<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.
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’m glad you speak for 140 million voters.
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.
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.
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.
Aye; I’m sure it was a spectacularly difficult mystery to figure out, since I didn’t quote you directly. Oh wait… :rolleyes:
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
The guy who peaked at 5% polling and got <3% in NH is going to supercharge turnout. Sure.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).