Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 02-19-2019, 08:19 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,118
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
For Larry David, a chance to work enough to buy that vacation home. For the rest of us, not much to offer. In 2016, he was the straight talking alternative to the inevitable Hillary. Now, his lane is occupied by sleeker and newer models. He's running like we owe him something, as if 2016 was taken from him. Yes, the DNC was in Hillary's pocket. But she also got more votes than Bernie nearly everywhere. Personally, I'd prefer that the Democratic nomination go to, you know, an actual Democrat.
I think you've addressed Bernie's challenge. In 2016, he was an underdog challenger fighting Hillary's inevitability. He also positioned himself as being the guy who could take liberalism in a new direction, which Hillary was reluctant to do.

But now there are non-white candidates who aren't 'inevitable' and they espouse some of the same positions he has.
  #52  
Old 02-19-2019, 08:37 PM
Ulf the Unwashed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,318
Well, I'm not counting out anybody who has the kind of passionate, vociferous supporters that Sanders has attracted, along with a fundraising list and machinery that is second to none. Also, when there are a dozen serious candidates, it's hard to predict what will happen.

But I think it's gonna be an uphill battle. As others have said, he attracted two kinds of voters in 2016: progressives and never-Hillaries. There are other progressives in the race, Warren for sure, Harris and Booker positioning themselves that way, and of course everybody in the race isn't Hillary.

More to the point, perhaps, Sanders was the candidate of straight white guys in 2016. Overall he won 41-42% of the vote, but just 37% of women, 34% of gays and lesbians, 23% of African Americans. Obviously there are a ton of straight white guys among the Democratic electorate (and independents who will vote in open primary states). But there are many more voters who are NOT straight white guys. I don't see that Sanders has done anything since '16 to broaden that support.

And then there's his age. He'd be 87 when his second term ended. I think that's going to be tough for a lot of voters.

I don't know. Maybe the non-straight white guy vote is split so many different ways that Sanders's core support and fundraising ability wins him both Iowa and New Hampshire. Maybe Warren drops out and Booker drops out and Harris says something dumb and Sanders winds up winning California and next thing you know he's well out in front. It could happen. But I think it's more likely that whatever happens in IA and NH he hits a buzzsaw in South Carolina and doesn't recover. At what point he'd drop out, if any, is another question entirely...
  #53  
Old 02-19-2019, 08:40 PM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,192
Bernie can still rouse people to action very quickly. In 4 hours, he had already gotten 42,000 people responding with donations.

By the end of the day Tuesday, the day he announced his candidacy, he had 120,000 people responding with over $3.3M in donations.

That's good for fundraising, but it's also good for getting a pulse on the people who want to see him elected.

Quote:
In just over the first four hours of his 2020 presidential campaign, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) had already raised money from 42,000 donors, a total that bested the number Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) had hit in the first full day of her campaign. The campaign estimated that Sanders had raised $1.2 million in three-and-a-half hours on Tuesday. Later Tuesday, it was revealed that the campaign reportedly raised over $3.3 million from 120,000 donors in one day. The figure is another sign of the incredible money-raising prowess that Sanders brings to the race.
The Daily Beast
  #54  
Old 02-19-2019, 09:23 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulf the Unwashed View Post

But I think it's gonna be an uphill battle. As others have said, he attracted two kinds of voters in 2016: progressives and never-Hillaries. There are other progressives in the race, Warren for sure, Harris and Booker positioning themselves that way, and of course everybody in the race isn't Hillary.
.
The figures I've heard are somewhere around 80-95% of Bernie voters voted for Hillary in the general election. Seeing how Sanders got 13 million votes, that means anywhere from 600k-2.6 million votes were lost for Clinton in 2016.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...on-vote-survey

But anyway, the 'never-Hillary' types exist. I've met them. But I think there's 2 types of them. One would be the socially conservative-economically liberal type (aka reagan democrats). The others are hardcore progressives who feel anything other than Bernie wasn't worth voting for. But evenso, both groups combined at most came to 1/5 of Bernies voters, hopefully a smaller number.

But anyway, when it comes to democratic primary there are 2 major groups of voters:

1. White liberals
2. Black voters

Bernie had the white liberal vote locked, but Hillary had the black voters locked.

There are obviously other groups, but these 2 groups, combined, probably make up 75%+ of democratic primary voters.

For a wide range of reasons, Bernie never connected with the black community. I don't know if he will have that same problem this time around. However, if Bernie maintains his lock on the white liberal vote (they do not abandon him for Harris or Warren or someone else like that) and if the black vote is split between multiple candidates, then I could easily see Sanders winning.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #55  
Old 02-19-2019, 10:00 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
You mean he's STILL here?
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 25,681
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Other than Warren, I don't think any of the other dems are actual progressives. They're probably just pretending to win.
Okay, let's concentrate on just Elizabeth Warren. How many votes is she going to draw from 2016 Sanders supporters?

And if Bernie doesn't get the nomination, how many of his supporters will sit out the general election? The Democrats might not love him as much this time around.
  #56  
Old 02-19-2019, 10:04 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by kunilou View Post
Okay, let's concentrate on just Elizabeth Warren. How many votes is she going to draw from 2016 Sanders supporters?

And if Bernie doesn't get the nomination, how many of his supporters will sit out the general election? The Democrats might not love him as much this time around.
I like Warren. She has well fleshed out policy ideas. Her ideas for subsidized daycare and ACA 2.0 are both good plans for example.

My concern with her is that being a good president and a good politician aren't the same. JFK was a good politician, not a very good president. LBJ was an excellent president, mediocre politician.

Warren strikes me as an unremarkable politician. I don't know if she can build a coalition of 65+ million voters in the right states to beat Trump. I'd love to be wrong though.

But I think Warren could pull some support from Sanders. But IMO, she is the only real threat to Sander's lock on the liberal vote.

Also Bernie should've done more to promote Hillary in 2016. If he pouts again if he loses, I think a lot of his supporters will be quite upset. The vast majority of liberals would rather have an imperfect democrat over Trump. In the long run, it may be better for Trump to have won (because Trump energized the democratic base and made people realize how important voting is). But if Hillary had won we wouldn't have all these judges, and we wouldn't have a tax cut on the rich. Also the world would still respect us.

But on the subject of policy, it really doesn't matter. I doubt the democrats control both houses of congress in 2021, and even if we do I doubt we do anything productive with it.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 02-19-2019 at 10:07 PM.
  #57  
Old 02-19-2019, 11:04 PM
Chisquirrel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,446
This:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pithily Effusive View Post
And I'm wondering what's behind your use of this pejorative term "dopers", as though you're referring to a social class, or a nudge-nudge wink-wink "We all know" inference here.
followed shortly by:

Quote:
It might behoove you to study a bit more before going off authoritatively about something of which you have but scant understanding.
is comedy gold. Can we expect more of the same?
  #58  
Old 02-19-2019, 11:14 PM
Locrian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 4,143
Sanders / Nader

"We'll see What we can do" - slogan.
  #59  
Old 02-19-2019, 11:27 PM
KellyCriterion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 899
Bernie is being way under-estimated in this thread.
  #60  
Old 02-19-2019, 11:41 PM
LoneRhino is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
What is with all the Bernie hate?
My biggest problem with Bernie is that after 40 years in congress he has no real accomplishments and no foreign policy experience. While I agree with a lot of his message he comes across as someone who has no idea how to implement his agenda.
  #61  
Old 02-19-2019, 11:43 PM
foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
Personally, I'd prefer that the Democratic nomination go to, you know, an actual Democrat.
Well, Andrew Jackson isn't running. I'm not clear what an "actual Democrat" is, but if you need independents to win elections, & you probably do, then this rhetoric seems counterproductive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
He'll have his hardcore supporters - my youngest brother is one, for example - but he's not one of a field of two this time. There are other options for those not wanting Hillary or Hillary-equivalent.
This difference is that he has those hardcore supporters. Warren is pretty popular, but I don't think any of the centrists has the kind of base Bernie has.

Quote:
Or, to quote what a member of my resist from just posted:

"Old. White. Man. No thanks."
She sounds delightful.

Bernie appealed especially to younger voters, even black ones. A good proportion of them are still around, & he is less obscure now. Now he's in, he's probably going to win the whole thing.
  #62  
Old 02-20-2019, 12:06 AM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,698
Man this thread and the "I'd vote for the mummified husk of Billy Carter if he was on the other side of the ticket against Trump" thread sure do seem to be at odds.
  #63  
Old 02-20-2019, 12:55 AM
Locrian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 4,143
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
Man this thread and the "I'd vote for the mummified husk of Billy Carter if he was on the other side of the ticket against Trump" thread sure do seem to be at odds.
I don't think so. As for myself, I'd vote for the Bern IF... he is the nominee. Will he get to be the nominee? Fat chance. That's where the snark is coming from.
  #64  
Old 02-20-2019, 01:30 AM
Qin Shi Huangdi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
For what? That nobody bothered to attack him in 2016? Or that there was plenty of material available if someone did?
That such attacks would have destroyed or seriously undermined him as a candidate in an atmosphere like that of 2016 when Donald Trump was elected President.

Quote:
The former is obvious; for the latter, I've forgotten all the goodies that popped up in blogland at the time, but IIRC, Bernie's got a track record of traveling to hang out with bona fide Communist leaders and stuff like that. I remember thinking that it would hardly take the right-wing noise machine to demonize Bernie; I could have done it with a few million, easily.
And so? It isn't the Cold War anymore. IIRC, he visited the USSR and met with Sandinistas-not exactly shaking hands with Pol Pot.

Quote:
She cleared the field on the basis of having raised a shit-ton of money, and having the party establishment behind her as well.

She's also the only Dem runnerup in recent memory who's been the nominee the next cycle. John Edwards was the runnerup in 2004. He did worse in 2008, even before his affair came to light. Bill Bradley was the runnerup in 2000; he didn't even try in 2004. Paul Tsongas and Jerry Brown were Bill Clinton's main rivals for the nomination in 1992; where were they in 2000? Jesse Jackson was the runnerup in 1988; where was he in 1992? Gary Hart was the runnerup in 1984; he managed to self-destruct in 1987, and was a nonfactor in 1988. Ted Kennedy was the runnerup in 1980; didn't bother in 1984.
The electoral performance of Bernie Sanders is more comparable to Hillary Clinton in 2008 in terms of how many contests he won compared to those others. Bradley and Edwards hardly won any contests. Tsongas died before 2000 while Jerry Brown won only California etc. None of this is to say that Sanders is entitled to the nomination anymore than Clinton was in 2016 but he has a very good reason to be a strong candidate in the same way Romney was in 2012 for example.
__________________
Clinton/Schweitzer '16
  #65  
Old 02-20-2019, 02:20 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,065
I will continue to lay at Bernie's feet the whole conspiracy narrative that he decided to borrow from Trump to say that things were rigged against him. To this day, people keep repeating that nonsense as truth. He deliberately created a division that made it more difficult for his followers to turn around and vote for Clinton should she win, when he knew he was a long shot the entire time.

He also didn't drop out when he had no mathematical chance of winning, making sure to hold onto that divide up until time.

538 specifically said that if Clinton lost by less than 0.1% of the vote, you could blame Sander followers. Well, she lost by negative percentages, so I blame them. There are places where, if everyone who voted for a liberal third party would have voted for Democrats, we would not have had Trump as president.

No, they aren't responsible for everything. But they are part of the reason why Trump won, and thus I do not support him. I don't trust him not to try and exploit the progressive/liberal divide again because it helps him win the nomination, but does not in any way help in the general election.

Only a message of unity can win this thing.
  #66  
Old 02-20-2019, 06:49 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,176
Quote:
Originally Posted by foolsguinea View Post
Well, Andrew Jackson isn't running. I'm not clear what an "actual Democrat" is, but if you need independents to win elections, & you probably do, then this rhetoric seems counterproductive.
The Democratic Party should have at the top of its ticket, a person who is actually a member of the party. If you don't identify enough with the party's political agenda to call yourself a member, why should you lead the party? This has nothing to do with trying to win independent voters, you always try to do that. Members of both parties always try to win the independent voters, it doesn't mean that nominees of either party have to give up their affiliation to do so.
  #67  
Old 02-20-2019, 07:47 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,256
If you want the party to back you, why shouldn't you be expected to back the party?

The topic only arises because Sanders has never done it, and because 77 is a bit old to gain a sense of responsibility.
  #68  
Old 02-20-2019, 07:59 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,118
I'm someone who has been pretty harsh on Sanders and his supporters at times, but playing the role of devil's advocate for a moment, there's probably an argument to be made that the Democratic party needed to find its soul again, and that Bernie Sanders was the only one who could force that kind of tectonic shift. And some would argue that he could only put that kind of pressure by being an outsider with a popular movement. Sanders created a competition for the party that serves progressive causes - sometimes competition is good. It forces organizations to be better.

Last edited by asahi; 02-20-2019 at 08:01 AM.
  #69  
Old 02-20-2019, 08:16 AM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locrian View Post
I don't think so. As for myself, I'd vote for the Bern IF... he is the nominee. Will he get to be the nominee? Fat chance. That's where the snark is coming from.
Exactly. I'm going to vote for whoever the Democrats nominate, and I really really hope it isn't Bernie or Hillary. Because those guys will lose to Trump.
  #70  
Old 02-20-2019, 01:08 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
If you want the party to back you, why shouldn't you be expected to back the party?

The topic only arises because Sanders has never done it, and because 77 is a bit old to gain a sense of responsibility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie Sanders, February 23, 2016
"Of course I am a Democrat and running for the Democratic nomination."
(emphasis mine)

So can we put this particular mistruth to rest?
  #71  
Old 02-20-2019, 01:37 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
I will almost certainly vote for him. No other candidate can come close to matching his record of integrity and adherence to progressive principles. His 2016 campaign was a historic effort which served to push the Democrats substantially to the left and mobilized a new generation of progressive activists.

His age is a problem. His refusal to release his tax returns could be another significant problem for me. Still, these negatives are IMO vastly outweighed by the positives.

Having said that, I don't see how he's possibly going to do better as one of twenty than he did as one of two. Minority voters were a major weakness for him against HRC; again, you'd have to be pretty wildly optimistic to expect him to improve on that when running against actual minorities.

My WAG is that about half of Bernie's 2016 support came from people like me who understand and agree with his message. I'm guessing most of those will agree with me that there is no compelling reason to look for another candidate now.

The other half came from never-Hillary types and those attracted to novelty and anti-establishment posturing. I expect him to find it much harder to hang onto those less ideological voters in a more crowded field.

So I predict he will get about half the votes he got last time, which will be enough to earn him a large bloc of delegates and a significant voice in deciding the nominee in the event of a brokered convention. He could even plausibly end up with a plurality of votes and delegates, depending on how the field shakes out. A path to the actual nomination is hard for me to see, but he vastly exceeded my expectations last time, and I certainly hope he can do so again.
  #72  
Old 02-20-2019, 01:43 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
So can we put this particular mistruth to rest?
Has he filed his letter with the DNC Chairman yet? Has he even registered to vote as a Democrat yet?

Did he concede and start to work for the party's candidate as soon as the nomination was decided in 2016, instead of continuing to try to damage her?

As you know: No.

Don't let your participation in a cult of personality affect your definition of truth itself. That's Trumpism as well as Bro-ism; they're the same damn thing.
  #73  
Old 02-20-2019, 01:53 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Has he filed his letter with the DNC Chairman yet? Has he even registered to vote as a Democrat yet?

Did he concede and start to work for the party's candidate as soon as the nomination was decided in 2016, instead of continuing to try to damage her?

As you know: No.

Don't let your participation in a cult of personality affect your definition of truth itself. That's Trumpism as well as Bro-ism; they're the same damn thing.
Can you give me a quick cite? Or just a paragraph from your memory. My level of skepticism is low enough I'll accept that.
  #74  
Old 02-20-2019, 01:55 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,256
You want a cite for him not doing something? Maybe you could do your own damn homework and show where he has.

Last edited by ElvisL1ves; 02-20-2019 at 01:55 PM.
  #75  
Old 02-20-2019, 01:56 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
If you want to argue that Sanders has displayed insufficient loyalty to the Democratic Party, that's certainly a reasonable argument to be made. But you have repeatedly stated that he has never claimed to be a Democrat. I hope you will now stop doing so.

I have no idea whether he has filed anything with the DNC. Do you have any cites that any other candidates have done so? I know that he is not registered as a Democrat, because Vermont has nonpartisan voter registration, so that isn't a relevant question.

And of course Sanders conceded and worked actively for the Party's nominee once the nomination was decided. He did keep running after his nomination seemed highly unlikely...just like Hillary Clinton did in 2008. The only difference is that many of her supporters were apparently so embittered by her attacks on the successful candidate that they failed to support the Party's candidate in the general election.
  #76  
Old 02-20-2019, 01:56 PM
Rick Kitchen's Avatar
Rick Kitchen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 16,710
Doesn't the Democratic Party have new rules requiring that their nominee be a registered Democrat?
  #77  
Old 02-20-2019, 01:57 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
Bernie can still rouse people to action very quickly. In 4 hours, he had already gotten 42,000 people responding with donations.

By the end of the day Tuesday, the day he announced his candidacy, he had 120,000 people responding with over $3.3M in donations.

That's good for fundraising ...
Not a Bernie fan but it is and it surprised me. I hadn’t expected Warren’s roll out to go so well and didn’t think the small donors to return to Sanders in force.

I still think he will peter out in early days this time but that sort of early response makes me less confident about it.
__________________
Oy.
  #78  
Old 02-20-2019, 02:03 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
You want a cite for him not doing something? Maybe you could do your own damn homework and show where he has.
Here you go. A New Yorker article from the last week of the 2016 campaign. Highlights:

Quote:
The truth is that Bernie Sanders is very, very angry—at Donald Trump. He is angry enough to have spent weeks travelling on behalf of Hillary Clinton, speaking for her in union halls and arenas, to students and activists.
Quote:
Since conceding defeat in the primaries, Sanders has been one of the real champions of this campaign. He let his supporters yell at him and deride him as a sellout in bleak delegate breakfasts at the Democratic National Convention, in Philadelphia, as he endorsed Clinton and explained why they needed to do the same. He made getting support for her his priority, putting aside any subtle, undermining gestures that might have better preserved his rebel-rock-star status
I await your retraction of and apology for the false statements you have made.
  #79  
Old 02-20-2019, 02:10 PM
SmartAleq's Avatar
SmartAleq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: PDXLNT
Posts: 5,100
Bernie raises 6 million dollars in 24 hours from over 225,000 small donors.
  #80  
Old 02-20-2019, 02:10 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,256
An opinion piece? Really? Maybe you should have been following the news in 2016 instead.

When Sanders signs the letter, affirming that he considers himself a member of and supports the party whose adulation he demands, and its policies and candidates, do please let us know. You do know why that rule was enacted, don't you?

Last edited by ElvisL1ves; 02-20-2019 at 02:11 PM.
  #81  
Old 02-20-2019, 02:11 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
Did you say you want some more? Well, here's some more.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/bernie-...ton-1475928002 The headline says it all, but you'll need a WSJ subscription to actually read the story (damn capitalists).

ABC News: Bernie Sanders goes "all in" for Hillary Clinton.

And here's one from USA Today.

Anyone who was paying attention knows that Sanders spent the fall of 2016 campaigning his ass off for Clinton. I'm not sure why you think people will be fooled by an assertion that's so easy to fact check.
  #82  
Old 02-20-2019, 02:14 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
An opinion piece? Really? Maybe you should have been following the news in 2016 instead.

When Sanders signs the letter, affirming that he considers himself a member of and supports the party whose adulation he demands, and its policies and candidates, do please let us know. You do know why that rule was enacted, don't you?
I have no idea why that rule was adopted. Every news story I have ever seen about it is careful to clarify in the first few paragraphs that the DNC claims it wasn't directed at Bernie, which leaves me mystified as to what the reason for it might be.

But now that he has declared his candidacy officially, I'm sure the DNC will now step in to demand that he sign such a letter. Do please let us know when that happens.
  #83  
Old 02-20-2019, 03:00 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
You want a cite for him not doing something? Maybe you could do your own damn homework and show where he has.
Your assertion is he continued to damage her. Thats doing something, not "Not doing something"

You also implied its common knowledge.

But the first refuge of the biased is "Do your own damn homework", so I'm not surprised.
  #84  
Old 02-20-2019, 03:03 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,256
Did he or did he not continue to campaign, continuing to attack the party's (not his party's) nominee well after the issue was decided? Yes, he did. Did that damage her chances in November? Of fucking course.

Water is wet, too.
  #85  
Old 02-20-2019, 03:13 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 38,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by KellyCriterion View Post
Bernie is being way under-estimated in this thread.
538's take on him is 'high floor, low ceiling.' So it's a question of whether getting 15-20% in most primaries through Super Tuesday leaves him among the contenders, or effectively weeds him out.
  #86  
Old 02-20-2019, 03:38 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 49,256
Don't you think the whole shebang will be decided that day? Hint: California.
  #87  
Old 02-20-2019, 03:38 PM
Ambrosio Spinola is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
538's take on him is 'high floor, low ceiling.' So it's a question of whether getting 15-20% in most primaries through Super Tuesday leaves him among the contenders, or effectively weeds him out.
This seems right to me. I suspect his most plausible route to the nomination would look something like Trump's in 2016, where he has only a minority of the vote but his supporters are unshakable, and thus he wins or finishes second repeatedly over a divided field that collectively gets more votes than him but never coalesces around a single opponent.
  #88  
Old 02-20-2019, 04:02 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambrosio Spinola View Post
This seems right to me. I suspect his most plausible route to the nomination would look something like Trump's in 2016, where he has only a minority of the vote but his supporters are unshakable, and thus he wins or finishes second repeatedly over a divided field that collectively gets more votes than him but never coalesces around a single opponent.
You can't compare the Dem v Rep primaries' pathways to victory. The Dems are all proportional and the bulk of Reps are winner take all.
  #89  
Old 02-20-2019, 04:05 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambrosio Spinola View Post
This seems right to me. I suspect his most plausible route to the nomination would look something like Trump's in 2016, where he has only a minority of the vote but his supporters are unshakable, and thus he wins or finishes second repeatedly over a divided field that collectively gets more votes than him but never coalesces around a single opponent.
Fortunately, though, the Democratic primaries are run differently and more, well, democratically, than the Republican ones. Delegates are allotted proportionally rather than winner-take-all, so if you get 30% of the votes, even if you come in first in every State, you're not going to get more than about 30% of the delegates. If nobody wins a majority, it will have to be hashed out at the convention.

ETA: or, what CarnalK said.

Last edited by Thing Fish; 02-20-2019 at 04:05 PM.
  #90  
Old 02-20-2019, 04:12 PM
Ambrosio Spinola is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Fortunately, though, the Democratic primaries are run differently and more, well, democratically, than the Republican ones. Delegates are allotted proportionally rather than winner-take-all, so if you get 30% of the votes, even if you come in first in every State, you're not going to get more than about 30% of the delegates. If nobody wins a majority, it will have to be hashed out at the convention.

ETA: or, what CarnalK said.
I get that, but if he finishes first in every state then he's gonna be the nominee even without a pure delegate majority walking into the convention. There are clearly major differences between the Democratic and Republican primary approaches, but I don't really think that party unity could survive disregarding consistent victories like that. Whether Bernie can accomplish that sort of feat at the end of the day, I have my doubts, but it could happen I guess.
  #91  
Old 02-20-2019, 04:28 PM
Deeg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,623
Sanders is anti-GMO and anti-nuclear power, which means he is anti-science. He needs to go away.
  #92  
Old 02-20-2019, 04:58 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deeg View Post
Sanders is anti-GMO and anti-nuclear power, which means he is anti-science. He needs to go away.
The Sanders vitriol in these quarters is Ben Shapiro level. Except more hateful
  #93  
Old 02-20-2019, 05:12 PM
Two Many Cats is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,562
Well, I'd vote for Bernie.
  #94  
Old 02-20-2019, 05:25 PM
Martin Hyde is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 14,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qin Shi Huangdi View Post
With all due respect, the Democratic Party is or at least ought not be in the business of nominating candidates with a view towards who can appeal towards lifelong Republicans the most. Who do you intend on voting for in a Sanders vs. Trump scenario?.
Trump--and I'll work to see him elected through volunteer work and donations if that can in any way hurt Bernie's campaign.
  #95  
Old 02-20-2019, 05:30 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Hyde View Post
Trump--and I'll work to see him elected through volunteer work and donations if that can in any way hurt Bernie's campaign.
It's very sad that you feel this way. Bernie's northern-European/Canadian-style socialism is a much, much lesser threat to America than the promotion of hate and white supremacism that Trump represents. The latter has always been, and still is, by far the greatest threat to America and Americans.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 02-20-2019 at 05:31 PM.
  #96  
Old 02-20-2019, 06:01 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 6,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
I will continue to lay at Bernie's feet the whole conspiracy narrative that he decided to borrow from Trump to say that things were rigged against him. To this day, people keep repeating that nonsense as truth. He deliberately created a division that made it more difficult for his followers to turn around and vote for Clinton should she win, when he knew he was a long shot the entire time.

He also didn't drop out when he had no mathematical chance of winning, making sure to hold onto that divide up until time.
These are specific criticisms of Sanders: that he supported the idea that the election had been rigged by the DNC against him, and that he stayed in the race after it was clear he had no mathematical chance of winning.

On the "rigged" accusation: though he later did make appearances and tweet in support of Clinton, it's also true that when the topic of the DNC rigging things against him came up (in connection with accusations by Donna Brazile that it was rigged), he did NOT say it wasn't true:

Quote:
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN:... the agreement the DNC had with the Clinton campaign. Senator Warren said it was proof the primary process was rigged. Donna Brazile, who was the source of this story now says it wasn't rigged. Let me ask you, was -- in your opinion, was it rigged?

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: Look, Donna Brazile showed an enormous amount of courage in describing the truth as she saw it when she came into the leadership of the DNC. I don't think there's any sane human being who doesn't believe that my campaign was taking on the entire establishment including the DNC.

But, Anderson, to be very honest with you -- my job, our job is to go forward, is do everything we can to defeat this right wing agenda of the Republican Party in the Trump administration, not to look backwards.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...backwards.html

So despite whatever else he may have said or done later, Sanders had a clear opportunity to say 'no, the election was not rigged against me'----and he chose not to take it. It's fair to criticize him for that choice.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Deeg View Post
Sanders is anti-GMO and anti-nuclear power, which means he is anti-science. He needs to go away.
Two more specific charges against Sanders. Note that these are not personal insults---they are observations about positions Sanders holds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
The Sanders vitriol in these quarters is Ben Shapiro level. Except more hateful
And those specific observations are here labeled "vitriol."

That's unjustified. It violates the definition of "vitriol."



...For the next twenty-one months, feelings are going to run high. I hope we can all remember that forces hoping to keep Trump and Trumpism in power will be doing everything possible to get us to do things such as label specific observations about policy positions as "vitriol" and worse. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we thwarted those efforts?
  #97  
Old 02-20-2019, 06:24 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,780
My 19yo son contributed $27 within minutes of Bernie’s announcement, and agreed to automatically contribute $6.60 a month (suggested by the site—presumably an A/B tested ask based on his being a teenage college student?). I have several FB friends who gave a lot more. They held back from Warren, and her money has come in at a relative trickle.

I think Bernie has some juice. I want almost anyone else as nominee, but I have to acknowledge him as a formidable contender.
  #98  
Old 02-20-2019, 06:38 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,777
People who actively want Bernie Sanders to be the Democratic nominee-
Do you think he can beat Trump when it's all on the table?
  #99  
Old 02-20-2019, 06:46 PM
Qin Shi Huangdi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobot View Post
People who actively want Bernie Sanders to be the Democratic nominee-
Do you think he can beat Trump when it's all on the table?
Yes, he has the best chance of beating Trump among the major Democratic candidates along with Biden.
__________________
Clinton/Schweitzer '16

Last edited by Qin Shi Huangdi; 02-20-2019 at 06:46 PM.
  #100  
Old 02-20-2019, 06:48 PM
Qin Shi Huangdi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Did he or did he not continue to campaign, continuing to attack the party's (not his party's) nominee well after the issue was decided? Yes, he did. Did that damage her chances in November? Of fucking course.
So just like Hillary Clinton in 2008.
__________________
Clinton/Schweitzer '16
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017