AOC and Sanders have similar ideologies, but I don’t find them to be similar politicians. To some extent I find Biden wants to use the system to make incremental changes, AOC wants to use it to make big changes, and Sanders wants to burn the system down and rebuild it.
I’d say this is an outdated take on AOC. She’s become much more of a mainline, traditional negotiator over the last couple of years, to the disgust of the DSA. Plenty of articles out there about it.
I think that is the point though. AOC will work with the system to get what she can as it brings things closer to her ideology. Bernie/DSA will not compromise in the same way.
Not sure about the DSA but Sanders certainly compromises:
My point is, I don’t think she’s trying to create big changes any more. She has embraced incrementalism, at least in practice.
His campaigning for Hillary came late and was lukewarm. Probably deserves a bit of blame for the Trump win.
To some extent.
538 said that three things caused the Clinton loss-
- The Comey memo
- Poor election strategy
- endless attacks- both from the right, and from Sanders supporters.
Sanders could have called off his pitbull anytime, and he should have conceded and endorsed her as soon as it was mathematically impossible for him to win. But- he waited longer than that and he never called off his pitbull.s
So yes, Sanders is partially to blame for trump.
Bernie at least takes a stand on things. Alaska had Frank Murkowski (R) in the House for 20+ years and we never heard a peep from him until he retired, returned to Alaska and became the second most-hated governor in the country other than some guy who was indicted. He was so bad that they replaced him with Sarah Palin. 
At least his daughter has some principles.
Who were Sanders’ pitbulls and how much control did he have over whoever they were? Do you have examples of he encouraging them?
BernieBros, and where did I say “encouraging them”?
If he never “called off his pitbulls” (BernieBros) that implies a level of control over that group. They’d do what he told them to do.
I’d say “never called off his pitbulls” implies encouragement. Wink-wink, nudge-nudge.
This assumes he had such control which I think he never had.
You made the inference, I did not so imply.
And- he never even tried. So we will never know if he could, will we?
Once he conceded he wholeheartedly threw himself behind Clinton and worked a great deal on her behalf (and in no uncertain terms). I’m not sure you would find other politicians who worked as hard as he did on her behalf (maybe some but not a lot). How his pitbulls would take that as a rally cry to continue their attacks is beyond me.
But he did all that way, way too late. Like they said in the Clue film- "too late!".
I think the problem with Sanders continuing his campaign even after it was clear that he was no longer going to win, was that it sent the message the campaign wasn’t just about deciding which candidate would be best able to realize a shared Democratic vision. Instead, win or lose, it was the fight itself that was the important thing. So then when Clinton had won, some of his supporters just kept fighting particuarly since it looked like Clinton would win easily so staying home or making a third party vote wouldn’t hurt.
Did this cause Trump to win? Probably, but then the margin was so narrow that a butterfly flapping its wings in Cairo could probably have changed the outcome. So I don’t really blame Sanders for Trump any more than I blame Monica Lewinski for the Iraq war.
Sanders is a gadfly, which is an important role. What policies are enactable depends on the Overton window. In order to be elected in the general, the party candidate needs to stay well within this window*. So Sanders is probably not an electable candidate. But in order for progressive progressive policies to be enacted the Overton window needs to be moved until it can cover those policies, and the window can only be moved by someone outside it. That is where you need someone like Sanders.
*Unfortunately what was revealed in 2016 with Trump is that while the current Overton window appears to have a border on the left, there is no border on the right.
I’d be curious when you think a timely capitulation would be, a too late capitulation would be, a way too late capitulation would be and a way way too late capitulation would be?
This is not a gotcha…I do not know what, “way, way too late” is to be able to discuss if it was “way, way too late.” Clearly you can bookend the “way way too late” part at when he did concede. But that gives us no context to the rest.
Would you say Trump is also a gadfly? Fits the definition.
When he is mathematically eliminated. Which I have mentioned before,
But maybe instead of asking questions, you can give your actual- you know- opinion?
When was that?
Did he have a legal case running against the DNC at the time?
Also, superdelegates. They are a thing which absolutely could tilt the results.
I can’t give an opinion on, “way, way too late” because you chose an undefinable time frame that can become whatever you want it to become.
A qualified yes. See the end note of my previous post.
Trump’s election demonstrated that the current Overton window apparently has no right side. There is no policy no matter how far right that is unacceptable to a large portion of the electorate. It can be debated as to extent to which Trump moved the window versus his simply illuminating how far it had already moved. I personally suspect more of the later.