Thing is Sanders has alot more support than most people realize. People honestly feel his ideas will make a real difference while Hillary will just be same old, same old.
Heck I’m a republican and even I would vote for Sanders.
If Sanders loses to Clinton I have no doubt that he will endorse her. Therefore?
If they predicted that Clinton would be ahead every week, they aren’t looking very smart.
If they predicted that Clinton would be ahead the great majority of the weeks, and win in the end, there’s nothing yet to think they weren’t smart.
Other than incumbents, has there every been, since scientific polling began in the 1930’s, a primary season where the same candidate was continuously ahead? I doubt it. But it’s nonetheless normal for the convention delegate vote winner to win in a landslide.
As for Bernie being electable, I think he matches up pretty well against Trump. But Trump isn’t getting the nomination, and Bernie has two big problems against any other Republican.
One is the socialist thing. I know he’s a social democrat, not someone who wants the government to destroy the private sector. But that one word socialist would be effectively used to paint him as an extremist. With the Democrat a self-proclaimed socialist, I can’t see convincing swing voters that Cruz, let alone Rubio, is the sole nominated extremist.
A third electability problem may be that he seems to be an agnostic, and is definitely a Jew. Someone may say that Obama won despite losing the votes of racists, and that some would vote against Clinton due to her gender. True. But others voted for Obama because of race, and some would vote for Clinton because of gender. No one is going to vote for Sanders because he is a Jew – not even, because of the agnostic thing, Orthodox Jews.
This makes a lot of political sense to me. I’d agree with the whole if we could take out the “really, really.”
Trump is moving the Overton window in the direction of nativist bigotry. If Sanders can counteract that a bit, his campaign has value. Bernie can take satisfaction in this:
Wait, people are seriously afraid that Sanders won’t fight hard enough against the Republicans? He’s never stopped fighting! The only way he can change is by getting more exposure on his attacks against them, and he’s gaining that continuously.
CBS confirms what ARG found(somewhat), showing Clinton up only 48-41
The sudden drop in Clinton’s support is real, and it’s both national and in IA and NH.
That assumes for instance, that the Democrats won’t win back the Senate in 2016 or 2018.
Contrary to the schizophrenic delusions of the Beltway literati, Americans are within the mainstream with the Democratic Party on basic issues such as health care, Social Security, the minimum wage, and taxation of the wealthy. And it is this new populist majority who will keep the pressure up on Clinton and ensure she stay progressive, in addition to the fact that Hillary Clinton herself is to the left of her husband.
Hillary Clinton is teed up for another humiliating primary defeat. I cringed watching her cackle while wearing the dictator style costume at the first Dem debate. I cringed listening to Hillary get snappy during the Terry Gross interview during the pre-campaign book tour when inquired about her politically convenient recently changed position on LGBT rights. The Clintons’ arm twisting attempt to gain coronation in 2008 pissed off a lot of people within the Democratic Party. The 2016 coronation is under threat, and in my view, another Clinton primary defeat is likely. Clintons’ phony, out of touch, stale style of politics is shameful. I could turn out to be wrong and eat crow, but I predict a Clinton defeat in the primary. She will, once again, hang on 'til the bitter end and overstay her welcome in the race just like in 2008. Even an unabashed nanny government liberal like Senator Sanders could defeat Clinton.
On the GOP side, the most well funded candidate, Jeb Bush, is also teed up for humiliating defeat. It’s not going out on a limb to predict his primary defeat given the poll numbers. The Bush campaign will likely fizzle soon after Super Tuesday.
As for age, Sanders might be 75 but Hillary is 68 so only a 7 year gap.
I cringe whenever I hear someone attack a candidate based on what they wore. :rolleyes:
Is the media turning against Hillary or were they ever really on her side? The only story about her on the front page of Huffington Post is titled, “Hillary Clinton’s Shadowy History With Shadow Banking” and it is obviously not favorable to her. The only story about a Democratic candidate on MSNBC is that Bernie Sanders has been endorsed by The Nation. Aren’t those outlets supposed to be her allies?
Because it’s a woman we are talking about, physical appearance, her laugh, the way she dresses-it’s all on the table.
The media wants a horserace – they were never on Hillary’s side. “Hillary might lose” is a much more interesting story than “Hillary coasts to victory”.
I’m afraid that he won’t fight dirty when the Republicans fight dirty. If you think Clinton is bad now, wait until Trump or Cruz or Rubio attacks Sanders. I can see the commercials now, peppered with images of Stalin and Communist Russia interspliced with the word Socialist. How voters will deal with 3 months of continuous ads like that is a mystery. Will Sanders fight back by trying to take the high road and explaining what the difference is between a Socialist and Socialist Democrat is? Or will he dig up shit on those guys and run ads about how Cruz isn’t an American, Trump is a racist, and Rubio only dislikes Castro because his parents had plantations in Cuba under Bautista and they lost their drug money? As much as I hate negative ads, they unfortunately work. Kerry was swiftboated out of the presidency partly because he didn’t respond quick enough and forceful enough. I have no doubt that Clinton will find anything she can to swiftboat the GOP nominee. Will Sanders do the same? I don’t know, but I do know its pretty crazy to not run negative ads in a general election.
Thinking her laugh is some kind of cackle is sexist. Attacking her clothes is also sexist. She may not have Morgan Freeman’s voice, but there is nothing wrong with what she sounds like or wears. She sounds and dresses like a perfectly proper 60 something year old woman
It’s funny how many people on both sides will vote Bernie or Trump, but not Hillary.
To an extent, but consider Trump hair piece jokes. Carson is falling asleep. Cruz looks like a creep or a serial killer. Jindal as a child in his father’s suit. Bush was a monkey in a flight suit. Doesn’t count?
Perhaps it’s also informative.
Yeah, as I’ve gotten older, I’ve become increasingly disillusioned with the long game. I still think it’s really important, but short-term immediate needs are gonna take priority. I’ll vote for Clinton in a New York minute over anyone the Republicans run, because despite my complete lack of faith in her integrity, despite my inability to trust she’ll stand up for poor folks against monied interests, I’m entirely convinced that she’ll do much less harm to people than any Republican nominee with a chance at winning.
But I sure hope I get to vote for Sanders instead.
Eh?
Which Democratic base are we talking about? Because I don’t think a Democratic base whose views don’t largely align with Hillary Clinton’s positions actually exists. I mean she’s basically Obama, pt 3, just a little to the left - are you saying that Obama’s viewpoint doesn’t align with the Democratic base?
This is Tea Party like talk, to be honest.
Don’t get too excited about Iowa just yet:
There’s a meme in the zeitgeist that Sanders supporters are more dedicated. But I suspect we may see that this is wrong, and it’s a classic “silent majority” situation. Bernheads are certainly younger, and the type to make a lot of noise online. But while the older crowd doesn’t do any of that, they do vote, like clockwork.
Look, for that matter, at what has happened after Democratic debates. To look at Twitter, and the unscientific online “polls”, it seems like Bernie cleaned up. But then a few days later, the scientific polls come in, and Hillary is seen by Democratic primary voters as the clear winner, every time.
It’s reminiscent of the phenomenon observed in the 1972 general election, only within the Democratic Party. Pauline Kael famously said (perhaps tongue in cheek? not clear) that she couldn’t believe McGovern got wiped out in a landslide, because no one she knew voted for Nixon. (Now, I’m a Hillary supporter, so I’m not entirely happy with having raised an analogy in which she plays the role of Tricky Dick…but, oh well.)
Yep, Sanders is just too old and too senile to ever get my vote.
Old, okay. Senile? Is that nothing more than a cheap lazy shot because you dislike him and old people are senile because it’s funny, or are you talking about something more than the broadest stereotype?