Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-16-2020, 03:44 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,462

I guess we should start taking the idea of a Sanders administration seriously


For most of the past year, I've simply assumed that Joe Biden was a doddering, elderly, gaffe-prone, out -of-touch fool who would nonetheless hold it together long enough to win the Democratic nomination. Results form Iowa and New Hampshire along with many recent polls suggest that I overestimated him and now, certainly, a Bernie Sanders victory looks more likely than ever. Up to now, I think, most people have avoided talking much about what a Sanders administration would actually look like because they assumed it would never happen. But I suppose the time has come to take it seriously.

Some starting thoughts:

Vice President. Normally the job of the Vice President is to look pretty while sitting behind the President during the State of the Union address, to attend funerals that aren't important enough for the President, and other such symbolic duties. But Bernie is on the old side and did have a heart attack a few months ago, so the chances of his Vice President becoming President would be higher than normal, and everyone would be aware of that.

Reasonably, a more mainstream choice night help reassure centrist Democrats and independents that the Sanders administration wouldn't be too extreme. But since when has Sanders himself ever accepted that type of argument. His entire strategy is based on avoiding that type of thinking and sticking with far left positions. Thus, I incline towards believing that he'll pick a left-wing running mate. Elizabeth Warren would seem like the most obvious name.

The Senate. Obviously to get even a part of his agenda passed, Bernie would need a Democratic Senate. Key Senate races will be in places like Alabama, Iowa, Colorado, and Maine. It is reasonable to wonder whether having Sanders at the top of the ticket will hurt the Democrats' chances in those states.

There is an added wrinkle. If Bernie wins the Presidency then he has to give up his Senate seat, which would be temporarily filled by a replacement nominated by the governor of Vermont. Amazingly enough, the current governor is a Republican, though he's up for re-election this year. His appointment would hold the seat for at most 3 months, after which there must be a special election. One tends to assume that a Democrat would be favored in Vermont, but strange things can happen in special elections. We may recall the Democrats losing a seat in Massachusetts in 2009, or the Republicans losing in Alabama in 2017.

Speaking of Massachusetts, if Warren became Vice President then her Senate seat would also be open. In Massachusetts there is no replacement appointed. The seat remains open until a special election, which must be 145-160 days later. So a Sanders-Warren ticket winning could actually cost Democrats two Senate seats in the opening months of the administration.

The Cabinet. Traditionally most Presidents have long experience in the mainstream of their party. They become friends with a large number of other current and former Congressfolks, governors, lobbyists, think tank researchers, and the like. Thus, when taking office they can tap a large number of people to fill their cabinet and then the thousands of other positions that need to be filled.

There President Bernie may face a problem. He has deliberately not had good relations with most Democrats, which is hardly surprising when you consider that he wasn't a Democrat until a few months ago. Thus much like Donald Trump, who had few political connections when arriving in office, Bernie may struggle to find qualified people willing and able to take positions. Per Wikipedia, Bernie has been endorsed by 1 current and 1 former Senator, 7 Representatives, and 1 former cabinet official. (For comparison's sake, Joe Biden has almost 10 times as many in every category.) It's difficult to imagine Michael Moore or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez running a federal department successfully.

Legislation. As noted, if the Democrats don't control the Senate, there's little chance of passing any major bills. If they do, there's still the filibuster to worry about. They could abolish the filibuster, but several Democratic Senators have already spoken out against the idea.

Judges. Justice Ginsburg is no spring chicken. Breyer isn't either. So President Bernie might have two Supreme Court appointments to make early, on top of the usual number of appointments to the lower courts. Of course, whether he can push through those nominations will depend on the Senate, and also on whether he makes choices who share his far-left position on the political spectrum, or whether he's more willing to consider moderate nominees.

Executive orders. If Bernie can't accomplish much by legislation, his base will clamor for direct action by whatever means is available. It's basically a rule these days that any significant executive action from the President draws at least one lawsuit from the opposing party. So we can probably look forward to a lot of protracted legal fights at the same time that we're fighting over control of the courts.

The midterm election. All recent Presidents have seen their party lose big in the first midterm election after their election, except for George W. Bush who delayed that day of reckoning until his second term. By any reasonable prediction, if Bernie becomes President, the Republicans are likely to win and take back Congress in 2022.
  #2  
Old 02-16-2020, 04:06 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 16,949
If Bernie is president, I see no reason McConnell would not repeat Scalia again should Ginsburg or Breyer die. He will try to keep their seats empty for a future Republican president (and if the Senate stays red after the 2022 midterms, it could happen.)
  #3  
Old 02-16-2020, 04:08 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 16,949
It should also be noted that if Bernie is defeated in 2024, it will be regarded as a big repudiation of progressivism - for maybe a decade or so. Even the next Democrat who wins the presidency may be a Biden centrist type.
  #4  
Old 02-16-2020, 04:16 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 16,800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
It should also be noted that if Bernie is defeated in 2024, it will be regarded as a big repudiation of progressivism - for maybe a decade or so. Even the next Democrat who wins the presidency may be a Biden centrist type.
He would be 82 years old in 2024. In all seriousness that seems an absurdity that he or anyone would run for president at that age. If Bernie wins, which for the purposes of the thread I will humor, I think he almost certainly has to be considered a one termer.

I've known several 82 year olds in my life. It's time for them to think about not driving anymore, let alone being president. I think it is a near impossibility for someone that old to do everything that the job entails.
  #5  
Old 02-16-2020, 04:20 PM
Superdude's Avatar
Superdude is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Fortress of Solidude
Posts: 10,947
I don't see Warren accepting a VP nod, nor her being the obvious choice. I think you'd be more likely to see someone who would help solidify his reach among other groups. I think Mayor Pete or Kamala Harris would be a more likely choice. Plus, Warren's 70 herself, so those age concerns for Bernie wouldn't exactly be alleviated if Warren had to assume the Oval Office.
__________________
It's chaos. Be kind.
  #6  
Old 02-16-2020, 04:23 PM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,105
The main goal of a President Bernie should be to flip the Senate to blue in 2022. That will be a good year for Democrats based on the map of who is up for reelection, with several purple state Republicans, few purple state Democrats, and the overall count being 22R and 12D. Rather than focusing on divisive legislation, Bernie should focus on reversing Trump's executive orders, rebuilding the Justice and State departments and any other departments that Trump has ravaged, and working on infrastructure. When judicial nominees come up, he should pick those with impeccable credentials that the country can rally around, so that McConnell will lose in the publics eye should he bust out the Merrick Garland maneuver again. He should save the tax increases and such until after the 2022 election.
  #7  
Old 02-16-2020, 04:24 PM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,671
I also don't see Sanders picking a moderate running mate. Sanders doesn't seem like one to pivot. Also I think he wagers, reasonably, that moderate Dems will vote for almost anyone who isn't Trump, and he'll get more people to the polls by pushing for big change.

Because the Senate is crucial, I don't see him picking a Senator and risking the loss of a D vote there. So, a firebrand Representative or progressive Governor seems more likely to me. Someone reasonably young, maybe 50s. Preferably someone who's not a white male. I dunno who fits that description, though.
  #8  
Old 02-16-2020, 04:33 PM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,671
Kate Brown of Oregon for running mate, maybe? I know very little about her. But she's a progressive, 59 year old, bisexual woman, so she seems to fit the totally made up criteria I imagine for Sanders's running mate.
  #9  
Old 02-16-2020, 04:53 PM
Flyer is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by ITR champion View Post
For most of the past year, I've simply assumed that Joe Biden was a doddering, elderly, gaffe-prone, out -of-touch fool who would nonetheless hold it together long enough to win the Democratic nomination. Results form Iowa and New Hampshire along with many recent polls suggest that I overestimated him and now, certainly, a Bernie Sanders victory looks more likely than ever. Up to now, I think, most people have avoided talking much about what a Sanders administration would actually look like because they assumed it would never happen. But I suppose the time has come to take it seriously.
The stock market people say "Past performance is no guarantee of future results." I guess you took that disclaimer to heart, because Biden's past results of running for president would certainly tend to indicate that he would NOT get the nomination.

And I see that you've also taken it to heart with regard to Sanders.
  #10  
Old 02-16-2020, 07:02 PM
2ManyTacos is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,001
The VP pick needs to be Yang, but that isn't a choice that is specific to Sanders. Whoever the nominee is needs to pick Andrew Yang as VP.
  #11  
Old 02-16-2020, 07:08 PM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,671
Part of me wants him to pick Kamala Harris or Adam Schiff and say, "When I'm president, Kamala/Adam will lead a massive investigation to prosecute every last member of the Trump administration for all their crimes." It won't happen, of course. But wouldn't it be cool?
  #12  
Old 02-16-2020, 07:38 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ManyTacos View Post
The VP pick needs to be Yang, but that isn't a choice that is specific to Sanders. Whoever the nominee is needs to pick Andrew Yang as VP.
You mean the Ying Yang principle?
  #13  
Old 02-16-2020, 07:57 PM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
It should also be noted that if Bernie is defeated in 2024, it will be regarded as a big repudiation of progressivism - for maybe a decade or so. Even the next Democrat who wins the presidency may be a Biden centrist type.
When gore lost in 2000, Kerry lost in 2004 and Clinton lost in 2016 why weren't these events considered repudiation for centrist democrats?
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #14  
Old 02-17-2020, 11:43 AM
Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 13,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
When gore lost in 2000, Kerry lost in 2004 and Clinton lost in 2016 why weren't these events considered repudiation for centrist democrats?
Well, probably because Gore and Clinton won the popular vote so some people like the moderate Dems
  #15  
Old 02-17-2020, 12:43 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ManyTacos View Post
The VP pick needs to be Yang, but that isn't a choice that is specific to Sanders. Whoever the nominee is needs to pick Andrew Yang as VP.
I'm not really seeing that. Yang is, when all is said and done, a businessman and a capitalist who got rich in business. Not Bloomberg-level rich, to be sure, but he made a few million. Also, while Yang may have had a devoted following on the internet, it obviously didn't translate to significant numbers of votes.

Perhaps if he's convinced Yang is a good-guy capitalist, Bernie would offer him some business-related post such a Secretary of Commerce or Treasury. Buttigieg might be a possibility for those as well.
  #16  
Old 02-17-2020, 12:50 PM
Oakminster is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Surefall Glade, Antonica
Posts: 19,323
Sanders is nothing but a pipe dream from a disillusioned segment of the population. If he somehow gets the nomination, it does nothing but guarantee Trump's re-election. Trump is already generating massive turnout in virtually unopposed primaries. Put Bernie on the main ticket, and you'll see record GOP turnout in the general.

Forget about Bernie. It's pie in the sky, never gonna happen wishful thinking.
  #17  
Old 02-17-2020, 12:54 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakminster View Post
Sanders is nothing but a pipe dream from a disillusioned segment of the population. If he somehow gets the nomination, it does nothing but guarantee Trump's re-election. Trump is already generating massive turnout in virtually unopposed primaries. Put Bernie on the main ticket, and you'll see record GOP turnout in the general.

Forget about Bernie. It's pie in the sky, never gonna happen wishful thinking.
I remember when I used to say the same thing about Trump! Funny to see that some folks are still certain they can predict political things without any data.
  #18  
Old 02-17-2020, 12:59 PM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 20,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I remember when I used to say the same thing about Trump! Funny to see that some folks are still certain they can predict political things without any data.
Do you believe that Democrats will line up behind the Sanders Administration in the same way that Republicans have lined up behind the Trump Administration?

What in the recent past of Dem/progressive/liberal party politics would lead you to think that there would be an impenetrable blue wall protecting Sanders Administration policies?


ETA: got ahead of myself.

Do you believe that Democrats will line up behind the Sanders Nomination in the same way that Republicans have lined up behind the Trump Nomination?
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 02-17-2020 at 01:01 PM.
  #19  
Old 02-17-2020, 01:01 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickS[QUOTE=QuickSilver View Post
Do you believe that Democrats will line up behind the Sanders Administration in the same way that Republicans have lined up behind the Trump Administration?

What in the recent past of Dem/progressive/liberal party politics would lead you to think that there would be an impenetrable blue wall protecting Sanders Administration policies?


ETA: got ahead of myself.

Do you believe that Democrats will line up behind the Sanders Nomination in the same way that Republicans have lined up behind the Trump Nomination?
I don't know. But also, Sanders won't do anything close to the evil, incompetent, harmful, and dishonorable stuff that Trump has done, so it would be different in any case.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 02-17-2020 at 01:03 PM.
  #20  
Old 02-17-2020, 01:02 PM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 20,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Huh? I have expressed no prediction for any of these things.
See above.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #21  
Old 02-17-2020, 01:08 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 28,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I don't know. But also, Sanders won't do anything close to the evil, incompetent, harmful, and dishonorable stuff that Trump has done, so it would be different in any case.
<sigh>

And so you fail to realize that your opponents see your actions in an even worse light than you see theirs? Because they do.

You could arrange for everyone to get free food and a new car every month, and it would just be the nanny state trying to take over people's lives. You could grant them immortality and you'd be a villain who gave them infinite suffering, denying them the chance to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

You should be preparing for resistance, not waiting for acceptance.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 02-17-2020 at 01:09 PM.
  #22  
Old 02-17-2020, 01:20 PM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 20,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I don't know. But also, Sanders won't do anything close to the evil, incompetent, harmful, and dishonorable stuff that Trump has done, so it would be different in any case.
I think it goes without saying that replacing Trump is non-negotiable and anybody on the Dem side would be immeasurably superior.

That said, we are still going to be left with a McConnell lead GOP Senate majority for the two years following the election. I won't even try making the argument that a moderate Democratic president will have better luck dealing with Mitch than a progressive. It will be turtles all the way down. However, who do you believe will have better luck convincing purple states to turn blue to get more Dem butts on Senate seats?

I ask in the effort of wanting to take the Sanders Administration seriously in terms of actual achievements in progressive policies enacted as laws.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 02-17-2020 at 01:20 PM.
  #23  
Old 02-17-2020, 01:35 PM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakminster View Post
Sanders is nothing but a pipe dream from a disillusioned segment of the population. If he somehow gets the nomination, it does nothing but guarantee Trump's re-election. Trump is already generating massive turnout in virtually unopposed primaries. Put Bernie on the main ticket, and you'll see record GOP turnout in the general.

Forget about Bernie. It's pie in the sky, never gonna happen wishful thinking.
I'm glad you speak for 140 million voters.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #24  
Old 02-17-2020, 01:38 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
<sigh>

And so you fail to realize that your opponents see your actions in an even worse light than you see theirs? Because they do.

You could arrange for everyone to get free food and a new car every month, and it would just be the nanny state trying to take over people's lives. You could grant them immortality and you'd be a villain who gave them infinite suffering, denying them the chance to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

You should be preparing for resistance, not waiting for acceptance.
No idea what this is replying to. I hope the Dems will win -- I have no particular optimism about any accomplishments (aside from, hopefully, beating Trump), by Sanders or anyone else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
I think it goes without saying that replacing Trump is non-negotiable and anybody on the Dem side would be immeasurably superior.

That said, we are still going to be left with a McConnell lead GOP Senate majority for the two years following the election. I won't even try making the argument that a moderate Democratic president will have better luck dealing with Mitch than a progressive. It will be turtles all the way down. However, who do you believe will have better luck convincing purple states to turn blue to get more Dem butts on Senate seats?

I ask in the effort of wanting to take the Sanders Administration seriously in terms of actual achievements in progressive policies enacted as laws.
I believe Sanders has the best chance of getting elected, and the best chance of inspiring voters to support down-ticket candidates (thus, the best chance of a Dem Senate). But there's pretty much no data on this, so this is just based on feelings right now. I'm not going to argue against those that feel another candidate has a better electability (or Senate) case, since we just can't know with any confidence who is better or worse in this way.

Once elected, I have no particular confidence that Sanders would be any more effective than Obama, though hopefully he's learned from Obama's experiences that there's no point to trying to reach across the aisle. I'm not sure what I've written that makes anyone think I have some special high hopes about the accomplishments of a Sanders administration. My support for him is partially based on policies, but mostly based on my perception of electability.
  #25  
Old 02-17-2020, 08:10 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 16,800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
When gore lost in 2000, Kerry lost in 2004 and Clinton lost in 2016 why weren't these events considered repudiation for centrist democrats?
Only from a far left perspective are any of those candidates considered centrists. They tick off every single liberal box. In what way are they centrists? That they don't publicly advocate for full on socialism?

It would be like a member of the John Birch society in 1964 thinking that Goldwater was too "centrist" and after his loss having the takeaway that someone more conservative was needed the next time.

Further all of those candidates came very, very close to winning. It would be like an NFL team that lost the Super Bowl on a last second field goal and the next year replacing all of the players and focusing in different areas because last year's team was a loser.
  #26  
Old 02-17-2020, 08:14 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 28,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
No idea what this is replying to. I hope the Dems will win -- I have no particular optimism about any accomplishments (aside from, hopefully, beating Trump), by Sanders or anyone else.
Aye; I'm sure it was a spectacularly difficult mystery to figure out, since I didn't quote you directly. Oh wait…

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 02-17-2020 at 08:15 PM.
  #27  
Old 02-17-2020, 08:24 PM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
Only from a far left perspective are any of those candidates considered centrists. They tick off every single liberal box. In what way are they centrists? That they don't publicly advocate for full on socialism?

It would be like a member of the John Birch society in 1964 thinking that Goldwater was too "centrist" and after his loss having the takeaway that someone more conservative was needed the next time.

Further all of those candidates came very, very close to winning. It would be like an NFL team that lost the Super Bowl on a last second field goal and the next year replacing all of the players and focusing in different areas because last year's team was a loser.
All 3 faced primaries from the left in their campaigns.

Gore had Bradley, Kerry had Dean, Edwards and Kucinich, Clinton had Sanders.

Sanders is center left. The far left are unapologetic communists. We don't have a far left in the US, the US political spectrum runs from the center left to the far right.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 02-17-2020 at 08:27 PM.
  #28  
Old 02-18-2020, 04:35 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
Aye; I'm sure it was a spectacularly difficult mystery to figure out, since I didn't quote you directly. Oh wait…
You said I was "waiting for acceptance..." and "failing to realize" various things that I've never asserted the opposite. What that I posted do you disagree with? Do you disagree that Sanders wouldn't do the terrible things Trump has done?
  #29  
Old 02-18-2020, 09:40 AM
2ManyTacos is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,001
Quote:
Originally Posted by ITR champion View Post
I'm not really seeing that. Yang is, when all is said and done, a businessman and a capitalist who got rich in business. Not Bloomberg-level rich, to be sure, but he made a few million. Also, while Yang may have had a devoted following on the internet, it obviously didn't translate to significant numbers of votes.

Perhaps if he's convinced Yang is a good-guy capitalist, Bernie would offer him some business-related post such a Secretary of Commerce or Treasury. Buttigieg might be a possibility for those as well.
To the extent that Sanders has his Bernie Bros and his less militant cohort of devoted supporters, Yang basically inspires a smaller version of that with the Yang Gang. Put both of them on the ticket together and it will basically cement the part of the electorate that is broadly disaffected and that would not otherwise vote. If turnout is to be the magic sauce to beating Trump, then any ticket with Yang on it will supercharge that turnout.
  #30  
Old 02-18-2020, 11:02 AM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 28,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
You said I was "waiting for acceptance..." and "failing to realize" various things that I've never asserted the opposite. What that I posted do you disagree with? Do you disagree that Sanders wouldn't do the terrible things Trump has done?
Your assertion (and now question) was both myopic and unilateral so, no, I don't agree. Because to Trumpists, YES, Bernie will do terrible things. So to a large percentage of the American public, he will now be The Worst Thing That Ever Happened To America.

Do you really think that the Trumpists are just going to shrug and say "well, elections have consequences" and then sit on their hands for 4 years? These are people and groups that have threatened to kill law enforcement and other citizens for years, some for decades. Do you think what happened in the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge wouldn't be repeated? Do you think there would be no resistance?

Again: you are waiting for acceptance when you should be preparing for resistance, IMO.

Last edited by Snowboarder Bo; 02-18-2020 at 11:02 AM.
  #31  
Old 02-18-2020, 11:03 AM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,170
I'm hoping that a President Sanders would overturn Cheetoh's worst executive orders, and then ask the Democratic congress to lower the age of Medicare eligibility by one year and introduce vitally needed electoral reforms (bigger congress, multi-member districts, etc). And then keep on asking them to lower Medicare by another year in every State of the Union address he delivers.

But anyone blue will do. We'll keep pulling the country and the party towards progress, either slowly or even more slowly.
  #32  
Old 02-18-2020, 11:16 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2ManyTacos View Post
To the extent that Sanders has his Bernie Bros and his less militant cohort of devoted supporters, Yang basically inspires a smaller version of that with the Yang Gang. Put both of them on the ticket together and it will basically cement the part of the electorate that is broadly disaffected and that would not otherwise vote. If turnout is to be the magic sauce to beating Trump, then any ticket with Yang on it will supercharge that turnout.
The guy who peaked at 5% polling and got <3% in NH is going to supercharge turnout. Sure.
  #33  
Old 02-18-2020, 11:19 AM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakminster View Post
Sanders is nothing but a pipe dream from a disillusioned segment of the population. If he somehow gets the nomination, it does nothing but guarantee Trump's re-election. Trump is already generating massive turnout in virtually unopposed primaries. Put Bernie on the main ticket, and you'll see record GOP turnout in the general.

Forget about Bernie. It's pie in the sky, never gonna happen wishful thinking.
But Trump was just a pipe dream from a disillusioned segment of the population. When he got the nomination everyone thought that a Hillary victory was guaranteed. Trump’s supporters were told “Forget about it. It’s pie in the sky, never gonna happen wishful thinking”.

Do you see where I’m going with this?
  #34  
Old 02-18-2020, 11:37 AM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 20,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreconstructed Man View Post
But Trump was just a pipe dream from a disillusioned segment of the population. When he got the nomination everyone thought that a Hillary victory was guaranteed. Trump’s supporters were told “Forget about it. It’s pie in the sky, never gonna happen wishful thinking”.

Do you see where I’m going with this?
Yes. There's a very real danger that we're going to get another 4 years of Trump and the general fear and ignorance of democratic socialism is going to be the contributing factor.

We KNOW that there are ~63M Trump supporters and that he has a 95% approval rating among Republicans.

We DON'T KNOW the actual numbers of Sanders supporters (as a nominee, or as candidate). So wishful thinking that Bernie will be able to pull off the kind of upset that Trump pulled off is just that - wishful thinking.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #35  
Old 02-18-2020, 11:45 AM
Wesley Clark's Avatar
Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 23,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Yes. There's a very real danger that we're going to get another 4 years of Trump and the general fear and ignorance of democratic socialism is going to be the contributing factor.

We KNOW that there are ~63M Trump supporters and that he has a 95% approval rating among Republicans.

We DON'T KNOW the actual numbers of Sanders supporters (as a nominee, or as candidate). So wishful thinking that Bernie will be able to pull off the kind of upset that Trump pulled off is just that - wishful thinking.
Its a gamble

You appoint Sanders and you run the risk of demoralizing centrists and crossover republicans

You appoint a moderate and you run the risk of demoralizing liberals, labor unions and the youth vote.

There is no win win. No candidate that excites liberals, labor and the youth who also appeals to centrists and crossover republicans.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #36  
Old 02-18-2020, 11:49 AM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Yes. There's a very real danger that we're going to get another 4 years of Trump and the general fear and ignorance of democratic socialism is going to be the contributing factor.

We KNOW that there are ~63M Trump supporters and that he has a 95% approval rating among Republicans.

We DON'T KNOW the actual numbers of Sanders supporters (as a nominee, or as candidate). So wishful thinking that Bernie will be able to pull off the kind of upset that Trump pulled off is just that - wishful thinking.
Cite that dt has retained his 2016 voters.

Cite on the rebupki party numbers, %s and actual numbers of people counted over time. (I don't believe Rs are thriving or increasing)

"Wishful thinking" has a very stong emotional component. You are confident though. Any cites?
  #37  
Old 02-18-2020, 12:08 PM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 20,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
Cite that dt has retained his 2016 voters.

Cite on the rebupki party numbers, %s and actual numbers of people counted over time. (I don't believe Rs are thriving or increasing)

"Wishful thinking" has a very stong emotional component. You are confident though. Any cites?
I think that's slightly backwards. The number of Trump voters is a matter of voting record. It's the best number we have as far as estimating his level of support. Any slippage is down to polling. Which remains an unreliable measure.

I'm confident of the only hard number we have (~63M Trump voters).

That's what we have to beat. And 3M more won't do it if they don't give us the electoral college majority.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #38  
Old 02-18-2020, 12:20 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
I think that's slightly backwards. The number of Trump voters is a matter of voting record. It's the best number we have as far as estimating his level of support. Any slippage is down to polling. Which remains an unreliable measure.

I'm confident of the only hard number we have (~63M Trump voters).

That's what we have to beat. And 3M more won't do it if they don't give us the electoral college majority.
I can't call those 63 million voters trumpers. Some were Obama voters, and some voted for bernie too. Some have become never or non trumpers or left the republcan party. (Which is why I asked for those numbers. The number of 95% really needs a deeper dive). The elections are binary choices under specific kinds of conditions. You never step into the same river twice. And right now we are in one of the rivers on the moon and not earth.
  #39  
Old 02-18-2020, 12:21 PM
muldoonthief's Avatar
muldoonthief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 11,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by ITR champion View Post
Speaking of Massachusetts, if Warren became Vice President then her Senate seat would also be open. In Massachusetts there is no replacement appointed. The seat remains open until a special election, which must be 145-160 days later. So a Sanders-Warren ticket winning could actually cost Democrats two Senate seats in the opening months of the administration.
This is incorrect. When the MA legislature originally changed the law, when Kerry was running for President and Romney was the Republican governor, they completely stripped the governor's power to appoint even a temporary Senator, and the seat would remain vacant until the special election. Of course, Kerry didn't win.

In 2009, when Ted Kennedy was very ill, MA had Democratic governor Deval Patrick, so the legislature changed the law again so that the governor could appoint an interim replacement until the special election. When Kennedy died, the governor appointed Democrat Paul Kirk to the seat, who held it until Republican Scott Brown won the election.

A seat became vacant again in 2013, when Kerry became SoS. Patrick appointed Mo Cowan, who held the seat until Ed Markey won the special election. All involved were Democrats, so there was no controversy.

But interestingly, MA currently has a Republican governor again, Charlie Baker. So if Warren is elected to Pres or VP, Baker will be able to appoint a Senator to hold the seat for 4-5 months. It will be interesting to see if Warren does get nominated if the legislature changes the law again.
  #40  
Old 02-18-2020, 12:27 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
Your assertion (and now question) was both myopic and unilateral so, no, I don't agree. Because to Trumpists, YES, Bernie will do terrible things. So to a large percentage of the American public, he will now be The Worst Thing That Ever Happened To America.
This is extremely confusing. Do YOU think Bernie will do these terrible things? I don't. I recognize plenty of Americans will think Bernie is going to do terrible things. There's no conflict here -- I'm speaking about my own beliefs, not about everyone's. Yes, plenty of Americans will think Bernie is the worst person ever. I've never stated otherwise.

Quote:
Do you really think that the Trumpists are just going to shrug and say "well, elections have consequences" and then sit on their hands for 4 years? These are people and groups that have threatened to kill law enforcement and other citizens for years, some for decades. Do you think what happened in the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge wouldn't be repeated? Do you think there would be no resistance?
I certainly don't think these things, and I'm at a loss as to what I've written that makes you think I do. I think all of these types of things are likely to happen again and again.

Quote:
Again: you are waiting for acceptance when you should be preparing for resistance, IMO.
I can't tell what I've written that makes you think any of this. I'm expecting massive resistance, including cheating, if Bernie gets the nomination and/or wins the GE (and I'd also expect all this for any other Democrat getting the nomination and/or the GE).

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 02-18-2020 at 12:28 PM.
  #41  
Old 02-18-2020, 12:31 PM
Oakminster is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Surefall Glade, Antonica
Posts: 19,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
I'm glad you speak for 140 million voters.
Not just me. CNN's "Reality Check" segment today suggests that Trump is intentionally building up Bernie's campaign because Trump wants to run against Bernie. He'll paint Bernie as an extreme socialist, and he'll coast to victory. Remember, in Trump's world, truth is irrelevant. Image is everything. And Trump has the money to make that image stick.
__________________
"Yes, but that's because you're a wild human, not a tame human. The likes of you would have to be kept in a zoo, and the keepers would be very careful to never put their tentacles inside the bars"--Lemur866 describing Oak, 11/13/09
Molon labe--Leonidas I
  #42  
Old 02-18-2020, 12:32 PM
SmartAleq's Avatar
SmartAleq is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: PDXLNT
Posts: 5,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
I think it goes without saying that replacing Trump is non-negotiable and anybody on the Dem side would be immeasurably superior.

That said, we are still going to be left with a McConnell lead GOP Senate majority for the two years following the election. I won't even try making the argument that a moderate Democratic president will have better luck dealing with Mitch than a progressive. It will be turtles all the way down. However, who do you believe will have better luck convincing purple states to turn blue to get more Dem butts on Senate seats?

I ask in the effort of wanting to take the Sanders Administration seriously in terms of actual achievements in progressive policies enacted as laws.
GOP retaining control of the Senate is by no means a foregone conclusion--23 GOP seats are up for election this year and at least 7 of those are considered to be tossups or lean R seats so if the progressives are doing their job and working with the Bernie momentum it's possible to flip enough seats to win a majority. Only 12 Dem seats are up for reelection and most are safe as houses. IF America is sick of what Trump's been doing then it's not inconceivable that enough Dem momentum could result in a sweep. Weirder things have happened.

As for Bernie's VP pick, he's already said it's going to be a woman and probably a WOC--most likely bets will be Nina Turner or Tulsi Gabbard, and Tulsi has already stated she's not running for her House seat again so there's no D loss if he taps her for VP. She has the foreign policy and military experience Bernie lacks, she's young and tough and would make an excellent VP to groom to take the top spot. Nina would be a good fit too, she's a firebrand and was offered the VP spot last election on the Green ticket but turned it down to continue working with Bernie. She's young and a scrapper as well, either one would be excellent VP material.
  #43  
Old 02-18-2020, 12:34 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,419
I sure hope he wouldn't pick Tulsi -- picking one of the only Dems not to vote for impeachment (not to mention the only one who regularly goes on white nationalist TV (aka Tucker Carlson)) would be an awfully weird signal against this oh-so-corrupt and oh-so-hateful President. It's awfully early to have any ideas about this, but I'd guess Stacey Abrams.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 02-18-2020 at 12:35 PM.
  #44  
Old 02-18-2020, 01:13 PM
Inigo Montoya's Avatar
Inigo Montoya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 16,599
The only thing to take seriously about the upcoming election is that Trump will win it and half the country will be gobsmacked because it's far too easy to sneak up on them. It doesn't matter who gets the Dem nomination, Trump will get his second term and America will be one step closer to Great Again. Eventually. But only after a lot of good people do a lot of losing. Vote Dem if you want to (I will, but with no hope in my heart), but for heaven's sake just don't bet that way.
  #45  
Old 02-18-2020, 01:42 PM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 20,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by drad dog View Post
I can't call those 63 million voters trumpers. Some were Obama voters, and some voted for bernie too. Some have become never or non trumpers or left the republcan party. (Which is why I asked for those numbers. The number of 95% really needs a deeper dive). The elections are binary choices under specific kinds of conditions. You never step into the same river twice. And right now we are in one of the rivers on the moon and not earth.
I think we agree for the most part. I'm just less optimistic than you about the fact that Trump is bleeding as much support as some want to believe. I'd rather underestimate the losses to his base and be wrong than overestimate and be wrong.

Looking at GOP support polls, the numbers are closer to 90% than the 95% I stated earlier. They do vary though. It strikes me as a realistic expectation that undecided voters galvanize at election time for their traditional positions. Better the devil you know, especially if you're afraid of the Democratic Socialist candidate (per OP).
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #46  
Old 02-18-2020, 02:56 PM
QuickSilver's Avatar
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 20,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inigo Montoya View Post
The only thing to take seriously about the upcoming election is that Trump will win it and half the country will be gobsmacked because it's far too easy to sneak up on them. It doesn't matter who gets the Dem nomination, Trump will get his second term and America will be one step closer to Great Again. Eventually. But only after a lot of good people do a lot of losing. Vote Dem if you want to (I will, but with no hope in my heart), but for heaven's sake just don't bet that way.
We're properly fucked, aren't we.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #47  
Old 02-18-2020, 03:06 PM
Inigo Montoya's Avatar
Inigo Montoya is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the level, if inclined
Posts: 16,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
We're properly fucked, aren't we.
Right roundly rogered, in point of actual fact. But it only hurts if you tense up.
  #48  
Old 02-18-2020, 03:37 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
I think we agree for the most part. I'm just less optimistic than you about the fact that Trump is bleeding as much support as some want to believe. I'd rather underestimate the losses to his base and be wrong than overestimate and be wrong.

Looking at GOP support polls, the numbers are closer to 90% than the 95% I stated earlier. They do vary though. It strikes me as a realistic expectation that undecided voters galvanize at election time for their traditional positions. Better the devil you know, especially if you're afraid of the Democratic Socialist candidate (per OP).
That 90% figure. It just makes me think "90% of what? ...and when?" Statistics can be another form of lie.
  #49  
Old 02-18-2020, 03:42 PM
drad dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 6,908
NM

Last edited by drad dog; 02-18-2020 at 03:42 PM. Reason: dupe
  #50  
Old 02-18-2020, 07:47 PM
Hari Seldon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Trantor
Posts: 13,687
Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that when Bernie was mayor of Burlington, he was able to get along fine with the business community there and when he made changes he got them to go along. And that was why he became so popular in Vermont. Yes, he talks the Democratic Socialist talk, but he knows the limits. Of course, no Republican would work with him, but no Republican will work with any Democrat. Obama was as centrist as they come and the ACA was essentially a warmed over Republican scheme, but no Republican was ever willing to give him anything. The only way to accomplish anything is to flip the senate and end the filibuster for good.
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 02:56 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