Then, to forestall the age-worries, he definitely would need a running mate both young and ideologically similar . . . Warren’s too old for that role . . . who’s out there?
Hmm… You’re thinking of mirroring McCain’s run, aren’t you. Clever plan. Cunning even. So let’s see: Young, distractingly pretty, “will say anything to anyone” and further down the wing than the candidate. But who?
EUREKA! The winning ticket for 2017 is: Bernie Sanders / Sarah Silverman
Even the Republicans couldn’t top that ball-o-nuts! You’re all very welcome. 
This presupposes that “centrists” and “independents” are all Friedmanite “Moderate Hero” types who are ever so enlightenedly “socially liberal and fiscally conservative” and think privatizing Social Security and instituting “right to work” laws is “progress” as long as we get an Assault Weapons Ban. As Vox points out here (http://www.vox.com/2014/7/8/5878293/lets-stop-using-the-word-moderate), a lot of moderates only average out to a moderate position even if they hold very right-wing views on some issues and very left-wing ones on others. A lot of these have the chance of being more likely to be energized by an iconoclastic candidate like Bernie Sanders-look at Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996 who in many ways was not a traditional centrist (especially his protectionism) or even George Wallace in 1968. The main problem here is that Sanders is probably going to fall for the SJW-progressive trap and thus be little more than a niche candidate in that area.
Do many Democrats actually *want *Bernie to get the nomination?
I’ll say there are many who would like his views to become more dominant in the party’s leadership, but would be happier to have someone more capable of implementing them than either Sanders or Warren would be.
I would prefer his policies to Hilary, and I don’t like Hilary, but I think she is more electable than Bernie. I’m not sure how you can parse this into an answer to your question.
Most do. We just don’t all know it yet. 
I am not so sure on that. Bernie is very much the type that wants to get in and micro manage the economy. I lived in Burlington back in the day and heard him a lot on the radio, on TV and in person a few times. He has very much moderated his public speaking, but I have to believe his private thoughts are still the same. That is exactly what would leave to no toilet paper in stores, and deodorant also.
In case you not get my point do a Google on Bernie and deodorant. A little slip up on his part last week. These little things tell much.
More or less.
Ok, there’s maybe a small chance he could win against HC.
But here’s the main question- can he win Florida in the General Election? if the answer is no, then the GOP will win. And Bernie can only win of the GOP runs one of their Teaparty candidates.
It’s kinda odd- really we might as well go ahead and just have the General election for President in Florida. :o
He looks like the crazy professor and has no charisma. This is what people mean when they say he isn’t “presidential.”
This is the answer. Not because there is one letter of truth in it, but because it is possible for some people to write it and because it reflects the uninformed opinion of so many. These sentiments can easily be exploited, simply because they are so simple.
Sanders’ hypothetical path to the nomination is a lot longer than “Hillary gets incapacitated somehow and drops out”. If Hillary drops out, then the presumptive nominee at this point is O’Malley. Or possibly one of the other Democratic governors, if more of them enter the race (which they probably would, if Clinton dropped out). Only after all of the governors dropped out or declined to run would Sanders have a chance.
An elderly Jew from the Northeast? Sure, he’s already got a huge Florida constituency locked in.
I’ll buy this – I hadn’t recalled that O’Malley is already in the race.
Right because Sanders totally will have the power and ability to nationalize the large sectors of the economy. :rolleyes:
I just disagree with you. I do not believe that Bernie is of the European Socialists Democrat model, but of a more hard line type. I listened to him in his early years, prior to even being mayor. It was there.
I’m sure the good people of Venezuela did not anticipate the degree that Chavez could radically change their economy in a few short years and it is in one hell of a mess at the moment. Wealthy in oil, yet the basic necessities of life are empty on the store shelves.
Again, what specific policies are you referring to? We’re not doing your research for you; you’ve been here long enough to know how this works.
What statements exactly do you base that on? Provide links.
I don’t even know where to start with this. The U.S. is the hugest economy in the world. A loss of trillions in 2008 barely nudged the economy and was made up in two [!] years. The recovery under Obama was fantastic, and our only hope for continuing those gains is to never allow conservative policies to be enacted. Ever.
Date US Real GDP
Mar 31, 2015 16.30 trillion
Dec 31, 2014 16.29 trillion
Dec 31, 2013 15.92 trillion
Dec 31, 2012 15.43 trillion
Dec 31, 2011 15.19 trillion
Dec 31, 2010 14.94 trillion
Dec 31, 2009 14.54 trillion
Dec 31, 2008 14.58 trillion
Dec 31, 2007 14.99 trillion
Yes, of course there was individual pain. But the economy as an economy dipped by a few percentage points and nothing more. And that took the combined work of all the major financial sectors of the country, the very ones who would nominally oppose socialist policies.
Moreover, the President has little to no control over the economy in the first place. Sanders would have to get Congress to pass bills to do dozens of mysteriously horrible socialist things. Since your argument depends on Sanders being a six-sigma outlier on the socialist curve, this could never happen. And even if you assume that your socialist bugaboos get enacted into law through Sanders’ magical hypnotic powers, you haven’t mentioned one yet that would be bad in a real world economy.
You have no argument except Socialist bad! No real world President with a real world Congress in a real world economy could have this effect. It is literally fiction.
Not reliably indicative of voting unfortunately.