bet, my bet is that capitalists engage in slightly more theft. But, as they are the victors for now, they write the history books that tell us such things like “communists are to blame for all deaths when overthrowing their capitalist king, whereas our revolution to gain independence from our king was well worth it”, “communists are to blame for all deaths when trying to liberate their country from capitalist foreign occupation”, “even if famine was a recurring event in certain countries due to the incredibly harsh climate, famines that occur on ‘communist’ watch are entirely due to ‘communism’ whereas famines that occur on ‘capitalist’ watch are due to the weather”, and much other nonsense that’s patently idiotic and yet almost universally accepted.

  • jadan

    Yes, he should run as a third party…but not as VP to the prima donna MD, Jill Stein. Bernie is second to no one because no one in politics measures up. If he is a spoiler and Trump trumps Hillary, that’s a good thing. Trump will incite serious discord domestically, but he will back off confrontation with Russia. That’s the most important thing. Back off this imperial war mongering foreign policy. War bitch Hillary is poison. More war, more corruption, more Obama corporate fascism…..so what’s a Trump cult of personality by comparison. Preferable!

    • Manorborn

      Agree about Russia and that Trump is preferable to a dyed in the wool neocon, free trade junkie like Clinton. She is Reagan in a wig masquerading as a liberal. But you’re wrong about Stein on two counts: she’s hardly a prima donna, and last week she offered Sanders the presidential spot on the ticket.

      • jadan

        Didn’t know that! Stein is NOT a prima donna. Good idea!

  • Lynn Walker

    Third party? You’re still talking politics. OMG, nobody ever learns anything. Nothing can be fixed until a critical mass (starting with you) stops thinking it can be resolved through politics.

    • MrLiberty

      Indeed. You simply cannot fix the myriad of problems that politicians and government have created by endorsing more political or governmental solutions. Government is an UN-NECESSARY EVIL.

      • wunsacon

        Then, can we stop enforcing claims to property rights far out of proportion to what people actually contributed — especially those who thanks to government have “inherited” their claims? I do consider it to be un-necessary, un-fair, and to infringe on the liberty of everyone else not “in the big club”.

  • wunsacon

    Upvoted cstahnke and kimyo alike, because you’re both making solid points and/or because I have cognitive dissonance.

  • wunsacon

    Bernie pulled punches and let Hillary win. Looks like a sheep dog to me.

    Why support him as a 3rd-party candidate? Better off supporting someone who really vocalizes the problems more forcefully.

    For me, Jesse Ventura comes to mind. Who else? I actually haven’t ever heard Jill Stein speak or interview.

    • Sally Striffler

      I’m a 65 yr old woman who was called a Bernie Bro for supporting him. ANYONE who supported him was obviously a misogynist. What would her supporters & MSM done to Bernie if he had taken off the gloves? Besides, he has a naturally blunt persona. I think his gentlemanly approach was a necessity. As it was, friends asked me how I could like such an angry old man? I saw him as inspired, propelled by his convictions about what the people need, not angry but vehement.

      BTW, how can we have a competitive market without a return to some of Teddy R’s anti-trust legislation? This is the area in which Liz Warren, if she hadn’t sold out but had joined Bernie, would have added the depth of her knowledge of how to undo Bill Clinton’s deregging & Bock’s disasterous economics. In that case, Bernie could have beaten all the election fraud & won the primary anyway.

  • doryinaz

    yes….yes….and yes….