Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-27-2020, 03:38 PM
Sterling Archer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,275

What should the DNC do in this scenario?


It looks like we may be headed for a contested convention. Let’s say we get to the end of the primary season and the delegate numbers look like this:

40% Bernie
22% Biden
20% Warren
Bloomberg, Pete, and Amy sharing the rest with lower %

They have to give it to Bernie then, right? Even if the superdelegates could technically unite and make Warren or Biden the nominee... people would go nuts.

I could see the DNC’s logic though in NOT giving it to Bernie. “Not a real democrat” and didn’t earn enough delegates to win our primary. But I imagine the Bernie people would be WAY more motivated to say screw this and not vote in November. You think the Berniebros were a problem for Hillary? This would be a whole new level of ugly.
  #2  
Old 02-27-2020, 03:52 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 17,482
This would be tough because Warren is generally regarded to be in Bernie's "lane" - the progressives - so they could argue that the progressive wing is the majority and should prevail. In this situation, I'd argue the DNC should just let the superdelegates have at it and let the chips fall where they may. If they go with Bernie, so be it, if they deny it, well, three months is still a long time to unite the party before Election Day in November.
  #3  
Old 02-27-2020, 04:02 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 17,482
For what it's worth:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/democrati...200946646.html

Quote:
The New York Times has interviewed 93 party officials — all of them superdelegates, who could have a say on the nominee at the convention — and found overwhelming opposition to handing the Vermont senator the nomination if he arrived with the most delegates but fell short of a majority.
  #4  
Old 02-27-2020, 04:03 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,846
I think Bernie would be the only chance to win the general in this scenario. Take it from Bernie and you'd have a revolt. A huge chunk of his voters would be so furious they wouldn't vote for whoever got it. Sucks that so many would feel that way, but that's what I think would happen.
  #5  
Old 02-27-2020, 04:32 PM
RTFirefly is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 41,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
In this situation, I'd argue the DNC should just let the superdelegates have at it and let the chips fall where they may.
The DNC is the superdelegates, or most of them anyway. And practically all the rest are Dem Senators, Representatives, and governors. Also still-living Dem ex-Presidents and Veeps. (I have no idea whether Biden has to choose between being a candidate and a superdelegate, or whether he can vote for himself on the second ballot. )
  #6  
Old 02-27-2020, 04:39 PM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,058
If the Bernie fans were ticked off in 2016 it will be 10x worse if he has the most delegates and someone else is picked. That's a dream scenario for Trump.
  #7  
Old 02-27-2020, 04:40 PM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sterling Archer View Post
It looks like we may be headed for a contested convention. Let’s say we get to the end of the primary season and the delegate numbers look like this:

40% Bernie
22% Biden
20% Warren
Bloomberg, Pete, and Amy sharing the rest with lower %

They have to give it to Bernie then, right? Even if the superdelegates could technically unite and make Warren or Biden the nominee... people would go nuts.
I see Warren withdrawing at that point, freeing her delegates to vote for whomever they want - and I suspect that just enough of them would vote for Bernie to give him a majority, even with the superdelegates. I especially see this as I don't expect the party to want this to go past a second ballot.

In fact, if it's 40-22-20, I wouldn't be surprised if the party talks Warren into withdrawing before the first ballot, as even a second ballot makes the party look weak - "How are we expected to run the country if we can't even agree on who should do it?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
The DNC is the superdelegates, or most of them anyway. And practically all the rest are Dem Senators, Representatives, and governors. Also still-living Dem ex-Presidents and Veeps. (I have no idea whether Biden has to choose between being a candidate and a superdelegate, or whether he can vote for himself on the second ballot. )
Why not? He has to balance Sanders voting for himself on the second ballot...

And the only superdelegates you left out are (a) the mayor of Washington, DC (since DC is treated as a state, the mayor is treated as a state governor), (b) any former Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, and (c) any former DNC chairs.
  #8  
Old 02-27-2020, 04:40 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,009
The DNC (Democratic National Committee) does not select the nominee. The other DNC (Democratic National Convention) can obscure the meaning

The DNC, committee, does have a key role in establishing the rules for delegate selection to the national convention. They also are part of establishing the rules for how the convention works. Both roles are also affected by what the delegates to the last convention voted for; they are not there merely to vote for the nominee.

The convention itself is a fine example of representative democracy in action. Voters chose candidates who earned the right to select who they wanted to be their delegates. Those pledged delegates along with the unpledged delegates that are party leaders named in the rules will ultimately select the candidate in a contested convention.

IMO the DNC as a body should do nothing to intervene in that process to force a specific outcome. The convention should do what the delegates decide they should do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sterling Archer View Post
40% Bernie
There is a real chance given the large field going into Super Tuesday that 40% of delegates could be based on a third or less of total primary votes. Still feel so sure that the plurality is strong enough to ignore the wishes of two thirds of Democratic voters?

Last edited by DinoR; 02-27-2020 at 04:44 PM.
  #9  
Old 02-27-2020, 05:00 PM
enalzi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,662
Quote:
Originally Posted by DinoR View Post

There is a real chance given the large field going into Super Tuesday that 40% of delegates could be based on a third or less of total primary votes. Still feel so sure that the plurality is strong enough to ignore the wishes of two thirds of Democratic voters?
And if Biden has 25%, should we be ignoring the wishes of 75% of the Democratic voters who didn't vote for him?
  #10  
Old 02-27-2020, 05:24 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by enalzi View Post
And if Biden has 25%, should we be ignoring the wishes of 75% of the Democratic voters who didn't vote for him?
What we? I won't be a delegate. If I were, I would likely view representing the voters who sent me to the convention as trying to pick a candidate closest to the politics of the one I was pledged to support.

Overwhelmingly, delegates get picked by single preference. Only some of the caucuses have a ranked choice component involved. A contested convention is a ranked choice problem. The delegates have to do that ranking. Both voting for the plurality winner or trying to pick a closest fit that can get a majority seem like perfectly reasonable strategies for delegates to pursue.

I have a preference in what the process produces. That does not mean I don't value the messiness of representative democracy more than the specific outcome.
  #11  
Old 02-27-2020, 05:38 PM
DinoR is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by enalzi View Post
And if Biden has 25%, should we be ignoring the wishes of 75% of the Democratic voters who didn't vote for him?
What we? I won't be a delegate. If I were, I would likely view representing the voters who sent me to the convention as trying to pick a candidate closest to the politics of the one I was pledged to support.

Overwhelmingly, delegates get picked by single preference. Only some of the caucuses have a ranked choice component involved. A contested convention is a ranked choice problem. The delegates have to do that ranking. Both voting for the plurality winner or trying to pick a closest fit that can get a majority seem like perfectly reasonable strategies for delegates to pursue.

I have a preference in what the process produces. That does not mean I don't value the messiness of representative democracy more than the specific outcome.
  #12  
Old 02-27-2020, 05:49 PM
enalzi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,662
We as in the royal we as in the Democratic Party. Just counterpointing to the face that somehow picking Sanders is overriding the majority of voters. Picking ANY candidate will overriding the majority of voters.
  #13  
Old 02-27-2020, 09:13 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
If the Bernie fans were ticked off in 2016 it will be 10x worse if he has the most delegates and someone else is picked. That's a dream scenario for Trump.
I absolutely agree, and I say this as someone who's not sold on Bernie's "electability" at all.

But, it's also possible that Trump's approval ratings go down the drain, and if that happens, I think Bernie's actually better positioned to capitalize on that than any of the current candidates.

Bernie is going to win the total vote count by several million voters. To take that away from his grass roots organization and just give the nomination to someone else is going to enrage Sanders' supporters so much that they'll never ever forgive the Democratic party. It would potentially destroy the party forever.

Now if Bernie tanks on Super Tuesday, that's another conversation. But short of that, the Dems have to accept that Bernie's the likely nominee, and they need to force him to put someone on the ticket who has broad appeal - and if he doesn't, then maybe they can use delegates as leverage.
  #14  
Old 02-27-2020, 09:21 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I think Bernie would be the only chance to win the general in this scenario. Take it from Bernie and you'd have a revolt. A huge chunk of his voters would be so furious they wouldn't vote for whoever got it. Sucks that so many would feel that way, but that's what I think would happen.
Then we lose and pin the blame squarely on Bernie this time around.
  #15  
Old 02-27-2020, 09:28 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Don Guy View Post
I see Warren withdrawing at that point, freeing her delegates to vote for whomever they want - and I suspect that just enough of them would vote for Bernie to give him a majority, even with the superdelegates. I especially see this as I don't expect the party to want this to go past a second ballot.

In fact, if it's 40-22-20, I wouldn't be surprised if the party talks Warren into withdrawing before the first ballot, as even a second ballot makes the party look weak - "How are we expected to run the country if we can't even agree on who should do it?"


Why not? He has to balance Sanders voting for himself on the second ballot...

And the only superdelegates you left out are (a) the mayor of Washington, DC (since DC is treated as a state, the mayor is treated as a state governor), (b) any former Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, and (c) any former DNC chairs.
All delegates are released after the first ballot.

That means that after the first ballot, everyone can vote for Warren. Why would she release her delegates? If the DNC felt pressure to nominate a progressive, why would Bernie they accede to bernie bros over Warren?
  #16  
Old 02-27-2020, 09:30 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by enalzi View Post
And if Biden has 25%, should we be ignoring the wishes of 75% of the Democratic voters who didn't vote for him?
If a decision isn't reached on the first ballot, all delegates are released and they can nominate whoever they want. Why would that have to be bernie?
  #17  
Old 02-27-2020, 09:38 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 23,968
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sterling Archer View Post
It looks like we may be headed for a contested convention. Let’s say we get to the end of the primary season and the delegate numbers look like this:

40% Bernie
22% Biden
20% Warren
Bloomberg, Pete, and Amy sharing the rest with lower %

They have to give it to Bernie then, right? Even if the superdelegates could technically unite and make Warren or Biden the nominee... people would go nuts.

I could see the DNC’s logic though in NOT giving it to Bernie. “Not a real democrat” and didn’t earn enough delegates to win our primary. But I imagine the Bernie people would be WAY more motivated to say screw this and not vote in November. You think the Berniebros were a problem for Hillary? This would be a whole new level of ugly.
The superdelegates (governors, Congresscritters, all of 'em) shuld follow the lead of the majority of the pledged delegates on second vote and beyond. My WAG is that in this case the released pledged delegates would very quickly have a majority of them going to Sanders on the second or third vote, and the superdelegates would pile on to make that delegate majority a resounding one.

There should be no inviolate requirement that such happens.
  #18  
Old 02-27-2020, 09:54 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Then we lose and pin the blame squarely on Bernie this time around.
Right...that'll work.
  #19  
Old 02-27-2020, 11:14 PM
China Guy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 12,120
"Dems are the rules. It is not "fair" to be changing rules of the game at this stage. IIRC, this was also the case in 2016. Don't be going banana republic and shaving the dice at this stage of the game based on the candidate makeup.

This is akin to the electoral college. IMHO the electoral college as asinine and has led to the tyranny of sparsely populated states dictating to the republic. But if you're going to change either the electoral college or the democratic super delegates, do it in 2021 so that the guard rails are firmly in place.
  #20  
Old 02-27-2020, 11:56 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,904
I think the exact scenario posited by the OP is unlikely, because I doubt Bernie and Liz could get 60% between them. If it happened, my guess is that Warren would see if everyone else would agree to support her over Bernie and if so she would be nominated on the first ballot, and if not she would release her delegates in the second round and Bernie would be nominated. If a majority of pledged delegates were voting for Bernie in the second round and the superdelegates overruled them, yeah, welcome to Trump’s second term.

I don’t think that if Warren were nominated with 60% of the vote, Bernie would have cause to complain.

I would say that the point at which one “deserves” the nomination with a plurality is around 45% of pledged delegates with nobody else over 25%. If a candidate were to be denied the nomination under those circumstances, hard feelings would certainly ensue.
__________________
Please...we prefer the term "Bernard Brother".
  #21  
Old 02-27-2020, 11:56 PM
Projammer's Avatar
Projammer is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SW Arkansas
Posts: 6,883
IMHO, it doesn't matter what they do as far as the results of the election. Bernie has already cost them the election unless he voluntarily drops out or drops dead.

As far as doing the least damage to the party, they would be better off letting him go with the nomination. As others have said, Bernie's supporters might just be pissed off enough to split off on their own. Not enough numbers to make a huge difference for themselves, but more than enough to kneecap the DNC for the foreseeable future.
  #22  
Old 02-28-2020, 01:25 AM
Little Nemo is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 86,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I think Bernie would be the only chance to win the general in this scenario. Take it from Bernie and you'd have a revolt. A huge chunk of his voters would be so furious they wouldn't vote for whoever got it. Sucks that so many would feel that way, but that's what I think would happen.
I tend to agree. The candidate who enters the convention with the most delegates is the presumptive nominee and his or her supporters have a right to feel entitled to the nomination.

The only scenario in which I feel the convention should consider bypassing the lead candidate is in the unlikely case of there being some significant change between the primaries and the convention and the committee arguing that the voters wouldn't have voted the way they did if this change had occurred before the primaries.
  #23  
Old 02-28-2020, 02:46 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Then we lose and pin the blame squarely on Bernie this time around.
I'd rather just win with Bernie.
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #24  
Old 02-28-2020, 03:54 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: the Land of Smiles
Posts: 21,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Projammer View Post
IMHO, it doesn't matter what they do as far as the results of the election. Bernie has already cost them the election unless he voluntarily drops out or drops dead.

As far as doing the least damage to the party, they would be better off letting him go with the nomination. As others have said, Bernie's supporters might just be pissed off enough to split off on their own. Not enough numbers to make a huge difference for themselves, but more than enough to kneecap the DNC for the foreseeable future.
Yes, I'm afraid this is correct. The D's will need 51 Senate seats to salvage American democracy, but I'm afraid that with Sanders heading the ticket this may also be impossible.

People overlook that Putin and the GOP are trying their hardest now to ensure Sanders is the nominee. Once he is the nominee, they will reverse course 180-degrees and the biggest Propaganda Blitz in human history will go into gear, trying to crush Sanders in a landslide.
  #25  
Old 02-28-2020, 08:44 AM
Sterling Archer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,275

What should the DNC do in this scenario?


So it seems there is no consensus, which is exactly what I was afraid of, other than saying the Democratic Party is in a terrible spot here, practically a Kobayashi Maru for other ST nerds.

Everyone is saying “it’s bad if they do this” or “this is bad because it will lead to this” but I see very few suggestions of what they should do to try to mitigate the problem.

To me, the least bad situation seems to be to let Bernie run with it and give him the best support we can and help shape his message to appeal to middle America. Hope he chooses a running mate with mass appeal too.

Last edited by Sterling Archer; 02-28-2020 at 08:45 AM.
  #26  
Old 02-28-2020, 09:07 AM
Jimmy Chitwood is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Near Philadelphia
Posts: 6,617
What they should do, in the scenario you're describing, is see it coming in advance and broker it as soon as it looks like the most likely scenario.

There should be an agreement prior to the convention that, to avoid the disaster of a controversial contest of the nomination, the candidate is going to be X, who has the full support of the party in exchange for measures ABCYZ, which are being mutually agreed upon simply to obviate the need for prolonged debate and internal conflict.

So, like, Bernie, if it's Bernie, you got the keys, and the party is out in force behind you, in exchange for which you give a minimum of 2 cabinet positions to this list of people, and we agree that your VP is going to be whoever your VP is going to be, and, I don't know, you don't support primarying this list of 5 important centrists or something.

And everyone should come out and very publicly say that they're on board with that, and that it in no way compromises the leader's position, because the leader has agreed to it all to ensure unity as soon as possible, etc. So when the convention rolls around, and the leader gets a plurality but not a majority, the brokering is a fait accompli. And then, from as early a date as possible, the general election should begin and there should be a multi-pronged, suddenly very strong in fact, assault on Trump. Literally. Just kidding, not literally.

This certainly will not occur, but that wasn't the question.

Last edited by Jimmy Chitwood; 02-28-2020 at 09:08 AM.
  #27  
Old 02-28-2020, 09:14 AM
Sterling Archer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,275
That’s a great plan, now let’s watch as they screw it up.
  #28  
Old 02-28-2020, 09:32 AM
Blalron is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 6,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post

People overlook that Putin and the GOP are trying their hardest now to ensure Sanders is the nominee. Once he is the nominee, they will reverse course 180-degrees and the biggest Propaganda Blitz in human history will go into gear, trying to crush Sanders in a landslide.
There will be a dishonest propaganda blitz regardless of who is the nominee.
  #29  
Old 02-28-2020, 09:40 AM
That Don Guy's Avatar
That Don Guy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
If a decision isn't reached on the first ballot, all delegates are released and they can nominate whoever they want. Why would that have to be bernie?
Source of this "rule"?
It's not in either the Call for the Convention or the Delegate Selection Rules.
The only rule concerning pledged delegates is:
"All delegates to the National Convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them."

Some states may have their own rules; California, for example, has them for the Republican convention, but none for the Democratic one.

The convention rules can be changed "on the floor," but that requires a 2/3 vote of the delegates, and that includes the superdelegates.
  #30  
Old 02-28-2020, 09:50 AM
Inigo Montoya's Avatar
Inigo Montoya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 16,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Then we lose and pin the blame squarely on Bernie this time around.
Why blame Bernie? Isn't the party to blame for allowing him to use their brand in the first place? If they didn't intend to support him as the candidate, why let him play?

Last edited by Inigo Montoya; 02-28-2020 at 09:51 AM.
  #31  
Old 02-28-2020, 09:52 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 17,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blalron View Post
There will be a dishonest propaganda blitz regardless of who is the nominee.
Yes, but Sanders is uniquely vulnerable. As one article put it, "There's a difference between having a Republican attack ad run against you, and running on a Republican attack ad."
  #32  
Old 02-28-2020, 10:09 AM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,058
last time a Dem did not have enough delegates before the convention was Mondale in 1984 but he won on first ballot anyway.
  #33  
Old 02-28-2020, 10:45 AM
CaptMurdock's Avatar
CaptMurdock is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Evildrome Boozerama
Posts: 2,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Yes, I'm afraid this is correct. The D's will need 51 Senate seats to salvage American democracy, but I'm afraid that with Sanders heading the ticket this may also be impossible.

People overlook that Putin and the GOP are trying their hardest now to ensure Sanders is the nominee. Once he is the nominee, they will reverse course 180-degrees and the biggest Propaganda Blitz in human history will go into gear, trying to crush Sanders in a landslide.
Well, if you're that resigned to the U.S. becoming a vassal state of Russia that you're just going to roll over and let Putin do whatever he wants, pass the vodka, tovarisch.

__________________
____________________________
Coin-operated self-destruct...not one of my better ideas.
-- Planckton (Spongebob Squarepants)
  #34  
Old 02-28-2020, 11:41 AM
Blalron is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 6,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Yes, but Sanders is uniquely vulnerable. As one article put it, "There's a difference between having a Republican attack ad run against you, and running on a Republican attack ad."
"SOCIALISM! SOCIALISM! SOCIALISM!" Yeah, everybody has already heard of that in connection with Sanders. This isn't new information. Yet he's still popular.
  #35  
Old 02-28-2020, 12:10 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,252
Under ordinary circumstances, I'd give Trump the electoral college edge over Sanders, and I predict he'd probably win a minimum of 279 delegates and perhaps getting closer to 300, give or take a few.

But if coronavirus starts weighing down the economy and if Trump is perceived as having failed in his response to the virus and the economic fallout, then that obviously changes the dynamics. There is a scenario in which Sanders wins; it's probably an extraordinary set of circumstances, though.

The problem the Democrats are in is that the establishment had 4 years to go out and find another Obama, but that Obama was never found. They needed someone who had some progressive street cred and someone who could be a recognizable figure among different groups of people, yet someone who would still pledge to work within established frameworks. That candidate, as it turns out, doesn't exist.

It's looking like Bernie is what we're stuck with, and the reason for that is that, like Trump, Bernie has tapped into intense anger at the system. The moderates have dismissed Bernie's harangues as crazy talk since 2015, but millions of voters don't think he's crazy. Rather, they think the establishment is conspiring against working class people, and that now is not the time to be told to shut up. Bernie's voters aren't going to stand for it if the establishment Dems pull his nomination from him. They will burn down the party on their way out.

If moderates are so worried about Sanders, it might actually make sense to accept the inevitable and try to steer their influence from within his organization. Moderates might be able to dilute some of his campaign's acidity a little.

Last edited by asahi; 02-28-2020 at 12:13 PM.
  #36  
Old 02-28-2020, 12:16 PM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 22,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blalron View Post
"SOCIALISM! SOCIALISM! SOCIALISM!" Yeah, everybody has already heard of that in connection with Sanders. This isn't new information. Yet he's still popular.
He's popular with the segment of the population who has a terrible record of turning out to vote in November.

Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
It's looking like Bernie is what we're stuck with,
I'm not giving up yet. Bloomberg is in free fall and I think many of the Biden supporters who flirted with Bloomberg are coming home. I think a big win Saturday will lead to a good Super Tuesday with a 1 on 1 Biden-Bernie show the rest of the way. The pundits are all reading too much into the first 3 contests, much like the sports announcers who when the Kentucky Derby is at the 1/2 mile point start with "OH HE'S IN THE LEAD? WILL HE WIN THE TRIPLE CROWN? TRIPLECROWNTRIPLECROWNTRIPLECROWN!" All this when the freaking first race is halfway done.
  #37  
Old 02-28-2020, 12:45 PM
Jimmy Chitwood is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Near Philadelphia
Posts: 6,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
He's popular with the segment of the population who has a terrible record of turning out to vote in November.
Please, please continue on this train of thought for like two more stops.
  #38  
Old 02-28-2020, 01:46 PM
Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 14,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
The superdelegates (governors, Congresscritters, all of 'em) shuld follow the lead of the majority of the pledged delegates on second vote and beyond.
Majority or plurality? There is a difference
  #39  
Old 02-28-2020, 01:54 PM
Little Nemo is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 86,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptMurdock View Post
Well, if you're that resigned to the U.S. becoming a vassal state of Russia that you're just going to roll over and let Putin do whatever he wants, pass the vodka, tovarisch.
I'm going to vote for Sanders if he's the nominee. But they're only going to let me vote once. What do you suggest I do beyond voting so I won't be rolling over?
  #40  
Old 02-28-2020, 01:59 PM
Blalron is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 6,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
He's popular with the segment of the population who has a terrible record of turning out to vote in November.
Couldn't this be an advantage, that he may motivate people who don't ordinarily turn out to vote?
  #41  
Old 02-28-2020, 02:00 PM
Little Nemo is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 86,225
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
He's popular with the segment of the population who has a terrible record of turning out to vote in November.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blalron View Post
Couldn't this be an advantage, that he may motivate people who don't ordinarily turn out to vote?
What if he motivates people to turn out and vote for Trump?

The Republicans got sixty-three million votes in 2016. The Socialists got ninety-one thousand votes in 2016. And here we are four years later, nominating a Socialist to run against a Republican.

Last edited by Little Nemo; 02-28-2020 at 02:01 PM.
  #42  
Old 02-28-2020, 02:05 PM
Sterling Archer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Chitwood View Post
Please, please continue on this train of thought for like two more stops.


Haha very good point. Getting the youth vote to actually VOTE would be a game changer.
  #43  
Old 02-28-2020, 02:07 PM
Sterling Archer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
What if he motivates people to turn out and vote for Trump?

The Republicans got sixty-three million votes in 2016. The Socialists got ninety-one thousand votes in 2016. And here we are four years later, nominating a Socialist to run against a Republican.

The democrats have to fix their message on socialism. Despite even what Bernie and AOC claim about themselves, they are not socialists. At least not the kind that should scare conservatives. They don’t want to take the Rich’s money and redistribute it to the poor. They DO want to tax the rich more heavily and use that money to improve society. But we need a better term for this. “Social programs” vs socialism.
  #44  
Old 02-28-2020, 02:09 PM
Blalron is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 6,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
What if he motivates people to turn out and vote for Trump?

The Republicans got sixty-three million votes in 2016. The Socialists got ninety-one thousand votes in 2016. And here we are four years later, nominating a Socialist to run against a Republican.
If you asked me in 2015 whether Trump would ever get elected President, I would have laughed at you. Perhaps the old common sense wisdom about who is electable is mistaken.

Last edited by Blalron; 02-28-2020 at 02:10 PM.
  #45  
Old 02-28-2020, 02:10 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
He's popular with the segment of the population who has a terrible record of turning out to vote in November.



I'm not giving up yet. Bloomberg is in free fall and I think many of the Biden supporters who flirted with Bloomberg are coming home. I think a big win Saturday will lead to a good Super Tuesday with a 1 on 1 Biden-Bernie show the rest of the way. The pundits are all reading too much into the first 3 contests, much like the sports announcers who when the Kentucky Derby is at the 1/2 mile point start with "OH HE'S IN THE LEAD? WILL HE WIN THE TRIPLE CROWN? TRIPLECROWNTRIPLECROWNTRIPLECROWN!" All this when the freaking first race is halfway done.
THanks to Bloomberg's disastrous first debate and his not too great second one either, Biden has come back to life. I don't think South Carolina is necessarily going to reverse the momentum that Sanders has already established, but it keeps his campaign relevant, which could loom larger if Sanders somehow falters as the race continues.
  #46  
Old 02-28-2020, 02:38 PM
Jimmy Chitwood is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Near Philadelphia
Posts: 6,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
The Republicans got sixty-three million votes in 2016. The Socialists got ninety-one thousand votes in 2016. And here we are four years later, nominating a Socialist to run against a Republican.
How many votes did black candidates get in 2004?
  #47  
Old 02-28-2020, 03:18 PM
Manwich is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Japan
Posts: 547
They must bend the knee support Bernie.

Practically, because the Democrats would not survive if they ratfucked him, it would destroy the party.

Also morally, because he is a good (Neutral Good / Scrupulous in Paladium), popular Democrat with good policies and beating the Republican opponent in polls, like we haven't had in decades.
  #48  
Old 02-28-2020, 03:27 PM
BrotherCadfael is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vermont
Posts: 10,513
Just tell me the convention isn't in Chicago this year...
  #49  
Old 02-28-2020, 03:31 PM
Projammer's Avatar
Projammer is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SW Arkansas
Posts: 6,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sterling Archer View Post
The democrats have to fix their message on socialism. Despite even what Bernie and AOC claim about themselves, they are not socialists. At least not the kind that should scare conservatives. They don’t want to take the Rich’s money and redistribute it to the poor. They DO want to tax the rich more heavily and use that money to improve society. But we need a better term for this. “Social programs” vs socialism.
If by fix, you mean completely remove the term from their lexicon and rebrand their ideas and plans as something totally different then you are correct. If you mean to educate people to believe that socialism means what you think it means, then you are waking into the valley of disappointments and that way is decades long. There are far to many examples of failed 'socialist' states for your opponents to drag out of the history books. Examples that failed spectacularly.
  #50  
Old 02-28-2020, 03:42 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sterling Archer View Post
The democrats have to fix their message on socialism. Despite even what Bernie and AOC claim about themselves, they are not socialists. At least not the kind that should scare conservatives. They don’t want to take the Rich’s money and redistribute it to the poor. They DO want to tax the rich more heavily and use that money to improve society. But we need a better term for this. “Social programs” vs socialism.
The term is "social democracy", like the systems in Sweden, Canada, and most of western Europe. The Republicans will of course use the term "socialism" and allude to countries like Venezuela, Cuba, and the former Soviet Union as exemplars of Bernie's policies. "Socialism" is still probably the most toxic word in American politics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blalron View Post
If you asked me in 2015 whether Trump would ever get elected President, I would have laughed at you. Perhaps the old common sense wisdom about who is electable is mistaken.
I would have laughed, too (and did). But the mistake here is not in underestimating Bernie's popularity in a general election. The mistake here is underestimating the stupidity of the average voter. Trump had massive appeal to gullible dumbasses and bigots, who were more numerous than anyone imagined and were motivated to come out in droves, and to those committed to right-wing ideology who would cheerfully have voted for an orange marmoset if it has an "R" after its name. Bernie appeals to intellectuals who actually understand his policies, and a dedicated base that is very committed but in the great scheme of things not very large. I would posit that the former greatly outnumber the latter.

Former U.S. ambassador to Canada David Jacobson put it very well when he said "... fundamentally I am very concerned about his ability to win in November. I think he is divisive. I don't think he would grow the tent. And I think you have to do more than turn out what he has — which is a very committed base but is overall quite small in the overall scheme of the electorate."

Maybe I'm wrong and a lot more people than I think are committed to fairly radical change and/or are just sick of Trump. But Bernie is nevertheless going to have to move decisively and convincingly much more to the middle of the road for the general.
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 06:19 PM.

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