Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-02-2020, 08:58 AM
tullsterx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 974

How do you think Sanders supporters will react if he doesn't get the Democratic nomination?


How do you think Sanders supporters will react if he doesn't get the Democratic nomination?

I have trouble imagining them accepting a loss in any way. And if he wins a majority of the primary delegates but the super delegates end up costing him the nomination. . . I think there might be something close to a riot at the Democratic convention.

Thoughts?
  #2  
Old 03-02-2020, 09:02 AM
BobLibDem is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 22,346
It all depends on the circumstance. If Bernie has a significant lead in delegates, there could be fighting in the seats in Milwaukee. If it's fairly close and the superdelagate vote gives it to Biden, they'll be pissed like they were with Hillary but they'll get over it.
  #3  
Old 03-02-2020, 09:08 AM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,842
I don't know. A mix of rage and apathy.

This assumes Sanders wins the majority of delegates, but doesn't hit the 1990 necessary to win a solid majority.

If it turns out Bloomberg offered huge financial incentives to the democratic party and superdelegates to vote for either himself or someone like Biden (who would have several hundred fewer delegates) as the nominee its going to cause a big fracture within the democratic party. And it should, because it shows how entrenched the power of oligarchy is in our system. You can win more votes but if a moderate republican offers enough bribes and enough one sided ads, you lose the election. That will and should have major negative effects on the party's standing in the eyes of its voters.

At the end of the day, most Sanders supporters will vote for whoever the nominee is. Four more years of Trump doesn't help anyone and sitting out the election so Trump can nominate judges for another four years won't help the left. But they will lose a lot of faith in the democratic party and will start investing much more heavily (financially, voting, volunteering) in pushing for candidates who take on the corporate wing of the party rather than submit to it.

In the long run, bloomberg and the moderate wing of the democrats ignoring their voters will empower the grassroots progressive movement even though the DNC will do it in the hopes of neutralizing them.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 03-02-2020 at 09:10 AM.
  #4  
Old 03-02-2020, 09:34 AM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 31,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
It all depends on the circumstance. If Bernie has a significant lead in delegates, there could be fighting in the seats in Milwaukee. If it's fairly close and the superdelagate vote gives it to Biden, they'll be pissed like they were with Hillary but they'll get over it.
I'm sort of with you but I think there will still be a fair amount of pushback unless Biden wins a clear plurality, and even then there might be some saltiness if Warren wins a significant amount of the rest before dropping out, with Bernie backers thinking that he should "naturally" gain hers as a fellow progressive, possibly along with some of Pete's, but they go to Biden instead or even remain uncommitted.
  #5  
Old 03-02-2020, 09:42 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,759
I predict that if Sanders loses, there will be a fair contingent of them who think that some behind-the-scenes deal was cooked up by the DNC and the superdelegates, rather than just accepting the fact that rules as set up now, love 'em or hate 'em*, were followed. What the hell am I saying, I don't "predict" it, I know it. But in the end, based on the reasonable friends I have who support Sanders, I think most will come over to the chosen nominee.

*ETA: As for me, I think superdelegates are bullshit. Have only (non-super) delegates and require them to vote as allocated during the primaries, with an attendant reduction in the number of delegates you need to get the nomination.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 03-02-2020 at 09:46 AM.
  #6  
Old 03-02-2020, 09:51 AM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 10,436
FiveThirtyEight on how there are maybe more “Biden bros” than “Bernie bros” (though the numbers of Bernie bros are understated, because the survey only included over-thirty-year-olds, since it tracks a group
of specific voters over the past eight years):

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...ly-do-mean-it/
  #7  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:01 AM
FlikTheBlue is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,161
I think it depends on how it goes down, including what happens in the primaries after Super Tuesday. Here are some of the scenarios and my predictions on the outcome.

1. Post Super Tuesday we end up with a duel between Sanders and Biden. Sanders goes on to beat Biden by something like 55/45 the rest of the way. Due to the delegates being awarded proportionately Sanders comes up just short, and Biden wins with the superdelegates to put him over the top. This would likely be the worst case scenario, and I could see Bernie himself going rogue after that.

2. Post Super Tuesday Bloomberg, Warren, and maybe Klobuchar continue on. Sanders continues winning pluralities the rest of the way, but with numbers in the high 30s to low 40s rather than over 50%. He again comes up short. In this scenario the other pledged delegates rather than the superdelegates put Biden over the top. Sanders will still be pissed, but less likely to go rogue. The Bernie bros will also be pissed and likely not turn out on Election Day.

3. Biden somehow turns things around and ends up with the plurality of delegates with Sanders coming in second place. In this scenario I think Bernie will admit defeat and go on to campaign for Biden.
  #8  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:01 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 37,523
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKellyMap View Post
FiveThirtyEight on how there are maybe more ďBiden brosĒ than ďBernie brosĒ (though the numbers of Bernie bros are understated, because the survey only included over-thirty-year-olds, since it tracks a group
of specific voters over the past eight years):

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...ly-do-mean-it/
Your link has been shortened and thus is broken. I believe this is the article you meant. It has only-Biden at 8% and only Bernie at 3% (and both being more conservative than the average Democratic voter).

However, I also note that they specifically say they are limited by not having anyone under 30 in their group.
  #9  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:02 AM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 17,479
3.5 months is an eternity in politics (the gap between the convention and election day). No matter who the (D) nominee is, the Bernie Bros will vote for him/her.
  #10  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:11 AM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by tullsterx View Post
And if he wins a majority of the primary delegates but the super delegates end up costing him the nomination. . . I think there might be something close to a riot at the Democratic convention.
Do you mean plurality?

Superdelegates are not involved in the first round of voting at the convention. If Sanders wins the majority of pledged delegates he almost certainly wins the nomination before the superdelegates get involved. Now Sanders' pledged delegates could legally vote against him in that first round. That is the only way your hypothetical makes any sense. Since Sanders has a pretty important role in selecting the people who are his pledged delegates a revolt of that type is partly on him.

To contemplate the outcome of that really depends on why Sanders chosen delegates revolted against him. If they all suddenly have new cars bought by a Bloomberg controlled company...chaos and mayhem. If he is discovered to have been keeping kids in cages in his basement, I am betting a lot of his primary voters will be happy that delegates are pledged not bound.
  #11  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:15 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 88,597
The same way they reacted in 2016: By mostly supporting whoever the Democratic nominee is. Yes, there were a few Bernie-or-nobody voters, and even a few Bernie-or-Trump, but their numbers were vastly amplified by Russian propaganda.
  #12  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:40 AM
pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
3.5 months is an eternity in politics (the gap between the convention and election day). No matter who the (D) nominee is, the Bernie Bros will vote for him/her.
Nope.
If there are shenanigans at the convention and the person who wins the most delegates is not awarded the nomination (most likely Sanders), not only will you lose a whole bunch of Sanders voters, but you will also lose a whole bunch of other people who actually care about silly things like democracy and party integrity.

It's bizarre to me that people actually think everything will go smoothly if the delegate popular vote winner is screwed over by a backroom deal in favor of a senile old man who can barely speak coherently, or a billionaire moderate republican. What a sick party the Democrats have become, wow.

I voted for Pete and now live in a purplish state, but I won't be voting for the Democratic nominee if they didn't win the most delegates in the primary process. Simple.
I am ok with 4 more years of Trump in this scenario. If Biden somehow were to eke out a win, he would accomplish next to nothing as president anyway (Supreme Court justices? Lol keep dreaming, Majority Leader McConnell will still be a thing), and the subsequent midterms would be even more disastrous for Dems due to massive disillusionment among younger voters, since, you know, their chosen candidate was robbed 2 years earlier. A republican even more awful than Trump would beat the dithering, barely-functioning old man in 2024, and in just 4 short years we will be back to where we started.

If Trump is reelected, OTOH, the Dems would be heavily favored to win the Senate in 2022. They could even impeach the imbecile a 2nd time if they wanted to.The next recession is inevitably coming up soon too, so might as well have Trump take the blame for it within within the next few years. Idiot Americans always pin the blame on whoever is occupying the White House during a recession, so better that it not be a Democrat. An actual decent YOUNG democrat who learned the lessons from 2016 and 2020 would then be nominated in 2024, and win the presidency.

4 more years of Trump would lead to better outcomes in the longterm than a pretender being nominated by a brokered convention.

These are the kind of rationalizations you will hear a lot if the Democratic establishment's plan to screw over Sanders continues.

Last edited by pjacks; 03-02-2020 at 10:44 AM.
  #13  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:47 AM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
The same way they reacted in 2016: By mostly supporting whoever the Democratic nominee is. Yes, there were a few Bernie-or-nobody voters, and even a few Bernie-or-Trump, but their numbers were vastly amplified by Russian propaganda.
Sanders supporters will mostly support whoever the nominee is because every major democratic candidate is superior to Trump, but 2016 will have nothing in common with what happens in 2020.

In 2016 Sanders lost both the delegate count and the popular vote. Most Sanders voters accepted this fact.

The scenario in 2020 is that Sanders wins the majority both the delegate count and popular vote, but is denied the nomination because the democratic party wants to maintain good relationships with wealthy individuals and corporate backers who do not like Sander's policies.

Also add in Bloomberg, who is a moderate republican with a history of behaviors that alienate the democratic base basically buying the election and bribing the democratic party to do it, he embodies what Sanders is fighting against. Whats the point as democrats of even having primary elections if we're just going to nominate whoever a billionaire republican tells us to nominate after he hands out his bribes?

Its not going to be the same thing. Sanders supporters will support the nominee but after 2020 they will vastly amplify their efforts to create an independent grassroots mobilization effort to take over the democratic party, since 2020 will perfectly embody everything Sanders and his voters rail against. The will of the people being ignored in favor of what the monied class wants.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 03-02-2020 at 10:48 AM.
  #14  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:51 AM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,254
Bernie has already proposed that very scenario and said that, "Alot of people will be very unhappy."

So the better question, seems to me, is what will Bernie say to keep his revolution from turning into a revolt.

Will he throw his support behind Biden, or will he grouse loudly about being robbed by the DNC apparatchiks.

As he's said time and time again, he will throw his support behind anybody who wins the Democratic nomination (if it isn't him), so there is really nothing to worry about. Right?
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #15  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:52 AM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 16,464
The same shit as 2016. It was rigged, the DNC conspired against Bernie.

They won’t vote for Biden. ‘What has he done to EARN my vote?’ ‘The lesser of two evils is still evil’
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #16  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:52 AM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 32,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjacks View Post
Nope.
If there are shenanigans at the convention and the person who wins the most delegates is not awarded the nomination (most likely Sanders), not only will you lose a whole bunch of Sanders voters, but you will also lose a whole bunch of other people who actually care about silly things like democracy and party integrity.
If by "shenanigans" you mean following the rules as they were set up far ahead of time, then Sanders supporters would be the ones blasting a hole through democracy and party integrity.

I.e., they'd be acting like Republicans. Why should anybody want that or approve of it?
  #17  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:53 AM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,764
I asked this in another thread, but will also put this here:

With the way delegates are allocated, is it possible for one candidate to receive a plurality of delegates, while another has received a plurality (or even majority) of popular votes?
  #18  
Old 03-02-2020, 10:58 AM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
The same shit as 2016. It was rigged, the DNC conspired against Bernie.

They wonít vote for Biden. ĎWhat has he done to EARN my vote?í ĎThe lesser of two evils is still evilí
You're not a Bernie supporter, you hate Bernie supporters. You don't speak for us. Granted I can't speak for the endless millions of them too, but I can try to explain my view.

2016 was different. The DNC maybe put their thumb on the scale, but Bernie still lost the election. He didn't get as many votes or as many delegates. Bernie never connected with black voters or voters over the age of 50, and as a result he lost the election. In 2020 Bernie will have the majority of votes and delegates, but will be denied the nomination because wealthy interests do not like his policies and those wealthy interests tell the democratic party to overrule its voters and nominate someone they like instead. Its a totally different scenario.



Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Will he throw his support behind Biden, or will he grouse loudly about being robbed by the DNC apparatchiks.

As he's said time and time again, he will throw his support behind anybody who wins the Democratic nomination (if it isn't him), so there is really nothing to worry about. Right?
What will happen likely is Bernie and his voters will say 'the democratic party is corrupt and beholden to the interests of anyone who pays them, but it beats another 4 years of Trump'. They'll vote for the nominee, and then in 2021 start massively building their grassroots movement again because it'll make them realize there is still a ton of work to do to rebuild the democratic party.

As I said earlier, if Sanders wins both the popular vote and delegate count, but the DNC nominates whomever a moderate republican (like BLoomberg) tells them to vote for after he hands out his bribes, that is going to create a massive revolt within the democratic party that made 2016 look like a joke.

What if in 2024 Charles Koch writes the DNC a check for 2 billion dollars to nominate Harold Ford Jr as the presidential nominee after someone like Warren wins the popular vote and majority of delegates in the primary? People aren't going to passively put up with that.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #19  
Old 03-02-2020, 11:00 AM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
I asked this in another thread, but will also put this here:

With the way delegates are allocated, is it possible for one candidate to receive a plurality of delegates, while another has received a plurality (or even majority) of popular votes?
Isn't that the case to date when looking at popular vote totals for Sanders and Biden?

Bernie has the delegate count but Biden the popular vote count:

Quote:
Former Vice President Joe Biden is leading the popular vote so far with 281,164 votes (27.8%) after four Democratic contests.

That's 30,216 more votes than Bernie Sanders, who comes in a distant second with 250,948 votes (24.8%).
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 03-02-2020 at 11:02 AM.
  #20  
Old 03-02-2020, 11:04 AM
BobLibDem is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 22,346
I think the vast majority of Sanders supporters will vote for Biden just as they did for Hillary. Sure, some defected last time but I think fewer will this time, just because of what Donald revealed himself to be. If you're comfortable of a second term of Donald and the loss of democracy because you're unhappy that Bernie doesn't get the nomination, then I guess you get the government you deserve.

The odds of Democrats filling Supreme Court seats are much better if Biden gets the nomination. For one thing, Biden is likelier to win. For another, downballot Democrats will fare much better with Biden leading the ticket than Sanders. With Biden, we might get a Democratic Senate. With Sanders, much less likely.
  #21  
Old 03-02-2020, 11:08 AM
pjacks is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
If by "shenanigans" you mean following the rules as they were set up far ahead of time, then Sanders supporters would be the ones blasting a hole through democracy and party integrity.

I.e., they'd be acting like Republicans. Why should anybody want that or approve of it?
Superdelegates and the 2nd ballot exist to give the elites a veto on the candidate. That isn't democratic or fair by any stretch. They are part of the rules in the same way that the ToS agreements of all the tech we use every day is part of the "rules." The candidates just click "yes" and agree to it because what other option do they have if they want to run.
But good luck explaining to enraged voters of how the Party's ToS is actually a good thing and not at all solely meant to screw over candidates who make the moneyed class recoil in horror.

Last edited by pjacks; 03-02-2020 at 11:09 AM.
  #22  
Old 03-02-2020, 11:40 AM
tullsterx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 974
Quote:
Originally Posted by DinoR View Post
Do you mean plurality?

Superdelegates are not involved in the first round of voting at the convention. If Sanders wins the majority of pledged delegates he almost certainly wins the nomination before the superdelegates get involved. Now Sanders' pledged delegates could legally vote against him in that first round. That is the only way your hypothetical makes any sense. Since Sanders has a pretty important role in selecting the people who are his pledged delegates a revolt of that type is partly on him.

To contemplate the outcome of that really depends on why Sanders chosen delegates revolted against him. If they all suddenly have new cars bought by a Bloomberg controlled company...chaos and mayhem. If he is discovered to have been keeping kids in cages in his basement, I am betting a lot of his primary voters will be happy that delegates are pledged not bound.
I mean if he has the most primary delegates. My mistake.
  #23  
Old 03-02-2020, 12:00 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 16,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjacks View Post
Superdelegates and the 2nd ballot exist to give the elites a veto on the candidate. That isn't democratic or fair by any stretch. They are part of the rules in the same way that the ToS agreements of all the tech we use every day is part of the "rules." The candidates just click "yes" and agree to it because what other option do they have if they want to run.
But good luck explaining to enraged voters of how the Party's ToS is actually a good thing and not at all solely meant to screw over candidates who make the moneyed class recoil in horror.
Of course, the person who got those rules was Bernie Sanders
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #24  
Old 03-02-2020, 12:43 PM
Oakminster is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Surefall Glade, Antonica
Posts: 19,380
His supporters will whine and pout, and may make noises about forming a third party. In the end, they'll either vote for the Dem nominee or know that they are responsible for Trump's second term. This needs to be the final stake through the heart of Bernie, the Bernie Bros, and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party. Bernie, AOC, and their ilk are a cancer on the party, and should be excised promptly and firmly.
  #25  
Old 03-02-2020, 12:50 PM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 10,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Your link has been shortened and thus is broken. I believe this is the article you meant. It has only-Biden at 8% and only Bernie at 3% (and both being more conservative than the average Democratic voter).

However, I also note that they specifically say they are limited by not having anyone under 30 in their group.
Thatís the one. Thanks for fixing the link.
  #26  
Old 03-02-2020, 12:53 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
What will happen likely is Bernie and his voters will say 'the democratic party is corrupt and beholden to the interests of anyone who pays them, but it beats another 4 years of Trump'.
Bernie might say that - after all, that's pretty much what he said at the 2016 convention when, IIRC, he personally called for the convention to nominate Clinton by acclamation. His voters, on the other hand, might think, "The only way we can get Sanders elected before 2028 is if Trump wins in 2020 - and this also gives us the chance of having not only Bernie, but both a House and a Senate that can pass his bills."
  #27  
Old 03-02-2020, 12:55 PM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 21,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakminster View Post
This needs to be the final stake through the heart of Bernie, the Bernie Bros, and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party. Bernie, AOC, and their ilk are a cancer on the party, and should be excised promptly and firmly.
I don't think this is a reasonable view of them. They are far from extreme. They are left of where the majority of the party is but they have been a good influence and a reflection of where progressive society is heading. Where they have fallen short is not in their positions but in the work it takes to vet and explain the details of their plan. Too often it seems as if, "...and a bit of magic happens here...", is their plan to get from A to B.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #28  
Old 03-02-2020, 12:55 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,759
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakminster View Post
His supporters will whine and pout, and may make noises about forming a third party. In the end, they'll either vote for the Dem nominee or know that they are responsible for Trump's second term. This needs to be the final stake through the heart of Bernie, the Bernie Bros, and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party. Bernie, AOC, and their ilk are a cancer on the party, and should be excised promptly and firmly.
Some will whine, absolutely no doubt. But most of them? I don't think so. In any case, I do not see him, nor AOC, nor others with similar positions on the issues going anywhere. They are the future of the Democratic Party. Thank the lord.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 03-02-2020 at 12:56 PM.
  #29  
Old 03-02-2020, 12:56 PM
Oakminster is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Surefall Glade, Antonica
Posts: 19,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
Bernie might say that - after all, that's pretty much what he said at the 2016 convention when, IIRC, he personally called for the convention to nominate Clinton by acclamation. His voters, on the other hand, might think, "The only way we can get Sanders elected before 2028 is if Trump wins in 2020 - and this also gives us the chance of having not only Bernie, but both a House and a Senate that can pass his bills."
Bernie should be way too dead to run in 2028.
  #30  
Old 03-02-2020, 12:57 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 6,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjacks View Post
Superdelegates and the 2nd ballot exist to give the elites a veto on the candidate. That isn't democratic or fair by any stretch. They are part of the rules in the same way that the ToS agreements of all the tech we use every day is part of the "rules." The candidates just click "yes" and agree to it because what other option do they have if they want to run.
But good luck explaining to enraged voters of how the Party's ToS is actually a good thing and not at all solely meant to screw over candidates who make the moneyed class recoil in horror.
Looking at the current 538 snapshot of today, they would predict

40.2% going to Sanders
36.5% going to Biden
15% going to Bloomburg
6.1% going to Warren
1.6% going to Klobuchar
and presumably the other 0.6% going to other candidates.

So Bernie has the most delegates, but not a majority.
Assuming that Blomburg's delegates would prefer Biden to Sanders (I think this is a pretty safe assumption) then in round 2 Biden wins a majority over Sanders even without any Superdelegates.

This to me doesn't feel like a failure of democracy, or a From the beginning the Democratic primary has basically been a contest between the moderate and progressive halves of the electorate. It would seem to me to be more of a failure if the majority prefers the moderates but the progressive side wins due to having multiple viable candidates. Effectively, the Democratic convention rules mimic rank choiced voting, something which the progressive wing of the party seemed to strongly support in theory until it looks like it won't give them the answer they wanted.

Last edited by Buck Godot; 03-02-2020 at 12:59 PM.
  #31  
Old 03-02-2020, 12:59 PM
BobLibDem is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 22,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakminster View Post
His supporters will whine and pout, and may make noises about forming a third party. In the end, they'll either vote for the Dem nominee or know that they are responsible for Trump's second term. This needs to be the final stake through the heart of Bernie, the Bernie Bros, and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party. Bernie, AOC, and their ilk are a cancer on the party, and should be excised promptly and firmly.
I won't go as far as the last sentence. Bernie and AOC bring a viewpoint to the party and represent a segment of the population whose voices need to be heard. The Democratic tent is big enough to include them, though Bernie will quickly call himself an Independent once he is denied the nomination. Neither Bernie nor AOC have any business running for president, though AOC has more credibility since she is actually a Democrat more than a few months every four years.
  #32  
Old 03-02-2020, 01:43 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakminster View Post
Bernie should be way too dead to run in 2028.
All the more reason to vote for someone who would allow Bernie to run in 2024.

Meanwhile, here's another of my crazy ideas, although I'm not sure if this would work under the current rules: if the vote does go to a second ballot, then, after each state votes, there is a call for a Roll Call of the state's delegates (which, if I am reading the rules correctly, happens if at least 25% of the delegates demand it), which would put each of the superdelegates on the spot as to whether they support Sanders or not. However, a roll call of delegates within a state may no longer be "public," where they read out the name of each delegate and they audibly reply, but just done by sending an official to the delegation and taking each delegate's vote in writing.
  #33  
Old 03-02-2020, 01:48 PM
krondys's Avatar
krondys is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gillette, Wyoming
Posts: 1,260
Sanders supporter here.

I'll vote for whoever the nominee is, because Trump.

However, at this point, I've become disillusioned with the party... and I live in the damned SDMB "liberal bubble", but still feel like I and others like me are expected to shut up and vote for the Dem, regardless, while watching our party march ever rightward. Despite over a decade of evidence to the contrary, a large contingent STILL believes that somehow the Republicans will SUDDENLY want to work to enact legislation put forth by the Democrats if its Joe Fucking Biden in the White House rather than Bernie Sanders, when the reality is they wouldn't vote for the "Republicans Get Supreme Power Bill of 2021" if it was offered up by a Democrat.

I'm tired of watching the nation's money get funneled to the top 1%. I'm tired of living in a plutocracy that calls itself a democracy. I'm tired of watching people in BOTH parties being convinced to vote against their own self-interest.

It's time for a fucking change.

Last edited by krondys; 03-02-2020 at 01:49 PM. Reason: Mistakes were made.
  #34  
Old 03-02-2020, 02:34 PM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 31,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by krondys View Post
somehow the Republicans will SUDDENLY want to work to enact legislation put forth by the Democrats if its Joe Fucking Biden in the White House rather than Bernie Sanders, when the reality is they wouldn't vote for the "Republicans Get Supreme Power Bill of 2021" if it was offered up by a Democrat.

I'm tired of watching the nation's money get funneled to the top 1%. I'm tired of living in a plutocracy that calls itself a democracy. I'm tired of watching people in BOTH parties being convinced to vote against their own self-interest.

It's time for a fucking change.
If the Senate changes, they'll hold the balance of power vis a vis a progressive versus moderate agenda no matter who reclaims the White House. If it doesn't flip, then there won't be any "fucking change" except if it's by endless executive orders.
  #35  
Old 03-02-2020, 02:56 PM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by krondys View Post
Sanders supporter here.

I'll vote for whoever the nominee is, because Trump.

However, at this point, I've become disillusioned with the party... and I live in the damned SDMB "liberal bubble", but still feel like I and others like me are expected to shut up and vote for the Dem, regardless, while watching our party march ever rightward. Despite over a decade of evidence to the contrary, a large contingent STILL believes that somehow the Republicans will SUDDENLY want to work to enact legislation put forth by the Democrats if its Joe Fucking Biden in the White House rather than Bernie Sanders, when the reality is they wouldn't vote for the "Republicans Get Supreme Power Bill of 2021" if it was offered up by a Democrat.

I'm tired of watching the nation's money get funneled to the top 1%. I'm tired of living in a plutocracy that calls itself a democracy. I'm tired of watching people in BOTH parties being convinced to vote against their own self-interest.

It's time for a fucking change.
Pretty much. Also its ironic that all that 'vote blue no matter who' talk only seems to apply when the liberals are upset. When moderates are upset were all supposed to placate them.

Also the moderate candidate has lost every presidential election for the last 20 years. Gore was to the right of Bradley, and Gore lost the general election. Kerry was to the right of Dean and he lost the general. Obama was to the left of Clinton and he won the general. Clinton was to the right of Sanders and she lost the general.

But if Sanders loses in 2020, the liberal wing is supposed to pack it up and shut up because at that point, the liberal wing will have gotten 1 out of 6 elections wrong while the conservative wing of the democratic party will 'only' have gotten 5 out of the last 6 presidential elections wrong.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #36  
Old 03-02-2020, 03:09 PM
RitterSport's Avatar
RitterSport is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
...Obama was to the left of Clinton and he won the general. ....
In what way was Obama to the left of Clinton? His healthcare plan during the primary run didn't require everyone to sign up, for example. Clinton's plan did (and the eventual law did as well), and that's a more left-leaning stance. Do you have any examples?

Vote Blue No Matter Who seems to apply to everyone from what I can tell. We have non-Sanders supporters all over this board saying they'll vote for Sanders in the general, so I don't know where you got that from.
  #37  
Old 03-02-2020, 03:13 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 16,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by krondys View Post
Sanders supporter here.

I'll vote for whoever the nominee is, because Trump.

However, at this point, I've become disillusioned with the party... and I live in the damned SDMB "liberal bubble", but still feel like I and others like me are expected to shut up and vote for the Dem, regardless, while watching our party march ever rightward. Despite over a decade of evidence to the contrary, a large contingent STILL believes that somehow the Republicans will SUDDENLY want to work to enact legislation put forth by the Democrats if its Joe Fucking Biden in the White House rather than Bernie Sanders, when the reality is they wouldn't vote for the "Republicans Get Supreme Power Bill of 2021" if it was offered up by a Democrat.

I'm tired of watching the nation's money get funneled to the top 1%. I'm tired of living in a plutocracy that calls itself a democracy. I'm tired of watching people in BOTH parties being convinced to vote against their own self-interest.

It's time for a fucking change.
And with all due respect, what are you going to do when you finally realize we donít want your fucking revolution? Be even nastier?
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #38  
Old 03-02-2020, 03:17 PM
PastTense is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 8,443
In 2016 it was obvious to just about all Democrats that Clinton was going to beat Trump anyway so nothing would be lost by sitting out the election for moral principles (that Clinton was a tool of big business, that Clinton was too Hawkish...)--so a fair number of Sander's supporters did this [and of course just about all Democrats turned out to be wrong about the election result].

This time Sander's supporters realize that if they sit out Trump will win--so they will vote for the lesser evil--Biden or even Bloomberg.
  #39  
Old 03-02-2020, 03:38 PM
krondys's Avatar
krondys is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gillette, Wyoming
Posts: 1,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
And with all due respect, what are you going to do when you finally realize we donít want your fucking revolution? Be even nastier?
Figured you'd chime in. *wipes the venom off his face*

I was nasty?
  #40  
Old 03-02-2020, 03:48 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 7,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by RitterSport View Post
In what way was Obama to the left of Clinton? His healthcare plan during the primary run didn't require everyone to sign up, for example. Clinton's plan did (and the eventual law did as well), and that's a more left-leaning stance. Do you have any examples?
The Dean being to the left of Kerry is also pretty interesting to me. On the Iraq War, Dean definitely was to Kerry's left, but Dean was a very centrist Governor of Vermont, had endorsements from Al Gore and had more superdelegates than anyone before Iowa. Kucinich called Dean a "Rockefeller Republican". Dean was leading in all the polls as well. He just finished a very disappointing 3rd in Iowa and that hurt him massively.

For example:
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/3973192/ns...ver-iowa-turf/

Quote:
But on three key issues Dean and Kerry part company:

Kerry voted for the No Child Left Behind Act and has complained that President Bush has refused to request sufficient funds from Congress to make it work. Dean opposes the act as a federal intrusion on local authority, mocking it as ďThe No School Board Left Standing Act.Ē Kerry would preserve the portions of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts that benefit middle-class workers; Dean seeks to repeal the entire 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, even though that would mean many middle-class families would pay a few thousand dollars more a year in income taxes. Kerry voted for the Iraq war resolution in October 2002, a vote Dean has fiercely criticized, although Dean himself supported a war resolution, the Biden-Lugar measure that would have authorized Bush to wage war unilaterally on Iraq as long as he made an effort to seek a U.N. resolution approving use of force
I think Kerry was more left on 'federal intrusion into local authority' in education, Dean more left on the Iraq War, and then you can make a case for either position on the 2001/03 tax cuts.
  #41  
Old 03-02-2020, 03:54 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 16,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by krondys View Post
Figured you'd chime in. *wipes the venom off his face*

I was nasty?
Thatís all Bernie people know. Hostage taking and bullying to get their way. We donít want the revolution, we donít want to move the stupid window, and we really donít care where Bernie fits in on a European scale
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #42  
Old 03-02-2020, 03:58 PM
krondys's Avatar
krondys is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gillette, Wyoming
Posts: 1,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
Thatís all Bernie people know. Hostage taking and bullying to get their way. We donít want the revolution, we donít want to move the stupid window, and we really donít care where Bernie fits in on a European scale
Excellent. And in what way does that (quite frankly, bullshit) claim fit with anything I said? What "hostage taking" did I threaten? And for YOU, of all people on this damn board short of maybe John Stamos' Left Ear to accuse Sanders supporters in general, and me in particular, of "bullying"?

SMH.
  #43  
Old 03-02-2020, 04:03 PM
FlikTheBlue is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by krondys View Post
Sanders supporter here.

I'll vote for whoever the nominee is, because Trump.

However, at this point, I've become disillusioned with the party... and I live in the damned SDMB "liberal bubble", but still feel like I and others like me are expected to shut up and vote for the Dem, regardless, while watching our party march ever rightward. Despite over a decade of evidence to the contrary, a large contingent STILL believes that somehow the Republicans will SUDDENLY want to work to enact legislation put forth by the Democrats if its Joe Fucking Biden in the White House rather than Bernie Sanders, when the reality is they wouldn't vote for the "Republicans Get Supreme Power Bill of 2021" if it was offered up by a Democrat.

I'm tired of watching the nation's money get funneled to the top 1%. I'm tired of living in a plutocracy that calls itself a democracy. I'm tired of watching people in BOTH parties being convinced to vote against their own self-interest.

It's time for a fucking change.
I donít get this at all. The Democratic Party has not been marching ever rightward. If we take 1992 as the start of the current political era, here is how things have gone, at least in my opinion. The 1992 version of Bill Clinton was less liberal than the version we had by 2000. John Kerry has moved a little further to the left by 2004 compared to 2000 Bill Clinton. The 2008 versions of Obama and Hillary were more liberal yet compared to Bill Clinton in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. The 2016 version of Hillary was more liberal than the version that ran against Obama in 2008. And this yearís candidates, even those from the ďmoderateĒ lane, are more liberal than Hillary was in 2016. Where does this idea that the party is moving to the right come from?
  #44  
Old 03-02-2020, 04:07 PM
tullsterx is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 974
I think how Sander's conducts himself will make some difference. And it'll probably turn out badly. His rhetoric seems so immutable. It's hard to imagine him compromising on much. And really, compromise is one of the founding ideals of the US, seems to me.

I worry that Sanders could damage his reputation with how he responds, kind of like John Kasich did in 2016.
  #45  
Old 03-02-2020, 04:18 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 8,502
It depends.

If the democrats and their allies in the MSM like CNN and MSNBC, along with their Hollywood allies, can keep up the idea that Trump is Hitler/Satan/Evil incarnate/Thanos or other ultimate badguy, then Sanders supporters will of course vote for whomever is in the dem category.

Otherwise they will sit this one out of maybe vote for a 3rd party like say the Greens or american socialist party.

Thing is Sanders people want REAL change. They dont want just a sidestep to the left, They want a total 90 degree turn.
  #46  
Old 03-02-2020, 04:55 PM
krondys's Avatar
krondys is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gillette, Wyoming
Posts: 1,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
If the democrats and their allies in the MSM like CNN and MSNBC, along with their Hollywood allies, can keep up the idea that Trump is Hitler/Satan/Evil incarnate/Thanos or other ultimate badguy, then Sanders supporters will of course vote for whomever is in the dem category.
You forgot Twitter, the way they make him look like "Hitler/Satan/Evil incarnate/Thanos or other ultimate badguy" is the most effective of all of the MSM.
  #47  
Old 03-02-2020, 05:32 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 32,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
Where does this idea that the party is moving to the right come from?
The candidates have been moving slightly leftward. The growth in the party has been more significantly leftward. That creates a larger gap between them even though both movements have been in the same direction.

The real question is where the core of the party sits at the current moment. I think that the majority still sits in the center-left, but the loudest voices are much farther left. If they voted at the same percentage that the moderates did then they'd be justified taking over the party. They don't, being generally younger.

The trend is definitely leftward, nonetheless. Maybe by the next election cycle the party center will have moved sufficiently. I just don't see it for this year.
  #48  
Old 03-02-2020, 06:16 PM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
I don’t get this at all. The Democratic Party has not been marching ever rightward. If we take 1992 as the start of the current political era, here is how things have gone, at least in my opinion. The 1992 version of Bill Clinton was less liberal than the version we had by 2000. John Kerry has moved a little further to the left by 2004 compared to 2000 Bill Clinton. The 2008 versions of Obama and Hillary were more liberal yet compared to Bill Clinton in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. The 2016 version of Hillary was more liberal than the version that ran against Obama in 2008. And this year’s candidates, even those from the “moderate” lane, are more liberal than Hillary was in 2016. Where does this idea that the party is moving to the right come from?
If you only go back to the post Reagan era, yeah the party hasn't changed much (if anything it has moved left since the 90s).

However going back to earlier in the 20th century, the democratic party has moved very far to the right. Large scale ideas like the ones from FDR and LBJ would never pass in a modern democratic party, not even on a state level where democrats have supermajorities in congress.

Sanders is pretty in line with FDR. FDR was a mainstream well respected democrat in the 1930s and 1940s. Sanders is portrayed as a radical extremist.

The party has moved to the right, a lot of which can be traced back to the Reagan revolution, the abolition of the fairness doctrine, the rise in lobbying and corporate power, and the southern strategy in the mid/late 20th century.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 03-02-2020 at 06:17 PM.
  #49  
Old 03-02-2020, 06:48 PM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 16,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
If you only go back to the post Reagan era, yeah the party hasn't changed much (if anything it has moved left since the 90s).

However going back to earlier in the 20th century, the democratic party has moved very far to the right. Large scale ideas like the ones from FDR and LBJ would never pass in a modern democratic party, not even on a state level where democrats have supermajorities in congress.

Sanders is pretty in line with FDR. FDR was a mainstream well respected democrat in the 1930s and 1940s. Sanders is portrayed as a radical extremist.

The party has moved to the right, a lot of which can be traced back to the Reagan revolution, the abolition of the fairness doctrine, the rise in lobbying and corporate power, and the southern strategy in the mid/late 20th century.
The fairness doctrine????? The days of Walter Cronkite are over. It never applied to cable.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #50  
Old 03-02-2020, 07:11 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 32,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
If you only go back to the post Reagan era, yeah the party hasn't changed much (if anything it has moved left since the 90s).

However going back to earlier in the 20th century, the democratic party has moved very far to the right. Large scale ideas like the ones from FDR and LBJ would never pass in a modern democratic party, not even on a state level where democrats have supermajorities in congress.

Sanders is pretty in line with FDR. FDR was a mainstream well respected democrat in the 1930s and 1940s. Sanders is portrayed as a radical extremist.

The party has moved to the right, a lot of which can be traced back to the Reagan revolution, the abolition of the fairness doctrine, the rise in lobbying and corporate power, and the southern strategy in the mid/late 20th century.
Not a single sentence in this post has any relationship with reality.
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 11:11 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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 © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017