Half the voting age population wasn’t born in 1972.
Are there any people here who would have voted for Hillary that would vote for Trump or Cruz over Sanders? If the Republican nominee is Rubio then Hillary might be the only one that can beat him.
With that said, a lot of his more radical social policies are unacceptable to a general electorate…
…But we are electing a President, not a King, none of those unacceptable policies have any chance of becoming law.
On the other hand, I really like his ideas on tuition free state schools and lifting the social security cap really appeal to me and I think they have some legs.
There is nothing that I oppose that Bernie supports that I think has much of a chance of becoming law. I think there are a few things that ONLY he supports that could become law if he pushed for them.
What, he’d be great fun, what with his down-to-earthiness and his Jewish wit and all. He might talk some rarely-heard-in-America lefty politics, but he don’t talk like no tedious Marxist ideologue academic.
Once the millennials own homes and move to good school districts for their kids they’ll be just as territorial about what they have. Are the lessons of the 60s so easily forgotten?
As Sanders himself keeps telling people, Democrats win when they have turnout.
The present dominant faction in the Democratic Party doesn’t get much turnout (except when Obama is on the ballot) and doesn’t win much. Hillary would get a First Woman President bump, once, and a very credible shot at re-election. But her supporters are actually arguing that the Congress is Republican, and that there’s nothing, nothing, they can do about that. :dubious: Wait, if she’s so moderate and electable, where are her moderate and electable Democratic younger sisters to ride her coattails in? That’s odd. But she is the face of the Democratic Party for the last twenty years, and her Democratic Party is a loser.
Bernie grabs one big chunk of the Occupy kids, he has an agenda that speaks to Americans under 45.
Good gravy, let me say that again: Senator Bernie Sanders has an agenda that actually speaks to Americans under 45.
Yes, he has a shot. It will be contentious. It will not be a sure thing. There will be religious wailing about a secular Jew in the White House. There will be assassination attempts, although Obama has gotten through all that OK. There just may be a state that votes to secede before he’s inaugurated (which will be less effective than the previous time states did that, but not nothing if it happens).
And he is not quite as clever as Mrs Clinton, and he’s not “anodyne.” He will have a very hard time as President, and possibly die in the office.
But can he win the election? I think so, and I think he’d be good for the Democratic Party and for the country.
Funniest thing I’ve heard all day. Most millennials are buried in student debt, chronically under employed and have little to no chance of achieving home ownership. The 60s were an entirely different time and were followed by 80s and 90s booms where the now 40 year old baby boomers could make some bank.
Where do you think the boom time that lets the millennials get their comfortable suburban lives is going to come from?
:shrug: They’re reading Nate Silver, Nate Silver is reading the betting markets, the betting markets rate Sanders low. They all see what they want to see. Who cares about populism and the opinions of poors when professional gamblers with money to blow on election bets have opinions?
Who says this? Trump is still in the lead to win the GOP nomination, as far as I know. There’s a serious risk he could win the whole thing.
One more reason to nominate Sanders. If we’re going to blow up one party, may as well blow up both. Maybe we’ll finally get a viable non-white supremacist party out of the realignment–although if all the old white conservative Democrats get back together with their cousins who converted to the GOP back in the 1980’s, that might prove to be an even bigger conservative party than the present GOP.
He has much more of a chance considering the US has ALREADY ELECTED TWO SOCIALIST PRESIDENTS IN THE PAST 30 YEARS AMIRITE? He could be a freakin card carrying communist and it wouldn’t gain much traction anymore considering all the wolf-crying.
You’re forgetting the parents of the high school students who realize that the same thing will happen to them if things don’t change. And never mind that public universities would use it as an excuse to raise fees (some of which would end up in the pockets of the new head football and men’s basketball coaches), and if President Sanders suddenly announces, “Well, in light of certain abuses, we can’t make schools 100% tuition free, but it will still be a better deal than before, just as Obamacare promised that ‘you will be able to keep your current doctor’ but the ones that had to change ended up paying less,” the people he depended on to support him will turn against him.
Then again, I remember when the college (and 18-year-old high school) students were supposed to come out in force for John Anderson in 1980, as “a vote for Carter is a vote for double-digit inflation, and a vote for Reagan is a vote for the military draft,” and some magazines even included election night grids where you could list how many electoral votes Anderson got, but in the end, he didn’t even finish second in any state.
Even if they do, they’re not likely to grow any more socially/religiously conservative, and that undercuts a major leg of the movement-conservative coalition.
On phone, so no cites, but they’re easily found: in the Iowa caucuses, Sanders got 91% of the under-30 vote. He got the majority of the under 45 vote – hardly just “college kids”. He got some ludicrously large percentage of first time voters. Sure, it’s only one caucus, not a large sample size; but it’s the only hard data we have so far, and it clearly supports my position rather than yours.
Except that my position was not ‘Sanders won’t get any youth vote.’ I said nothing like that.
My admittedly clunky term “usually-don’t-vote people” refers not to “college kids” but to all those who normally sit out elections (which might include some college-age people but is scarcely limited to them).
No, you implied that Sanders will get ONLY the youth vote, which isn’t true unless you define “youth” as “under 45”. I looked it up and he got 62% of first-time caucusers; given that many of his voters were clearly old enough to have voted before, wouldn’t you say that is evidence he is drawing support from people who previously haven’t voted?
PS I was mistaken above; he got “only” 84% of the under 30 vote in Iowa.
Bernie’s base is, roughly, the Millennial working a job without benefits under a Baby Boomer boss. There’s a generational break here. The Millennials (and Thirteeners) have a worse deal than their older managers did at their age.
Remember, about ten years ago, Boomers saying, “We’re the first generation in this country whose children will have a lower quality of life than we do”? Bernie’s base are those children. And some of them are over thirty, married, have kids, and they still feel behind.