In the past few days, I’ve run into two Republicans who said that they want Bernie Sanders for President. Republicans for an avowed democratic socialist. How did that happen?
The first one was on Facebook. I later learned his name, Everett Clifford. He commented on a pro-Bernie post that I put up. He told me that he was a Republican, an ex-Marine, and a minister. “Have been living in Vermont for many years, have voted for Bernie every time, very proud of him, he tells us what’s wrong, and how to fix it, never ran a dirty campaign, so as a Republican, Marine vet, and Minister, I’m voting for Bernie Sanders.”
I made a poster with him on it and told him I thought that Bernie’s campaign should find more Republicans like him. (I contacted Bernie.org and told them the same thing). If Republicans could supported a democratic socialist, that would show that his message of battling the billionaires has broad appeal. Everett Clifford told me that he thought that there were others like him. (He said he liked my poster. Someone reposted my Clifford poster on a liberal Facebook page and it drew 86 “likes,” which I thought was good, even though I didn’t find my poster that attractive).
Then, a day later, I found a post by another avowed Republican. This post went to great lengths, explaining why the person was supporting Bernie Sanders and was against the Republican party:
I am a long-time GOP supporter. During my teenage years, I witnessed Reagan, contrary to the narrative today, being a very pragmatic moderate Republican. After providing the economy with some Keynesian stimulus in the form of tax cuts, as the economy got back on its feet we saw him increase taxes to help reduce the deficit. He closed loopholes for the wealthy. He granted amnesty (something I oppose but it shows how he was willing to compromise.) He worked with Tip O’Neill to salvage Social Security.
While I did not support Iran Contra, I proudly registered to become a Repbulican just in time for the upcoming election of 1988. I voted for H W Bush, and after being impressed with his pragmatism (i.e. raising taxes although they were unpopular) I voted for him again. During the Clinton Presidency, however, I began to notice a substantial shift to the right. They pushed legislation like DOMA and NAFTA, which I could absolutely not support. However, they showed willingness to compromise with Clinton on major issues such as welfare reform and balancing the budget, so I was not yet ready to abandon the GOP, although I did vote for Perot in ’96.
In 2000, I voted for W, noting the pragmatism of his father and his seemingly reasonable ‘compassionate conservatism.’ However, I quickly noticed things were a bit off. He began the War on Terror and simultaneously cut taxes, even though wars are generally financed through tax hikes. He then expanded Medicare, and again he did not pay for it. I was upset with this, but I was also sucked into the whole “we need a strong leader to defeat terrorism,” which I was convinced John Kerry was not, so I voted for him. Deficits kept rising, the wars were failing, and the WMD claims turned out not to be true. Then the economy collapsed thanks to deregulation, and I strongly regretted my decision to vote for him. In 2008, I refused to vote for McCain, because he seemed way too far right on foreign policy, abortion, and gay marriage (shouldn’t small government supporters be pro choice,) but I also didn’t vote for Obama as his rhetoric seemed extremely far left.
Everything Sanders did was for the American worker, from protecting them from outsourcing and cheap foreign labor, to fixing the budget deficit by hiking taxes on the rich, to boosting the minimum wage. He’d be considered a centrist back in the 80s, which is why he has my vote.
Everything Sanders did was for the American worker, from protecting them from outsourcing and cheap foreign labor, to fixing the budget deficit by hiking taxes on the rich, to boosting the minimum wage. He’d be considered a centrist back in the 80s, which is why he has my vote.
Of course, when Obama got into office, I quickly realized that he was actually, if anything, a moderate Republican. He passed the ACA (Heritagecare) bill, extended the Bush tax cuts (even for the wealthy at first!), and steered us out of the worst recession since the Great Depression. After the 2010 wave elections for the Tea Party, I was disgusted with how far right the Republican party had gone, and began noticing the blatant racism. I found republicansforobama.org, a group of people closely reflecting my views, and voted Obama in 2012 and Democrat in 2014. I lurked on Reddit for a few months, reading r/politics regularly, and was amazed by Bernie Sander’s policies. Everything he did was for the American worker, from protecting them from outsourcing and cheap foreign labor, to fixing the budget deficit by hiking taxes on the rich, to boosting the minimum wage. He’d be considered a centrist back in the 80s, which is why he has my vote.
I cannot vouch for this person. For all I know, his story is made up, although it sounds genuine. One article has already been written about it.
I also found on Facebook a group that calls itself “Republicans for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Primary.” It has only two likes, and the purpose of group is to have Bernie win so that Hillary will be defeated that the Republicans will win the election.
Republicans wouldn’t necessarily want Hillary Clinton to be defeated. If the GOP ran Jeb Bush as its candidate, having Hillary as the opponent might be advantageous. One of Jeb’s big problems is that he represents a dynasty—the one that got us into the terrible Iraq War. Hillary is part of the Clinton dynasty. Having her as a candidate would probably nullify the whole “dynasty” argument. On the other hand, if Bernie Sanders ran against Bush, Jeb would have the dynasty problem. Similarly, if Hillary ran against Mario Rubio or Scott Walker, she would likewise have that problem.
Fortunately for the Democrats, their convention in 2016 comes second. They’ll know who the Republicans are running before they have to make a choice. Of course, by that time someone may have already wrapped up the nomination for the Democrats. But who knows?
Back to Bernie Sanders. His name has really exploded all over the Internet since he announced his candidacy. I’m an administrator of a small group of supporters on Facebook (“Bernie Sanders 2016 – Ideas Welcome”). The group had 700 members when I joined in November 2014 and 1400 in mid April 2015. As we get towards the end of May, we now have almost 2500 members, so the number has nearly doubled in a month. I get the impression that similar things are happened elsewhere. Bernie got 200,000 volunteers signed up in a few weeks after announcing and $3.0 million in donations in the first four days after he announced. . He is still raising money at a fast pace.
Some of his supporters still think that he should be running an independent campaign and that going for the Democratic nomination will be futile and a “sell out” to a corporate dominated party. However, it’s a balancing act. He won’t win if he runs independently, but if he keeps to his program of not taking money from the billionaires, he has both a decent chance of winning the nomination and the election.
What’s happening on the Hillary Clinton side? Unlike Bernie Sanders, she continuously has problems—potential scandals—that crop up. These could be generated by Republicans, naturally, since many of them do not want to see her in the general election. But the existence of such scandals and issues will not go away. They will be there during the general election as well as the primaries, and they are a cloud over Hillary’s position as a candidate.
Bernie Sanders has no such issues. The only thing really against him is that he’s a “democratic socialist.” And this is where the support of people like Everett Clifford and other Republicans can become crucial. Bernie Sanders should make it a special point to collect endorsements from Republicans and former Republicans to show that his positions have broad support.
How can the positions of Bernie Sanders be broad? “He’d be considered a centrist back in the 80s, which is why he has my vote,” said the Republican who came out for him. And that’s the real truth. Our country has become so conservative in the past 30 years that today a “democratic socialist” is the equivalent of a centrist back in the 1980’s. The positions that Ronald Reagan – the hero of the Republican Party—took back then would be anathema to many who call themselves Republicans today. So the left wing of the old Republican Party may be joining with the Democrats and electing Bernie Sanders, “democratic socialist,” as President.
Michael Hertz
Dutch says
Came across this site while doing a “Republican for Bernie” search. I’ve voted Republican since Dole ’96 and am now leaning heavily towards Bernie. I have absolutely nothing in common with Republican party of today.
~Signed demographic: White male registered voter in his mid 30s (Yes I voted for Dole when I was 18).
Stu says
If more Americans eschewed partisan politics, and make the donkey and elephant show obsolete, we make room for concrete ideas and true scrutiny of the problems.
I do love the fact that Hillary supporters act as if it us a foregone conclusion that she becomes the candidate. I expect attacks on him to start from the Hillary camp. And, it is true that her positions have shifted to the left, since he entered the race, but you will NEVER see her stand up to Wall St and the big banks and that , friends, that is where the rubber meets the new road. And why on earth would I choose her, that has oto shift her positions, over the guy who has been steadfast in his message for years. Just common sense.
Here is an important point. The slow but steady economic recovery, under Obama, has been a boom for the large corporations, the big banks, and wealthy investors. Our ” too big to fail bank” back President has taken very good care of his donors. But looming on the horizon is another financial crisis and there is only one group of folks that can save us, the American consumer. Putting more money in the hands of the people so that capitalism works as it is supposed to. It is contingent on the circulation of capital thoughout the new entire economy. End the 30 year stagnation of the value of labor .
Sharon C. says
Beware of Greeks bearing gifts. REPUBLICAN support for Bernie is all part of a RW plot called OPERATION CHAOS. They did it in 2008, 2012 and now are executing it again for 2016. Republicans are being urged to DONATE to Bernie’s campaign and give FAUX support by trashing Hillary on Pro-Bernie websites and social media in order to WEAKEN Hillary so she’ll lose the nomination.
https://www.nationalreview.com/article/420262/bernie-sanders-republicans-myra-adams
Victor Tiffany says
You should start a Facebook page to this effect. There’s a Republicans for Obama page:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/RepublicansForObama/
I belong to it, but I’m changing party affiliation to help Bernie get on the ballot in NY and to vote in the primary.
Plus, we’re waging an innovative Bernie or Bust campaign on our Revolt Against Plutocracy website.
Xombie Rainbow says
Any “republican” who would vote for a socialist was a rino anyway. The pope is not going to vote for satan unless he is possessed.
Whoops, I forgot, bribed “republicans” will vote for anything. We learned this from the house of representatives and the supreme court.
I take it all back. A bribed republican will not only vote for satan but he will try to have that devil’s baby.
JoeJoe says
Did you even read that gibberish you wrote before posting? I am a Republican but vote for whomever is best. The current choices and their lies makes Bernie Sanders an obvious choice if you are looking for a good person to fill the position for the presidency.
Chuck L. Head says
Changing my voter registration from Republican to No Party Affiliation so I can support Bernie in the primary.
Allen Gingrich says
Love it!
Ron H says
I want to know who is spreading the absolute lie that tax cuts are Keynesian policies. They are the product of the Chicago style Randian economics. You know – thoroughly discredited voodoo economics, trickle down economics, supply- side economics – that are destroying our country by transferring it’s wealth to 1% of our population. Keynes focused on the demand side and encouraged growth thru investment in industry and in people at the lowest levels so that everyone enjoyed growth, not just the super rich.
Ben says
Yeah, I saw that too. Maybe just a mistake rather than something being propagated, since I haven’t seen it anywhere else. But yeah, tax cuts are generally thought to be Friedmanite.
That said, if the tax cuts were only to the poor, then they would fall on the demand side, no? Increasing spending power? So maybe that’s what he meant?
Jason Gade says
Tax cuts by themselves are very much a Keynesian temporary stimulus to the economy, by getting money back into the hands of people which should increase demand.
The problem is that the stimulus of tax cuts is very temporary in nature, whereas supply siders believe it to be permanent and always beneficial.
hoboe pete says
Another convert from the dark side here. Bernie’s policies make sense, and will lead to prosperity. I’m getting out the vote for him, and networking with as many groups as viable to co-ordinate the effort. Here is what has evolved so far as I discuss and research the issues…
Everyone hears the terms Communism and Socialism being tossed about as though they were epithets. However, they are very much a part of our current economic system. If you own stocks or mutual funds, you are a Communist. Everyone’s contributed value is combined for a mutual purpose, and all share in the gains or losses. This combined effort is administered by a central authority, which controls the means of production. The leaders may insulate themselves from the effects of their decisions by taking their share first as salaries and bonuses.
Socialism uses the same process without that central authority. In Socialism, the contributors control the means of production, and the central authority is only empowered and required to prevent abuses by those trusted to administer the distribution of gains or losses. Employee owned companies such as Publix Supermarkets are examples of Socialism. All risk is equally shared, all gain is equally distributed by percentage. When everyone has a voice, and a vote, this becomes Democratic Socialism.
At some point, enough is enough. Nobody needs to accumulate 30 billion dollars of wealth while others suffer in the misery of poverty. There will always be rich and poor. There will always be those who seek gains far beyond their production. The role of the Central Authority in this case is to provide checks and balances to simple human greed,for the betterment of all. So go ahead, call me a Socialist, it’s a great honor.
One of the major “talking points” for the rebuttal of our proposals is that “50% of Americans pay no taxes”. This is intended to create a sense of outrage against those who are “persecuting” the rich, to marginalize us and propagate an image of us as being non-productive members of society. It is intended to imply that we should be grateful to the greedy for providing a bare subsistence standard of living for those of us who are not motivated to own everything and control all. The answer to this is a living wage. If, in truth, 50% of Americans are not paying taxes, how could it possibly be a bad thing to enable them to do so? Every dollar gained through the living wage directly offsets almost the same amount of Government spending on social welfare programs. Almost 30% of our Federal budget is directed to Social Services. More revenue, less expenditure, balance the budget- sounds pretty damn Conservative, doesn’t it?
The changes proposed will simply shift the burden of maintaining our societal needs to those who are productive. Those who are accumulating wealth through political influence and manipulation of the less sophisticated will be the ones who end up using the same social programs they denigrated, and grateful for the opportunity to take advantage of those same programs. Those who are consumers without being producers will be the opponents of our cause.
t is only in the last decade that economic conditions have deteriorated to the point that the proposals made by Senator Sanders are able to receive widespread consideration. Now that our minds have been opened, it is time to embrace common sense. Legislation should be crafted on the principle of what does the greatest good for the greatest number of American citizens, while doing the least harm possible to a few. There should be no back door deals, no compromises. By proposing such bills, you force each representative to reveal their true character. Those who are voting against YOUR interests must be voted out of office. We, the common people of this nation, have the numbers to oust the oligarchy if we will only force them to reveal the true nature of the game they are playing. They manipulate us with their propaganda, forcing us to vote against our own best interest. For the last 100 years we have had a choice of “bad” or “worse”. The lesser of two evils is no longer an option.
https://www.change.org/p/the-lying-begins-hillary-is-making-promises-that-only-bernie-would-keep-tell-her-to-step-aside-and-let-bernie-handle-it
The trade deficit with China was 342.6 billion last year. Up from 316 billion in 2013. Since the enactment of NAFTA over 2 trillion American dollars have been diverted to the economy of COMMUNIST China. No wonder we are suffering at home. Yet the same elements which are enriching the Communist regime use the term Communist as a slur to marginalize our ideals. Democratic Socialism is not Marxism, it is not Communism, They scream that trade restrictions will destroy the economy-and they are correct, restriction will destroy the economy they are building in China for their personal gain. For the American economy, protection is crucial, or there will soon be nothing to protect. American products, made in American factories, by American labor, from American raw materials, for sale to American consumers, can NEVER be a bad thing no matter how hard they try to convince you. If Wal Mart can really provide the lowest price, they can do it with American products. If they can’t, then their business model, based as it is upon corporate welfare, deserves to fail and another will rise in it’s place.
@ Carol- I’ve run the numbers. The Defense budget is about 25% of the total federal budget. 60% is what goes to social services. Over half of the healthcare industry is supported by Medicare alone. When you add in State Medicaid payments, it grows to about 80%- 1.2 trillion out of 1.6 trillion. We’re collecting enough tax money to pay for the needs of our citizens. The problem is that we have a web of interconnected corporations and Wall Street banks which are keeping 30% of that. When you add it all up, Federal and State, we are spending almost 5 trillion dollars per year on social programs. And 30% of that is going directly to the top 1%. As we lose jobs, the reliance on social programs increases, resulting in deficit spending. These same elements then lend this money back to the Government at 8% interest. The system works fantastically except that corporate influence has shaped the legislation to perpetuate this transfer of wealth. Everything they say is sleight of hand while they pick your pocket. Constitutional government is based upon a system of checks and balances. There are no checks or balances now in the economic environment fashioned by corporate legislation. The same ones who scream about entitlement are the ones taking trillions of taxpayer dollars while denigrating old people on Social Security that they paid for all of their lives.
Trade reform is crucial to the recovery of America. Anyone who says Protectionism doesn’t work is at best a fool and at worst a traitor. If we do not make that which we consume, we build an unhealthy dependence upon our rivals. If China were to withhold all shipments for 60 days every big box retailer in the US would be closed within 2 weeks. Millions of people already living paycheck to paycheck would now have no work and zero income. And we no longer have the infrastructure to fill the gap. It would take far more than 60 days to convert the strip malls and ruined industrial belt into productive facilities. We have no fear of China’s nukes- they have a far more powerful weapon in economic domination.
I’m going to explain in simple terms how this SCAM is perpetrated. instead of just including education in the budget, the financiers lobbied for complicated legislation which directly pays less than the full amount needed, so that they can make money from usury, yet they included government backing of these loans so as not to take any actual risk. It’s set up to provide income for the big banks at taxpayer expense, under the guise of saving tax dollars, which it does not do. Most legislation is similar. Anything which is mandatory for Americans to be forced to purchase, or to borrow money, has been set up specifically to divert your money to the rich.
Trickle down economics is completely invalid. The economy is not a vertical structure. It is more comparable to an electrical circuit, with various devices drawing power at many points. If we look at the average American as a light bulb, every time someone on the string adds a device which draws more power than your bulb, your bulb dims because it has less current available. When those who have access to more devices(money), turn on the microwave and vacuum and toaster at the same time, all bulbs down the line go dark. Anyone ever turned on the toaster and the vacuum at the same time and blew a fuse? That’s where we are now.
Doc Pingree says
My compliments on a fabulous article, well thought-out and obviously well-researched. We have reached a turning point. We must allow Bernie Sanders to become our president and implement his various positions. There is NOTHING in them that will damage this nation; everything he proposes, if implemented, will BUILD THIS NATION! Bernie for president!!!
Laura says
Great article! Will share…
Bill Eisen says
The Republican leadership has moved so much to the right that moderate Republicans may be reluctant to express contrary views. But I suppose that some moderates may be able to support Bernie if nothing else than to help knock Hillary off her lofty perch and help usher in a Republican to White House.
Donovan R. says
“Republicans for a avowed democratic socialist. How did that happen?”
Republicans figured out long ago that the best way to gain the White House (or to penalize a Republican who failed to tow the line) was to pit a more radical faction against the other; Progressives fall for it almost every time. Whether it was Jesse Jackson siphoning off African-American support, Ross Perot breaking the first Bush presidency (punishment for being a moderate and signing a capital gains tax), or Ralph Nader helping bring George W. Bush to office – it works well because partisans don’t compromise.
Ken says
This is why it’s crucial that Bernie runs as a Dem and not an Independent. If he loses, he will probably endorse Hillary and the majority of his voters will vote for her.
If he wins, the same applies the other way around. As a result, there is no split as e.g. with Perot. Worst case, Hillary will adopt some of Bernies policies – which is only a good thing.
Republicans who think that helping Sanders weakens Clinton don’t realize that if he ends up winning the nomination he has excellent chances to win the general election. It’s not like all those Hillary-hating Republicans are voters that the Sanders campaign would count on anyways, in fact Bernie might be able to attract moderate Republicans who otherwise no longer feel that there are any sane options in their party but dislike Hillary.
James says
Bernie has the advantage of NOT having to skew his analysis or his proposed solutions to placate banks or billionaires. Cruz, Bush, Walker, Paul & Clinton must have no idea how bad their straining at truth and logic comes across to the middle class and the working poor who are just looking for someone to make some sense, speak to them truthfully and propose solutions NOT grounded in their being content with living on the leftovers thrown them by those candidates financial backers and beneficiaries.
I fit your articles profile as well. A lifelong Republican – I have never stopped thinking, reading or expecting intelligence and integrity in return for my vote. Which was why I supported Nader in 2000 and Obama in 2008. I have donated to Sen Sanders and Sen Warrens campaigns even though I live in California.
So you are right – Bernie Sanders has a clear and honest message. Agree with him or not – you don’t get doublespeak or deception. which I think will make him an absolutely fascinating voice in the debates, presuming they don’t find a way to keep him out of the line-up.
conelrad says
If you compare the positions of Bernie Sanders with the positions of Thomas Jefferson – you will find that they are almost the same.
“It seems like almost every day we read about one giant financial institution after another being fined or reaching settlements for their reckless, unfair, and deceptive activities.
In fact, since 2009, huge financial institutions have paid $176 billion in fines and settlement payments for fraudulent and unscrupulous activities.
It should make every American very nervous that in this weak regulatory environment, the financial supervisors in this country and around the world are still able to uncover an enormous amount of fraud on Wall Street to this day. I fear very much that the financial system is even more fragile than many people may perceive. This huge issue cannot be swept under the rug. It has got to be addressed.“ BERNIE SANDERS
“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”
– THOMAS JEFFERSON
julieanna says
Thanks for this. It might be good, too, for Bernie’s campaign to hand out mini-Constitutions (for donations to keep Bernie going) with an explanation of how it, the Constitution, has been eviscerated – and how he, Bernie, can help to bring it back! The Constitution reflects many of Bernie’s key issues. The Republicans have enacted their own “constitution”!
http://www.BernieSanders.com
Claire Carpenter says
Please consider posting this comment on Reddit (r/politics), where this article is receiving a lot of criticism from Republicans who are unaware or unwilling to realize just how extreme the Republican establishment has become. Wherever one stands on politics, I am thankful and have learned so much from the dialog that Bernie has initiated, and I know I am not alone. Your comment is valuable to this discussion as a whole.
Charles says
This is really good. Thanks.
Pat Downs says
Hi Mike! Nice article. It will be interesting to see how many–and I believe there will be MANY–Republican and 3rd party voters line up to vote for Bernie.
Am glad you are not taking the bait of dividing the party by HRC bashing. Bernie would approve. Will share your article. Thanks.
–Pat @California for Bernie Sanders, also admin @Women for Bernie Sanders 2016
Sharon C. says
It’s all part of a RW plan to kill Hilary’s campaign by demonizing her on pages/sites/social media that supports Bernie. They are also padding his campaign w/donation. It’s called OPERATION CHAOS. They did the exact same thing in 2008 and 2012.