Why are the polls useless? Maybe people did not like Clinton for what you consider the wrong reasons but that does not matter to a poll or in the voting booth.
I’ll quote it again: “This voting phenomenon tells us that working-class voters are disenchanted with the status quo.”
Sanders had a crossover appeal that Clinton lacked. If you want the “most electable” candidate in the general election then you want the person who can draw in people from the other side. Sanders proved he has that ability. Biden, basically a Clinton Clone, probably won’t so much.
Wow, you really think that is it? That is why people hate on Biden? If they only realized how shallow and silly that was they’d love him for the virtuous paragon of nobility that he is?
Yes, but only Bernie has applied the label to himself. And if nominated, here’s what we will hear from every Republican, every political ad, and every mainstream media outlet for months up to the election:
And because there’s something ingrained in the American psyche (that even cuts across party lines) that knows socialism to be “bad”, Bernie will go down in flames, taking with him other Democrats and setting back the entire progressive agenda another decade.
It’s not rational and it’s not fair but we don’t live in a rational or fair world. Bernie would probably be a good president but if you’re not factoring in the obvious source of mud for the slinging machines you’re not truly understanding his chances of getting elected.
Fairly close. But what’s so wrong about Klobuchar?
Disclaimer: I know very little about most of the candidates. I just react to the obvious highlights and a few interviews I’ve seen on Youtube. (Then again, maybe this ignorance makes me a good proxy for the average American voter.)
This strikes me as no better than a guess, considering what we learned about voters at large in 2016. I was as certain that Trump was unelectable as you appear to be about Bernie.
Addendum: No one should feel good about their own predictive powers any more. If you feel good about yours, that’s fine, but that strikes me as setting yourself up to look like a fool. If you’re right, you guessed right… and anyone can make a guess. The only predictions I’ll take onboard as having any sort of useful legitimacy are those with a consistent data-driven record of accuracy (i.e. Nate Silver’s data model predictions).
My hunch is that it won’t be necessarily be Bernie’s embrace of socialism itself that takes Bernie down in a general election; rather, the Republicans will exploit his recent fame and newfound wealth to characterize him as a hypocritical socialist, who lives as a millionaire with multiple properties but advocates socialism for everyone else. Not that I or anyone I know would fall for that gambit, but there are a lot of dumb voters out there who would, unfortunately.
Beyond that, I wouldn’t put it past the Russian troll farms to engage in blatant antisemitic propaganda, and I wouldn’t put it past Falwell and people of his ilk to exploit it either. Although Bernie downplays his Jewish roots and doesn’t seem particularly religious, reality and perceived reality are two different things. I could see a lot of “Do you really want a hypocritical Jewish socialist as president?”
I reiterate the first sentence of the segment of my post you quoted. Republicans accusing Democrats of being socialist isn’t remotely new. Democrats (and Sanders) labelling themselves with the word is. And nobody who doesn’t already know the difference is going to be swayed by an explanation of the social democrat/democratic socialist/socialist distinction.
And of course this is a guess, iiandyiiii. The difference between this and the previous Trump predictions, however, is that Trump’s numbers didn’t factor in the level of irrational antipathy in the voting public nor the sheer amount of combined right-wing and foreign shitstirring designed to play to that irrational antipathy, whereas my guess is attempting to factor those very things in.
It’s fine that you think this, but you’ll forgive me if I see it as no more useful or predictive than flipping a coin. We won’t know how voters feel about “socialism” as Bernie uses it, in a voting context, unless and until votes are counted in a Bernie vs someone general election. For every American that would otherwise vote Dem but absolutely hates the concept of socialism, there could well be an American who won’t vote at all unless it’s for Bernie. We just don’t know.
The thing with Sanders labeling himself as a socialist is that it’s therefore baked in. Sure, he didn’t face the Kremlin smear machine, but he did face a constant mantra of SOCIALISM SOCIALISM SOCIALISM, because he was chanting it himself. And even with SOCIALISM SOCIALISM SOCIALISM, people still said they favored him pretty strongly over Trump.
You can’t attack someone by publicizing their own messaging. If the Kremlin attacks on Sanders come (and if he’s the nominee, they will come), they won’t be just SOCIALISM SOCIALISM SOCIALISM, because that won’t work against him.
“Socialist” isn’t the quite the dirty word it was a decade or so ago, or even four years ago, especially with younger voters. True taken as an item, a label, in isolation, it is something that most voters (76%) say they could not vote for. But in a context in which Trump has embraced Putin and Russia and who represents an extreme of unfettered unchecked capitalism, against a Democratic candidate who self-describes as a democratic socialist evoking not Iron Curtain Socialism but (accurately or not) more the Nordic social democracy vibe? Not sure that past or even current polling is likely to be so predictive.
I’m not a Sanders fan but there is an argument to be made that “change” is often the best sales approach in a presidential election in particular with working class swingable voters and those who are at risk of sitting on their asses. Obama won on “change” and Trump did as well.
In a Sanders-Trump battle “SOCIALIST!” will get plenty of chances to be put into contrast against “business as usual unrestrained capitalism” taking from working people still barely making ends meet as the very richest get even richer and more powerful. The Sanders focus will be “yes, I am against the worsening wealth inequality.” It might even play well with swingable voters.
There are, IMHO, lots of reasons to prefer someone else other than Sanders, but running scared from Trump and co. yelling SOCIALIST! is not, in my mind, one of them.
I don’t have a prediction, I would never put one forth after the last election. But I have a feeling. My feeling is that Sanders can’t beat Trump. Yeah, Sanders has a following, the idealists that listen to progressive radio shows and podcasts and such. And I know these people are true in their noble beliefs. But do they fall in line if it isn’t Sanders? I hope that whoever gets the Dem nod can beat Trump, but I ain’t feeling it for Mr. Sanders, even though I agree with a lot of what he says. For the record, I will vote for whichever candidate the Democrats slate.
The following is one data point. ONE. But if others know of the same experience, then your fears are well-founded.
My nephew was a Bernie-Bro. Bought the t-shirt; I think even went to a rally. He was Bernie-this and Bernie-that for months.
In the general election, he voted for Trump. Why? I don’t know. To shake things up? To voice his displeasure for how the DNC tipped the scales for Clinton? My nephew’s biggest goal in 2016 was where he could score his next bag of weed. Maybe he thought Bernie would give him free weed. But when Bernie didn’t get the nomination, there was no consideration whatsoever to “fall in line” and vote for the Dem candidate.
I haven’t talked to him this election cycle. Maybe I’ll see what his thoughts are. Maybe he has matured. At least now he has a job.
I’m not sure of Doper’s general support for Sanders over the others, but it might make for an interesting poll. Sanders supporters: will you vote for the Democrat if it isn’t Sanders?
Pretty much every analysis out there suggests that Sanders would have beaten Trump in the general election in 2016. Trump also refused to debate Sanders (if he felt confident of wrecking Sanders Trump would have leapt at the chance).
Sanders had a crossover appeal with the voters that ultimately swung it for Trump. Clinton never got those voters.
We’ll never know for sure but a best guess suggests your gut is wrong on this one.
Again, for the Nth time, that was because Sanders wasn’t hit by a smear campaign. In fact, somewhat the opposite, the kremlin & GOP supported him over Hillary.
And that’s gonna come out- why did the Russian trolls support Bernie over Hillary? Because Putin was scared of Hillary? Or was it “Because Sanders is a Commie!”
It is worth noting that since about 2010, independents have been the largest political group. The Republicans have been the political minority since the 1930s, but Democrats began a long decline starting in the 1970s when they became associated with liberalism. Independents are basically the Republicans who could no longer stand being called Republicans but they are still more likely to be white and moderately conservative, though occasionally being open minded about some progressive ideas like healthcare and immigration reform and ideals like tolerance of gays and minorities.
It is very likely that independents will be open to some modest liberalization. They might be inclined to support an increase a modest increase in the minimum wage. They probably agree that the rich should pay more in taxes. They probably support a handful of proposals to make higher ed and job training more affordable. But when you ask the middle class taxpayer to open up their wallets for things like medicare for all and free college, good luck with that.
Socialist might be losing a bit of its stigma but wait until the election when memes and propaganda referencing every far left atrocity and economic failure are linked with what socialism means historically. That being nationalized means of production and a corrupt and hypocritical ruling class.
