Okay, Okay I get it. I know when we're whipped - I'll even say it twice. In 2016 I'm ready for

[Douglas Carpenter]

[VanillaRhapsody]

1. Polling at 4%?

good luck with that!

Does he even have double digit leads on all the Republicans yet?

[arcane1]

5. It's an unfortunate side-effect of not having name recognition and media attention

That's why everyone knows who Jennifer Lopez is

[Roland99]

13. And the visual lack of appeal...he looks like a crazy uncle

Hair all messed up most of the time.

Doesn't play well on TV despite how right he is

[appalachiablue]

78. Einstein's hair wasn't perfect. Crazy uncles can be right, but not if your into the same

canned, slick and useless candidates promoted by M$M. Bernie Sanders knows what he's doing, has experience, integrity and works hard for the people. Warren also knows exactly what's going on.

[Roland99]

80. I agree 100%. Getting the masses of America to accept him?

quite the uphill challenge.

[appalachiablue]

81. It's an uphill challenge since the Media is controlled by the corp. right & neoliberal conservatism

has taken this country way, way far from the progress & strength of the 40s-80s that were based on business prosperity & a safety net that is being eviscerated. Social security & old age insurance go back to the 1880s under Bismark who hated socialism but placated people with these programs. Sanders is a social democrat & unfortunately in this age of the New John Birch Jr. people don't understand how beneficial that is, regulated business & govt. services working together that we already had during the era of America's largest, strongest middle class that was the envy of the world. If people would open their minds, listen to Sanders & hear his sincere concern for the people they might see the light.

[VanillaRhapsody]

15. You keep telling yourself that....whatever gets you through the night....BUT

Democrats....want Hillary Clinton...sorry.

[Ken Burch]

18. interesting that your tagline demonstrates a fixation with being obeyed.

Just noticed that.

[Katashi_itto]

23. Look up that person's posting history. It's an eye opener.

[TheKentuckian]

30. At least this Protector of the Faith and Inquisitor can apparently vote in our elections

I like my authoritarians more local, I don't know why but it rubs a little less raw.

[VanillaRhapsody]

52. No my tag line is the dictionary definition....your problem must be with Websters!

are you an Anarchist?

[Ken Burch]

66. No...it's just that your choice of a tagline

appears to represent a basically authoritarian, anti-democratic, public-order-at-all-costs mindset. The definition you quoted could've been quoted verbatim by Nixon, Reagan or George Wallace in any of their "law and order" speeches.

The fact that you felt the need to use it as a tagline suggests you feel a deep distrust towards grassroots activists and dissenters and noncomformists in general.

In this country, anarchy(which is not the same thing as anarchism, btw) is probably the least-likely turn of events.

[VanillaRhapsody]

69. its been there for quite some time.....back when there WERE self professed Anarchists on DU...

what is there...is VERBATIM from the dictionary....do YOU have a problem with DEFINITIONS?

by the way....yes I actually BELIEVE in a Democratic form of Government.....not Anarchy. That is for Libertarians. Are you a Libertarian?

[Ken Burch]

70. No...but I'm not sure why you see anarchy as a real prospect.

If anything, we're actually headed for something like authoritarian market feudalism-in other words, the way life was run in the South before 1964.

BTW...Do you equate dissent and protest with "anarchy"? Did you see Occupy's tactics as "anarchy"?

[VanillaRhapsody]

71. I DON'T see it....that is the point....

its there because I OPPOSE anarchy!

I SUPPORT a Democratic form of Government...

[Ken Burch]

72. What's the point of making a show of opposing something that's never going to happen? n/t.

[VanillaRhapsody]

75. I already TOLD you why.....besides...its really none of your business...

I can put there what I want for whatever reason I want....and so can you...

Perhaps this is just one of those moments when "its not ABOUT you..."

[benz380]

37. I'll write Jennifer Lopez in before I vote for Hillary. n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

53. then you are also not a Democrat...

why would Jennifer Lopez care either?

[JDPriestly]

8. No, but he has independence, a stellar character, more experience than anyone else running

and he represents the middle class, not the 1% and the banks.

I think he has what he needs.

It's January 2015. The election is November 2016. Anything can happen.

Nixon was elected in November 1968.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon

Johnson announced that he would not run ib March 31, 1968.

http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/Johnson/archives.hom/speeches.hom/680331.asp

Republicans are going to go after Hillary like no candidate before her. Who knows what those nuts have up their sleeves, what secret information, true or false, theprefery will use to try to destroy her candidacy?

Let's keep the alternatives open.

I much prefer Warren or Sanders,

[fbc]

10. Polls at this time are meaningless

Can we at least have a debate or two?

[VanillaRhapsody]

16. You think that will bring him up from THAT?

a whole 4%

Can he beat the entire pack of Republicans too?

My grandmother used to say...."wish in one hand..."

[jeff47]

24. Obama was polling at less than that in 2006.

Why on Earth are you people running an inevitability campaign? You lost. That utterly annihilates the inevitability argument.

Not to mention you're using a campaign theme that failed badly. Learn from your mistakes before Jeb steals Florida.

[VanillaRhapsody]

51. Not less than 4%.....and Obama was an anomaly.....Just like my Grandmother said...

wish in one hand....

Not to mention....MY FAV. already beats EVERY Republican!

[jeff47]

65. So did Gore.

Seriously, do you people think time started yesterday?

You're running on a theme that lost. We have a Republican party with a history of stealing close elections. Clinton is a "only say what works well in the polls" centrist, just like Gore. Who was crushing all the Republicans this far from the 2000 election.

Do we need to put a flashing light and a klaxon next to your head for you to realize the strategy you are using brought us W?

[BlueCaliDem]

55. You can't compare Obama with Senator Sanders. Appearance wise, there's NO contest.

Senator Obama caught and held the fascination of the youth. He had charisma. I don't see Senator Sanders having those advantages in 2016.

[jeff47]

64. I can, because no one was talking about Obama this far out.

And try reading the last paragraph again.

[BlueCaliDem]

67. Wrong. People had been talking about Senator Obama since his incredible speech at the DNC in '04

which had given him a nationWIDE stage and made him a very visible politician. His name alone, especially his middle name, guaranteed him lots of coverage in pro-war U.S. media.

Again. Senator Sanders is NO Senator Obama.

Senator Sanders enjoys no advantages that Senator Obama had. He will not inspire the youth (too old), he will not inspire confidence among shaky voters (comes across a little too angry and a little too...um...passionate, translate: unstable), and he is a socialist - a word made dirty by constant propagandizing by pro-corporate U.S. Media.

Senator Sanders is LESS known that Elizabeth Warren, so this gives the Koch-backed PACs, infused with BILLIONS, the ability to define him early on in ways that will guarantee he'll lose against any Republican of their choosing.

[jeff47]

68. They were talking about him for his speech. Not as a candidate

Polls didn't even bother to include him.

Again. Senator Sanders is NO Senator Obama.

Good thing I'm not demanding Sanders be coronated then. But it's a lovely distraction from my real point.

Al Gore was crushing all potential Republicans in early 1999. He was the inevitable heir apparent. He was running a centrist campaign, where he only said and acted in poll-tested ways. It was a terrible campaign that made the race close enough to steal.

Hillary Clinton is crushing all potential Republicans in early 2015. She is the inevitable heir apparent. She is running a centrist campaign where she only says and acts in poll-tested ways.

Guess what the next sentence will be in 2016 if she doesn't change strategy. As an added bonus, FL's former governor will be the Republican candidate.

Clinton does not need to be thrown out of the primary. She needs to run the "New Hampshire 2008" version of herself, not the "everywhere else 2008" version. She isn't doing that. Instead, she's repeating the mistakes that lost in 2008.

[BlueCaliDem]

73. That's when he got instant name recognition - something Senator Sanders still lacks even

after sixteen years in the U.S. House. That should alarm you. Anyway, lack of name recognition and the lack of other variables that I've mentioned in my previous post puts the odds against a President Sanders. I highly doubt, though, that he intends to run as a serious presidential candidate. He's in it to push Democrats more to their left.

SoS Clinton hasn't announced her candidacy yet, so we really don't know if she's running despite the PACs pushing for her to do so. I also doubt that IF she decides to run, she would make the same mistakes she had made in 2008.

That said, she didn't do all too shabby in the primaries. Senator Obama just got more votes - bringing out the youth vote and his campaign signed up a lot of new American citizens. He also convinced Black Americans to vote for him despite their earlier support of then Senator Clinton. Soldiers tired of the wars also contributed and voted for him. Many Republicans, seeing the looming recession, also voted for him.

And just to be clear, I will vote for the strongest Democratic candidate in the primaries. SoS Clinton doesn't have my vote locked-in "just cuz". She will have to fight for it just like the other Democratic candidates.

I believe you're right, that Jebbie Bush will get the Republican nom despite polling poorly against Mitt Romney (the current frontrunner). But that, too, will carry a burden since the American people have not forgotten what his brother did his eight years as president. That's a huge cross for him to bear and maybe a hurdle too high to overlook for most American voters outside of the Republican/Faux News bubble. We'll see.

[jeff47]

77. If I gave a damn about Sanders winning, it might. But I don't.

Sander's role, if he runs, will be to force the primary to address left-of-center issues. Not to win.

SoS Clinton hasn't announced her candidacy yet, so we really don't know if she's running

Yes, Clinton has no contact with her surrogates. And she hasn't done anything like a book tour. And as a completely private figure who could never get the press to print a story about her opinion on a subject, it's abundantly clear why she's not talking about inequality, or the Republican abortion ban, or immigration or anything else.

But that, too, will carry a burden since the American people have not forgotten what his brother did his eight years as president.

That would be important if Clinton ran a campaign that brought out the marginally-attached voters that came out for Obama.

If she keeps running her 2008 campaign again, that won't happen. It'll be a base versus base election, and the Republicans think W was a fantastic ass-kicker.

[BlueCaliDem]

79. Good for you. Very wise to play that down. Like I said, there's not going to be a Pres. Sanders.

Sander's role, if he runs, will be to force the primary to address left-of-center issues. Not to win.

Uh...that's what I said in my previous post.

Yes, Clinton has no contact with her surrogates. And she hasn't done anything like a book tour.

Again, she has not announced her candidacy. And all your sarcastically delivered bullet points don't change that glaring fact.

That would be important if Clinton ran a campaign that brought out the marginally-attached voters that came out for Obama.

You're conveniently forgetting that she didn't do all too shabby in the primaries in 2008. Or maybe you really don't know. And you're also assuming that she will repeat the same mistakes she made in 2008. Surely, you can't be that obtuse.

[sabrina 1]

14. Don't worry, if he decides to run, you watch what happens when people are MOTIVATED.

I'm starting already, informing people about him, and so far, I'm doing great. Everyone I talk to is excited 'thanks for telling me about this guy, he is exactly who I have been looking for.

We have nearly two years to make sure people know who he is and most importantly, what he stands for.

Run Bernie! We'll do the rest!

[VanillaRhapsody]

17. Good luck with informing the other 96% of Democrats!

MOST of whom have already made up their minds!

[Thinkingabout]

26. Yep, the 96% will be motivated also.

[VanillaRhapsody]

50. they sure will be.....and 61% are motivated to vote for just one particular candidate!

[CrispyQ]

61. Or had their minds made up for them.

When you're given only one choice, how can you say you chose?

[Autumn]

2. I WANT that shirt!!!!!!! I am more than ready for Bernie

[pa28]

3. Bernie walks the walk.

If he runs I think I his message will catch on in Iowa.

[Phlem]

4. K&R!

[Overseas]

6. K&R. Yes please!

[Jefferson23]

7. He talks about the elephant in the room all the time..the money. The Koch brothers

must hate him, if they see him as a threat yet..I don't know.

[merrily]

54. And he refers more obliquely to New Democrats all the time as well.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. But..but..he might be a (GASP!!) "Leftist Independent"!!

And, he might sneak into houses in the dead of night and steal the votes of REAL Democrats!!

[merrily]

56. Former Democratic Socialist whom a centrist like Schumer called an asset to the Dem caucus.

[7962]

11. Well, if you're ready to get whipped, then full speed ahead!

Bernie wouldnt get 20% of the vote. But good luck anyway. He'd STILL beat Palin!!

[99Forever]

28. Well then...

... since you've already seen the outcome, I'll contact Senator Sanders and tell him to drop out.

Why are you so mean?

[7962]

32. I'm not mean, I'm realistic. He has no chance. By all means, run in the primaries.

I havent said anything mean at all! But He wont beat Hillary, Webb, O'Malley or Warren. But if he was the nominee, the GOP would win. He calls himself a "Socialist", and they would run that 24/7!
Its no different than those on the right saying the GOP needs Ted Cruz. He has NO chance either. Although I bet he'd win a DU poll of "Who would you like the GOP nominee to be in '16?"

[99Forever]

35. And Hillary Clinton is an absolute sure thing in 2008.

[7962]

39. Well, I never thought that after seeing Obama's speech in '04

Obviously its easy for me to say it NOW, but I was at my folks at the time, and after that speech I told them "That guy is gonna run for president and Hillary is gonna have a fight on her hands"

[NYC Liberal]

74. Name one Democrat now who has anywhere the name recognition Obama did in 2007.

It's not Sanders. MAYBE Warren. But she supports Hillary.

Hillary out-polls every single potential Republican candidate by double digits. There is no Democrat who is viable enough to mount a serious challenge. And, yes, Obama WAS viable in early 2007 since he had been a national figure for 3 years at that point; he was behind, yes, but not to the degree any Democrat is today.

[merrily]

57. We all have our opinions. Mine is that the GOP would beat Hillary.

[peacebird]

76. Probably a Hillbot. They are so delusional that they think HRC is 'Inevitable!' Just like in 08

But wait, I thought Ms Inevitable Cake Walk To the Coronation got her a$$ handed to her in the primary... Wait! Actually she DID, and it will happen to her again if she runs.

[mountain grammy]

12. I honestly believed America wouldn't elect a black president in my lifetime..

anything can happen.

[liberal_at_heart]

19. exactly.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

22. exactly. what were Obama's numbers at this point first time out? anyone know?

[F4lconF16]

25. Someone upthread mentioned that they were less than that in 2006.

No link though, and I don't know where to find it, sorry. Ask that poster?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

31. I don't doubt it. And look how that went. The rest is history.

[7962]

33. There are many differences between then and now.

First, Obama came on the national stage after his 04 speech at the convention. Second, and most importantly, the nation had serious "Bush fatigue" and most any Dem was going to beat McCain because of it. ESPECIALLY after he picked Palin as his VP!!
Now, there isnt any Bush fatigue. Theres no national backlash against the current administration, so thers not going to be a groundswell of support for a guy like Sanders.
All just my opinion of course, but hey, how often am I wrong?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

34. then, by all means, pick your horse and let the race begin !!

[7962]

40. I believe The biggest challenger to Hillary would be Webb.

But I also think its hers to lose. And that SHE is her own worst enemy; if she starts talking off-script. We've already seen her do a couple big screw ups
I'm not a big fan of hers, I'm just trying to be realistic.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

48. Did you pick a horse or not ? I can't tell.

[7962]

49. I'd vote for Webb over Hillary, but I'll support whoever my nominee is. There you have it. nt

[merrily]

63. January 2007 is when Hillary first announced she was forming an

exploratory committee to explore a run. There had been speculation since 2002

On January 20, 2007, she announced that she was forming an exploratory committee and filed with the Federal Election Commission to seek the nomination of the Democratic Party. Subsequently she began fundraising and campaigning activities. For several months Clinton led opinion polls among Democratic candidates by substantial margins until Senator Barack Obama pulled close to or even with her. Clinton then regained her polling lead, winning many polls by double digits; by autumn 2007 she was leading all other Democratic candidates by wide margins in national polls.[4] She placed third in the Iowa caucus to Barack Obama and John Edwards,[5] and trailed considerably in polls shortly thereafter in New Hampshire before staging a comeback and finishing first in the primary there.[6]

She went on to win a plurality of votes in Nevada, but won fewer delegates in Nevada than Obama, then lost by a large margin in South Carolina.[7] On Super Tuesday, Clinton won the most populous states such as California and New York, while Obama won more states total. The two gained a nearly equal number of delegates and a nearly equal share of the total popular vote. Clinton then lost the next eleven caucuses and primaries to Obama, and lost the overall delegate lead to him for the first time. On March 4, his consecutive wins increased to twelve when Vermont went his way. After an increasingly aggressive round of campaigning, Clinton broke the string of losses with wins in the Rhode Island, Ohio, and Texas primaries.[8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_presidential_campaign,_2008

In October 2007, she had a 30 point lead over her closest competitor.

[Skittles]

41. I knew that would happen before a woman was elected

[merrily]

59. America not only elected a black President, it elected him over Hillary.

[MohRokTah]

20. Where's his ground game in Iowa????

IS he even started competing?

I don't think he'd do better than 10% in New Hampshire given his lack of funding.

[Douglas Carpenter]

21. knr

[Thinkingabout]

27. How much money is the Indepent party putting towards Bernie's election?

[Ken Burch]

42. If Bernie runs, he'll run as a Dem.

Attacking Bernie for being independent no longer serves any good purpose, if it ever did.

We are all better off, as progressives, that Bernie ran as an independent in Vermont. None of the Dems he defeated were ever good on anything, and no good would have come of the Vermont Dems insisting on running a candidate against him for the U.S. Senate(we can assume that candidate would have been a bland centrist nothingburger). Nobody in the Vermont Democratic Party in Bernie's era was fighting for what he cared about. Pat Leahy is great, but no other Vermont Dem ever walked the walk on progressive issues.

Let me give you a thought experiment:

If, in the 1960's someone like Bernie had run as an independent for the Alabama governorship against George Wallace, would you have insisted on voting for Wallace because "he's the Democratic candidate, dammit"?

[Thinkingabout]

44. Just wondering how much is the Independent party going to contribute?

[Ken Burch]

45. Give it a rest.

There's no such thing as "the Independent Party" and we both know Bernie won't go third-party in the fall of '16.

Why are being McCarthyite here?

You can't be progressive and bash Bernie on his party status.

[Thinkingabout]

46. It is a fair question, i know lots of independents.

[Ken Burch]

47. If they are independents who like Bernie, they'll give what they can.

Just as independents who like HRC(a group that would, by definition, be much wealthier independents) will give her what they can, and the same could be said of independents who would prefer any other candidate, including those independents who like Republicans.

It's not a question with a simple, easily quantifiable answer.

[olddots]

29. he is about critical thinking

That process can save rhe world .

[BlueCaliDem]

60. And that's all he'll be doing for four years in the off-chance that he wins the WH.

Because Congress will NOT support him in anything.

[deutsey]

36. A lot can happen between now and 2016

Which is why I think polls at this time, while interesting gauges of which way the winds are blowing at the moment, are kind of meaningless in terms of an election two years off.

Bernie may be on the margins now, but...

What if there's another economic downturn as bad or worse than 2008? What if we have some candidates (Republican and Democratic) supporting austerity measures and bailouts to deal with the crisis, while Bernie advocates stimulus measures much larger than 2008 that put people to work rebuilding infrastructure, alleviate student debt, etc.?

[Sunlei]

38. whipped? There's more time to scrutinize congress and make them raise the federal minimum.

We have plenty of good prospects for 2016. For a start, one of those prospects can help us demand congress raise the federal minimum wage. Congress can do that in a day.

Once the minimum is raised everything else on the table has more room for bipartisan negotiation.

[bigwillq]

43. I'm ready for Bernie.

Spread the word.

[gwheezie]

58. I hope he becomes a dem and challenges hillary

I also hope a few more dems go for it. I think it would be very boring and not helpful if the dem nominee has a boring primary fight. The GOP is getting ready to put on quite a show. Let's run some smart thoughtful dems as s contrast to the GOP clown show.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

62. Bernie is one of the only people in DC who isnt a complete asshole, and that comes from

someone on the inside, not me but someone I know.

Which of course means he has no way of winning, and I mean that sincerely, but I am gonna work for him anyway.

I sure wont understand reading DIGS at him from ALLEGED liberals, that is gonna piss me off for sure