Explain to me why Bernie Sanders isn't 2016's Ron Paul...

[brooklynite]

I've asked before for someone to give me a hard-nosed estimate of how Bernie Sanders wins a national Primary (we'll set the General Election aside for now), and all I've gotten is variations on "he resonates with the struggling 99%". From what I see, the Sanders campaign is essentially following the path that Paul followed four years ago: a candidate who says what's on his mind, generates large crowds of voters disaffected from their default Party, and develops a solid floor of 15-20% in polling but never breaks a ceiling of 20-25%. He never generates a lot of financial support; enough to travel with his support team to make speeches and participate in debates, but not enough to build in the kind of staffing that Clinton and Obama had in 2008, and certainly not enough to spend on TV advertising. Come voting time, he does relatively well in Iowa (21-22%) in Iowa and New Hampshire, but never wins except in a handful of smaller Caucus States (ME, AK, NV). He doesn't have the staffing to play in multiple Super Tuesday States, or large population/large Geography States. Because his operating costs are low, there's nothing stopping him from continuing on through the Convention, but he doesn't end up with a net of more than 10-15% nationally.

So what am I missing?

[Cleita]

1. Ron Paul is an idiot. Bernie is not. He's a pretty smart cookie. eom

[brooklynite]

2. Care to elaborate on how those smarts apply to a national campaign?

[Cleita]

11. I don't think I can as I'm not running his campaign. Eom

[orpupilofnature57]

106. That lack of K-Street is part of his appeal, and part of the disdain people have for other canidates

[bravenak]

3. He's not a crazy old racist Libertarian?

[PotatoChip]

21. Thank You.

[randys1]

46. There is that, but now you are being picky

[hifiguy]

62. Well, there IS that... nt

[cascadiance]

91. The Pauls' racism is reflected in their stances on "property rights" to reject the Civil Rights Act.

... amongst other unpopular positions that Libertarians avoid talking about in order to focus on those issues that they differ from mainstream Republicans on that are more popular with young people like protecting our privacy, being anti-war, stopping the war on drugs, etc. Read here more for an example of these sort of issues that the Paul family and Libertarians try to avoid talking about.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/01/09/400521/rand-paul-explains-his-familys-opposition-to-civil-rights-act-its-about-controlling-property/

Bernie I don't believe avoids any question on ISSUES. He talks about everything on his radio show interviews with Thom Hartmann. He only avoids trying to attack other politicians personally instead of on the issues.

Bernie may EMPHASIZE economic issues, or other issues like voting rights and mechanisms, corporate oersonhood, etc. that he believes need to be solved if other problems we are all concerned about are also to be solved. It is this emphasis that those criticizing him are trying to find a way to force him to pull back from by saying things like he's "avoiding" talking about racism and sex only because they want him to switch from sometimes to talking about those issues to only talking about those issues the way other corporate owned politicians do to avoid them being discussed.

The way Bernie looks to focus on certain issues but NOT AVOID others has their campaigns completely different, not only on the issues themselves, but the way they campaign too.

[smokey nj]

119. Have I mentioned yet today how much I love you, bravenak?!

[bravenak]

132. Yay!

[LondonReign2]

171. Heh! +1

[neverforget]

4. Gee. we need another Bernie Sanders compared to Ron Paul thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026879643

[Art_from_Ark]

97. It's just par for the course

with these posters. Attack a good man because he's a threat to their mediocre candidate.

[AgingAmerican]

157. It's the latest meme

...doomed to crash and burn

[KamaAina]

5. His son doesn't have a weasel on top of his head?

[Evergreen Emerald]

34. Ok that made me laugh

outloud.

[hifiguy]

64. That thing may come to life at any moment

and suck out what is left of the Aqua Buddha's brains. Not that it's much of a meal.

[Evergreen Emerald]

67. Ha-- I forgot about Aqua Buddha!

I cannot believe the quality of people who are running our country!

[Gothmog]

123. Rand Paul is not going to be the GOP 2016 nominee

The GOP donor class hates Rand and his daddy. Randy has a strong floor and clear cap as to his support much like his daddy

[CherokeeDem]

152. OMG...

What is that? Whatever it is, I hope it's dead....


Creepy....

[hobbit709]

6. In the running for dumb OP of the day

[hifiguy]

65. Runaway winner, IMO.

[upaloopa]

7. Geez you are asking for it.

I admire your nerve. I doubt you will get a straight answer.

[Agony]

8. There is no difference between Democrats and Republicans so you are probably right...

[earthside]

9. Explain to me why Hillary Clinton isn't 2016's Mitt Romney...

Nuff said.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

13. Not so hard! I felt that all the way over here.

[hifiguy]

66. Oh, my, THAT is gonna leave a mark.

And the similarities in foreign and economic policies are there to be seen.

[jamzrockz]

77. Mitt Romney

won his party's nomination. So will Hillary. This has always been my problem with Bernie, being good is not enough. You also have to be a savvy politician and Bernie doesn't rub me as a good politician.

He will lose a hard fought primary and unlike Ron Paul, he will endorse the winner of the primary. I hate to break it to everyone here but unlike Disney cartoons, fairy tales don't come true in national elections. In national politics, the big money crushes the little Cinderella candidate.

[Exilednight]

128. Mitt did win the nomination, but loss the GE.

[Gothmog]

80. The GOP does not have an Obama type candidate or even someone close

I am not impressed with the so-called strong GOP field. Most of the leaders in this field have some very significant flaws and are not good campaigners. Walker is not ready for the big leagues and is weak. Jeb has issues with his brother and not know being a good campaigner and Rubio is too green and not that bright. There is not one GOP candidate who could put together the type of campaign organization or be able to campaign like President Obama

[uponit7771]

116. Because of a progressive enough record? Wingers are going with the meme that Hillary is too

... rich and it's not surprising FUD on a progressive sight are using the same meme

[WillyT]

121. OUCH !!! (word)...

[1StrongBlackMan]

131. That is a fair comparison ...

Non-responsive to the OP; but, a fair question, none the less.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

10. Who needs principles, a solid record & well-stated positions when you have Hillary and her money!

At least, that's how the OP reads.

[djean111]

12. If you are so convinced he will fizzle out, why not wait and see what happens?

I sincerely doubt anyone is asking you to support Bernie instead of Hillary. I think that everyone should support the candidate that feels best for them, policy-wise, at this stage.

Also, Rand Paul was not running as a Democrat. Bernie is not distracting anyone from a Default Party, he is attracting people from the Default Candidate. He will be on the ballot as a Democrat. And I believe that if he wins the primaries, there will be plenty of money for him.

Although surely this is not your intent, OPs like this always make me think that what is wanted is for everyone to throw in for Hillary, Right Now.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

16. You only take flak when you're over the target.

Bernie is taking a lot of flak.

[djean111]

18. Yes. Comparing Bernie to Paul seems to be the meme of the day. Yawn.

I am not sure what this stuff is supposed to accomplish, really. Here at DU, I mean.

[arcane1]

28. The 2008 acronym "FUD" comes to mind n/t

[djean111]

30. Ah. I think it is having the opposite effect. n/t

[arcane1]

38. Indeed it is!

[djean111]

41. and, to paraphrase something someone said elsewhere -

Explain to me why Hillary Clinton, after losing the nomination in 2008, with big money and big organization, won't lost the nomination again? This is more apropos of any sort of twisted and tortured comparison.

I suspect that, in this case, money has not been the deciding factor so far.......how dreadful!

[arcane1]

48. Exactly. All this 2008 revisiting has been very selective. And missing an important fact:

This isn't 2008!

[Gothmog]

82. There is no one like Obama on either side of the field

I like Sanders but he is not a President Obama and none of the GOP candidates are close

[Marr]

142. Oh, right-- because Obama was so advantaged.

A black man with a name that recalled both of our biggest national bogeymen of the day. He might as well have been a Hasidic Jew named Kim Jong-Hitler.

Hillary lost an enormous lead to a political unknown with the deck stacked seriously against him, demographically speaking.

[brooklynite]

100. I'd be delighted to:

First, she smart enough to know when something doesn't work. She has a bew campaign team and is taking a much slower, less presumptive strategy.

Second, she's much more popular. In 2007-8 she polled at 25-30% throughout the Primary. This time, she's CONSISTENTLY polling at 55-60%; a much bigger cushion.

And third, she's not running against some someone as well organized and financed as Barack Obama.

[AgingAmerican]

159. She self destructed in 08

nt

[jamzrockz]

109. Maybe it was because she lost to

another big money candidate. Obama was no slouch when it comes to the money game. And Bernie is no Obama. He will lose, he will concede and you will be left with no choice other than to vote for Hillary.

[RDANGELO]

14. The main theme of his campaign is income inequality.

Close to 60% of the people support policy in changing that. Paul's theme was libertarianism which most people do not support. It's that simple.

[morningfog]

15. Glad y'all have a new dead horse to ride. Ride on!

[arcane1]

36. The weekly meme has been reduced to statistics and time travel, before a single primary vote.

Fortunately, we all know this isn't an attempt at getting Sanders supporters to give up before any votes are cast, thereby never knowing how many votes he'd get.

[morningfog]

138. Of course not. And we all know that women and black voters would never

support Bernie. So there's that.

[NRaleighLiberal]

17. -1. n/t

[bluesbassman]

19. Your concern is noted. Frankly I don't understand why you give a rip though.

Bernie has stated he will not run as a spoiler and I believe him. Your candidate seems inevitable for the GE according to you, so why even bother posting this?

[Fumesucker]

20. Bless your heart...

[Agony]

24. ha Ha HA!

Damn you… i just spit beer all over my lap...

[djean111]

35. Oh, thank you!!!!!!

[hifiguy]

71. DUzy, DUzy, DUzy!!

[leftofcool]

22. I don't think you missed anything.

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. I need the distraction

pass the

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. Here, a full tub

[OilemFirchen]

25. This is not about Sanders, brooklynite.

He's not a grifter. His notions, by and large, are helpful, rather than destructive.

His ardent fans, though, are indistinguishable from Paulbots. I fully expect the same kinds of shenanigans from them during this primary.

Unlike Paul, however, I don't see Sanders taking the bait. Nor, BTW, do I see an enduring army equivalent to the Paul-inspired, Koch-sponsored Tea Party.

[madfloridian]

39. "His ardent fans, though, are indistinguishable from Paulbots." Wow

[OilemFirchen]

47. "Wow"

Gosh!

[arcane1]

57. That's the new marching order, since smearing Sanders himself has failed so spectacularly.

Now it's the "fans" themselves who are irrational, dishonest, and scheming.

It's so transparent, and it proves Sanders is scaring the hell out of all the right people

[OilemFirchen]

83. Super Non Sequitor!

Nowhere did I attempt to smear Sanders. Nowhere on DU have I ever attempted to smear Sanders. I've also never smeared Clinton, nor O'Malley. In fact, the post to which you're referring corrects brooklynite in favor of Sanders.

It's simply not a secret that far too many of his acolytes are nasty little flailing pugilists. Just like Paulbots.

Anyway, what does fear have to with this? Talk about transparent...

[arcane1]

86. You're in luck: I never said you did. I simply said smearing Sanders hasn't worked out.

Nice try though. Talk about acting like Paulbots

[OilemFirchen]

102. Nice try at what?

Not being a barn door?

[smokey nj]

95. The Ron Paul comparison is another way to smear Bernie as a racist without

actually calling him a racist. Hillary supporters are sinking to disgusting depths to attack a genuinely honorable person who wants the best for everyone.

[aspirant]

144. Comparisons

Ron Paul (R) male Vs Bernie Sanders (D) male

Hillary Clinton (D) female Vs Sarah Palin (R) female

How could this happen

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

52. I knew I'd missed somebody on the list of pointless, time-wasting insultmongers to add to ignore! nt

[OilemFirchen]

59. I would have been heartbroken if you had missed me.

Thanks for the announcement!

[edbermac]

61. Jury results.

On Mon Jun 22, 2015, 06:04 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

This is not about Sanders, brooklynite.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6883525

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Sanders supporters are not "Paulbots"

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jun 22, 2015, 06:11 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Boo hoo hoo. Another idiotic thin-skinned alert.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: nothing to alert on or about in this statement, move on. He can , in my book, call supporters of any candidate names as long as it's not malicious, racist or just plain hateful
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Not referring to DUers. Comparing Sanders supporters in general to Paulists in general.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Seriously?

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[OilemFirchen]

75. Whew! A squeaker!

Maybe I'll get another ignore out of it.

There's always hope.

[AgingAmerican]

158. Projection

nt

[hootinholler]

26. First, he has WAY better hair

Second he is a compass, pointing the same direction his entire career, unlike those who have to evolve.

Third, he isn't just echoing what the problems are, he has plans as to how to correct those problems and he explains them plainly and well.

Fourth, he is attractive to all ages because of the above. There are even R voters that are cocking an eyebrow.

Fifth, he acknowledges Obama's first serious mistake in office: putting the coalition who got him into the white house on hold instead of harnessing the support to accomplish shit. He said he won't be repeating that.

Sixth, those millennials that Obama pissed off by dismissing them, won't be working for or coming out to vote for your ordination candidate.

The rest is left as an exercise for the reader. It's funner that way.

[whatchamacallit]

27. Check your Rolex, don't you have a tee time or something?

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. SNORT!!!! That was FUNNY as hell

[ret5hd]

84. Cotillion. The word you were looking for is "cotillion".

[riderinthestorm]

146. No it's a "salon"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025897209

[U4ikLefty]

154. Pardon me

[karadax]

29. I'll wait until the TV debates.

Ron Paul was routinely snubbed by the MSM during the televised debates. One of the debates CBS ran he only got 89 seconds to speak. Regardless of views that is a pretty crummy way to treat someone.

If Bernie gets to actually talk during the debates I'll be surprised. I fully expect him to get the Ron Paul treatment in the media blackout department.

[shenmue]

31. That's a very astute observation

but I don't expect that to make a difference here.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

32. Why Hillary isn't 2016's Sarah Palin....

You do know why Bernie is popular don't you?

[wendylaroux]

33. you really shouldn't

let yourself get this wrapped up in politics,stay calm.

You will hate yourself later for saying stupid crap like this.

[leftofcool]

60. No, she won't. It is a legitimate question.

[tk2kewl]

78. .

[Kalidurga]

37. I don't feel the need to educate everyone who is wrong.

So, I will pass on this.

[JDPriestly]

40. Bernie's ideas areMos more attuned to mainstream Americans' ideas and experiences in recent

years.

Bernie is fighting Citizens United, and most Americans despise that decision and the corporate dominance it has engraved into our political system.

Bernie is more fun than Ron Paul.

Ron Paul was inconsistent about women's rights -- anti-abortion I believe while claiming to be a Libertarian.

Ron Paul was conservative and his ideas old.

Bernie is liberal and his ideas young.

Most important, Bernie is leading in the direction in which the country is going. Ron Paul was trying to go in the direction the country was leaving.

[Recursion]

151. Ron Paul also has popular ideas

Both libertarian and socialist ideas poll very well. The electorate is very self contradictory in what it says it wants.

[JDPriestly]

164. Except Bernie Sanders is speaking to the issues that Americans are angry about and that

no politician dares to mention. Hillary speaks about the disparity in wealth. Good for her. But Sanders says we need to raise taxes on the very rich and that they are taking too much of the wealth. Good for him. It's the truth, and Americans know it.

Just the other day I bought something at a store that sells a lot of storage materials, shelving and boxes, etc. There were two cashiers standing side by side. The person helping me was apparently a bit new and was having a problem with my credit card. The more experienced person was helping him. I talked with the clerk helping me and in the course of the conversation. Turns out he used to travel in his work, buying shoes in Italy. His current job is, I'm sure, paying him a lot less than the job he used to have.

Americans are bitter about this drop in their living standard.

Ron Paul never spoke to that. Libertarians are in general very young, inexperienced and very unrealistic. They are either people who have start-ups and will or will not succeed. They are not the working people of America, not the vast majority of Americans.

Bernie is not that far to the left. He is an old fashioned Democrat, like FDR or RFK or LBJ (all the presidents know affectionately by their initials -- all Democrats more like Bernie).

We haven't had a really pro-union president in a long, long, long time. Bernie is strongly pro-union. Hillary says nice things about unions, but is not passionate about them. Bernie Sanders is sincerely passionate about unions. People sense that.

[Warpy]

42. Uh, the fact that the election is 16 months away?

A lot can happen in 16 months and Paul peaked a lot later than that.

It's too soon to tell if a campaign is going to sputter and fizzle out or if it's going to inspire the rest of the pack, most of which has not declared yet, or if it's going to keep building on success and go all the way to the nomination.

It's too soon to tell much of anything. So stop trying.

[madfloridian]

43. Ron Paul's views are scary, Bernie's views are wise and progressive.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/1630

[Report1212]

45. Ron Paul's ideological ceiling was 20% maybe

He wanted the gold standard and total abolition of federal programs.

Bernie Sanders wants things most average people want.

Ideas matter, that's what you're missing. You have no ideas, literally.

[lame54]

49. Ron Paul's philosophy is full of shit...

Bernie's is the polar opposite and has been proven to work in the real world

[Horizens]

50. I'll explain that

You’re political ideology is nothing more than support the front -runner. That’s rather mindless particularly when compared to a candidate who details a platform that, excepting for Elizabeth Warren, no other politician has voiced. You dismiss the significance of Senator Sanders’ ability to resonate with the struggling 99%. When, in fact, that a HUGE deal and begs the question why doesn’t your candidate’s message resonate with that same crowd?

You commented that Sander’s doesn’t generate a lot financial support. That’s the point. It’s a major part of his message and it resonates particularly when compared to the massive amount of special interest (particularly Wall Street) money you candidate has in her coffers.

Now, I’ve answered your question. Perhaps you can answer mine.
Explain to me why Bernie Sanders can’t be 2016’s Eugene McCarthy? (McCarthy, against all odds and expectations would likely have been the Democratic nominee in 1968 had Robert Kennedy not jumped in front of his parade.)

[leftofcool]

68. And that is the problem with Bernie.

Several problems, actually. He will never have enough money support and they only thing he ever talks about is his hatred for the rich, his hatred for Wall Street and his hatred for bankers. When Bernie starts addressing women's reproductive rights, the issues facing the LGBT community and when he stops saying that economic justice will solve all the race problems, he will have a message that resonates with the 87% of Democrats that Hillary does. Bernie Sanders will be just another McGovern from 1972 should he win the nomination because the truth is that the extreme liberal left who supports him make up just about 12% of Democrats. Most Democrats lean to the center of many things, left on some issues and a bit more right on others, but they are almost always in the center. I applaud Bernie for his taking only "holy money" but corporate money is the system we have and when you have big rollers like the Koch Brothers who are supporting the Republicans, you better be willing to take money from anyone who will give it or you will lose.

[bluesbassman]

85. The extreme liberal left who supports him make up just about 12% of Democrats."

Interesting. So in your opinion, should Sanders win the nomination the other 88% of loyal Democrats are going to stay home or vote Republican in the GE?

[sadoldgirl]

88. So you are saying that Bernie's message

is to the extreme left?

2008 polls said 63% of voters were in favor of single payer

Recent polls found that over 70% disagree with CU

I don't know the percentage in favor of asking for
higher taxes for the uberwealthy, but I bet you it is high.

Just a few of the left extremists?!

[arcane1]

101. Not-so-clever use of the word "hatred" to make him appear irrational.

Followed by made-up bullshit and a half-ass defense of Wall Street.

Just another day at the smear factory.

[Horizens]

107. Corruption is Corruption

Re: "his {Sanders}hatred for the rich, his hatred for Wall Street and his hatred for bankers." Sanders exposes fairness, never hate.

Re: "corporate money is the system we have and when you have big rollers like the Koch Brothers who are supporting the Republicans, you better be willing to take money from anyone who will give it or you will lose." The system is corrupt and you have no problem with that. I don't want candidates or laws that are bought and sold and that's what we have today.

Wall Street money is no less corrupting the system than Koch brothers money.

I ended my response to the original post with a question that has gone unanswered. Perhaps you will give it a try.

Now, I’ve answered your question. Perhaps you can answer mine.
Explain to me why Bernie Sanders can’t be 2016’s Eugene McCarthy? (McCarthy, against all odds and expectations would likely have been the Democratic nominee in 1968 had Robert Kennedy not jumped in front of his parade.)

[Oh Yes]

141. Why would he need money when he has over 300,000 volunteers ready and able to work for him

Can you show me where Hillary Clinton has _THAT_ many volunteers ready to talk about Bernie on a daily basis?

Oh, and Bernie gains 10,000 likes PER day on Facebook - Hillary gets 4,000 likes PER day - saw this today recently here.. , the trend is upwards.

I don't really think the money is an issue for Bernie, as long he has his volunteers able and ready to work for him. Yes, it costs money to run a campaign, and I really don't see a problem with his fundraising, as long as he continues to attract people of all ideological stripes who are tired of the same as usual for the last 30-40 years.

I have faith in Bernie, and he has nothing to lose by shifting Hillary Clinton to the left, and hopefully govern from the left (which I doubt) - will vote for the Democratic nominee, whoever that may be.

We all have good candidates, we just have to figure out who's the right candidate to lead the Democratic Party for the next decade.

[ljm2002]

155. Are you lying...

...or just ignorant?

Bernie DOES address women's reproductive rights, he DOES address issues facing the LGBT community (and oh, by the way, he was for gay marriage 20 years ago, back when it was not a "safe" position to take), he DOES address racial issues, et-fucking-cetera.

He also recognizes that the economic issues affect all of us -- well all of us except for the .01%. And that is a message of unity.

He is FOR universal health care -- that would apply to EVERYONE of EVERY RACE, of EITHER GENDER, of ANY SEXUAL ORIENTATION, and of ANY AGE.

He is FOR free tuition for all public colleges and universities, and for low-interest loans, and for the government not to profit off those loans. Again this would apply to every race, gender, sexual orientation, and age.

He is FOR a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.

He is FOR police accountability. He is AGAINST the mass incarceration that tends to affect young black men disproportionately.

How do I know these positions of his? BECAUSE HE TALKS ABOUT THEM IN HIS SPEECHES. Maybe you should listen to one of them, then you might stop spreading MISINFORMATION about his campaign.

[Trajan]

53. This is what you're missing

Condemnation for failing to promote your own candidate while you slash and burn the wonderful , liberal senator from Vermont ...

It's all about going negative against one of our own good guys.. The partisans are a blight ...

[brooklynite]

103. I've said before, I have -no- objection to any of sanders's positions...

I just dont believe (based on my 35 yers of political activity) that he can win, and I'm not willing to risek electing one of the Republicans.

[AgingAmerican]

161. So you admit he is the better candidate

nt

[brooklynite]

165. No - I say I'm happy with either.

[AgingAmerican]

169. Bullshit

You endlessly rant against Bernie. Strawman after strawman.

I smell an agenda.

[brooklynite]

173. Point to a "rant" where I've challenged a position of Bernie

Go ahead, it's all searchable. I'll wait.

[brooklynite]

178. Still waiting...

[Motown_Johnny]

54. He wins the Iowa caucus.. it is a caucus and

movement candidates have an advantage in that contest. Yes I know Hillary's numbers are still huge there but you are asking for how he wins. That is the first step.

The second is winning New Hampshire. He is from a neighboring state and once again may have a structural advantage there.

Once Sec. Clinton's aura of inevitability is stripped away with those losses, we are off to the races.


He could win. It won't be easy but it is possible.

We really don't know what is for real yet. Check back after the second debate. If Hillary stomps him with her overwhelming knowledge of a wide variety of issues then Bernie's hopes are dead. If Bernie comes off as authentic and Hillary looks contrived and insincere in comparison then he has a real shot (still not a done deal though).


What you are missing is that Ron Paul is a nutcase. Sen. Sanders is the right person in the right political place at the right time.

[hifiguy]

63. And whatever one may say about HRC

she is a lousy retail politician, and that is one of Bernie's great strengths. HRC has the same common touch as J.P. Morgan.

[Gothmog]

125. I thought that the groundgame was important in Iowa for the Democratic side

I remember that President Obama had a larger field staff in Iowa that made the difference in 2008. I understand that Hillary has hired the people who ran the Obama groundgame in Iowa. I worked with some Obama people who had been Iowa for the Texas two step and these people were good at organizing. Hillary won the Texas primary but Obama ended up with more delegates due to the caucus part of the Texas two step

[Motown_Johnny]

129. apparently, Bernie has a large number of volunteers

So it is possible that he can put together a winning ground game for Iowa.

IMO it is still to early to know.

I am not counting him out yet. I admit it s an uphill battle, but there is still a battle to be fought.

[Gothmog]

181. Volunteers are great if they are coordinated

My daughter graduated from the University of Iowa law school and saw the caucus system in operation. It takes a ton of effort to organize a good ground game

[DemocratSinceBirth]

55. I am not getting into this mess but I don't remember Papa Paul polling in the 20s or...

I am not getting into this mess but I don't remember Papa Paul polling in the 20s or actually win a primary or caucus.

[Juicy_Bellows]

69. Allow Del Griffith to respond:

You wanna hurt me? Go right ahead if it makes you feel any better. I'm an easy target. Yeah, you're right, I talk too much. I also listen too much. I could be a cold-hearted cynic like you... but I don't like to hurt people's feelings. Well, you think what you want about me; I'm not changing. I like... I like me. My wife likes me. My customers like me. 'Cause I'm the real article. What you see is what you get.

[Grilled Charlie]

70. Copying my reply from a similar ridiculous thread

Paul (and his fringe) wants to eliminate social security - Bernie (and most Americans) want to strengthen it
Paul anti-choice (and his fringe) - Bernie Pro-Choice
Paul wants to eliminate all public education- Bernie (and most Americans) want tuition free college
Paul wants to privatise all Federal land- to sure about Bernie's position but pretty sure it's opposite (like everything else)
Paul doesn't believe that 'global warming is a major problem threatening civilization'- Bernie(and most Americans) is concerned about the environment
Paul believes the government should not be involved in health care- Bernie (and most Americans) want medicare for all
Paul's appeal was limited to passionate but small percentage of libertarian Republicans. They showed up for him but his platform is practically the opposite of what most Americans want.
Bernie is his mirror image. Bernie's platform not only represents what the Democratic party used to be about (before it went corporate) It represents what many moderate Republicans secretly want and what disillusioned non-participating potential voters want. Bernie represents what people were probably hoping for when they voted for Obama (and got burned).
This time I'm hoping we get bet burned but that we get 'Berned'.

[panader0]

130. Good answer---welcome to DU!

[frylock]

72. Well, it looks like talking points for the week of 6/22 have been issued.

[elleng]

127. Yup!

[ucrdem]

73. Ron has a twinkly smile and Bernie has a trademark scowl?

Ron wears better clothes?


Kidding aside Paul seemed to take the high road of policy (albeit rancid policy) whereas Bernie is basically running on ODS and Clinton fatigue. Not nice at all.

[bluesbassman]

87. You have any links to quotes that establishes Sanders is "running on ODS and Clinton fatigue"?

First time I've heard that one used directly toward Senator Sanders.

[ucrdem]

89. So glad you asked!

Hang on . . .

1. Bernie's Jan. 7 to USTR Froman:


There are manifold problems but what stands out to me are a) the inaccuracies and b) the sarcastic tone which together belie a lack of respect for the man and the office not to mention the party Sanders claims to seek the support of. (from an earlier post)

-----------

2. On those inaccuracies (from another earlier post):

Sanders, pitching to the Paul crowd:

The letter Sanders sent on Monday to U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman criticizes secrecy standards that Froman's office imposes on the TPP talks.

"I have been very concerned that up to this date the text of this agreement has not been made public," Sanders wrote. "The only text that I am aware of that has been made public so far has been through leaked documents, and I find what I read very troubling.

"It is incomprehensible to me that the leaders of major corporate interests who stand to gain enormous financial benefits from this agreement are actively involved in the writing of the TPP while, at the same time, the elected officials of this country, representing the American people, have little or no knowledge as to what is in it," Sanders added.

..............
Truth, per the USTR:

USTR told HuffPost it had ramped up congressional outreach, and has held nearly 1,600 meetings on Capitol Hill over the trade pact.

“Senator Sanders, like all Members of Congress, has full access to the draft TPP negotiating text and we look forward to working with him to review it," USTR spokesman Trevor Kincaid said. "Members of Congress, labor unions, non-profits, and environmentalists have all played an important role in shaping our approach to our trade policy. This includes Senator Sanders, whose input USTR has received on a dozen occasions on issues ranging from clean energy manufacturing to cheese."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/05/bernie-sanders-michael-froman-tpp_n_6419874.html

More coming in separate post . . .

[bluesbassman]

110. That's what you consider "ODS", and "sarcastic tone"?

This a letter requesting release of TPP information to a sitting US senator so that he, and his fellow senators would be able to make better informed decisions regarding the TPP. While we don't know what the documents released to the members of Congress contain as the members are prohibited from taking notes or divulging the contents, we do know that parts have been redacted so Sanders was well within his right to ask that the information be released.

We can argue forever about whether Sanders was "inaccurate" in his letter, but how you got "sarcastic tone" and "Obama Derangement Syndrome" out of that letter makes no sense at all.

I suppose you have similar documentation to back up your "Clinton fatigue" smear too?

[ljm2002]

163. "Truth, per the USTR"...

...see, that's where you go wrong, right there. You seem to think they have a corner on the Truth (TM). Naivete at best, dishonest at worst.

Then you frame his letter as "pitching to the Paul crowd". Yet Sanders has been consistent over the last 30 years or so in his votes against these trade agreements -- NAFTA, CAFTA and others. So no, he is not "pitching to the Paul crowd" and by using that framing, you are only demonstrate your own willingness to employ sleazy political tactics.

As to this quote from Sanders' letter:

"It is incomprehensible to me that the leaders of major corporate interests who stand to gain enormous financial benefits from this agreement are actively involved in the writing of the TPP while, at the same time, the elected officials of this country, representing the American people, have little or no knowledge as to what is in it," Sanders added.

Your unquestioning acceptance of the USTR's response is laughable. They claim that members of Congress have "full access" to the draft TPP negotiating text. That "full access" occurs in an isolated room. Each Senator or Representative must go in there alone, no aides allowed. They must leave their cell phones at the door. While they may take notes, any notes they do take must be surrendered when they leave the room. There are thousands of pages in this document -- so this sort of access hardly allows the kind of substantive review that a serious lawmaker would want and expect. And importantly, they are not allowed to publicly discuss anything that they have read.

When the USTR says that members of Congress, labor unions etc. have "played an important role in shaping our approach", they fail to point out that it is corporate lackeys, rather than our Congress members, who are WRITING the damned thing. They say that the USTR has received input from Sanders and others, but do not mention whether they DID anything with said input. It is a carefully-worded and largely content-free response, which is a characteristic of the sort of dialog favored by corporate interests.

Your post is either dishonest, or you are deluded, IMO.

[ucrdem]

111. 2nd page of Sanders Jan. 5 letter:

Left it out accidentally:

[ucrdem]

112. Sanders: "Obama sounds like Bush and Clinton on trade"

Bernie Sanders: Obama sounds like Bush and Clinton on trade

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bernie-sanders-obama-sounds-like-bush-and-clinton-117717922196.html

Bernie Sanders' Brutal Letter On Obama's Trade Pact Foreshadows 2016 Democratic Clash

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/05/bernie-sanders-michael-froman-tpp_n_6419874.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000013

Bernie Sanders To Obama Admin: Let Me See The Damn TPP Draft

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/06/1355859/-Bernie-Sanders-To-Obama-Admin-Let-Me-See-The-Damn-TPP-Draft

(from an earlier post)

[bluesbassman]

118. So what? These links and page 2 of the letter are about the TPP.

Sanders is doing his job for crying out loud and you want to make it out to be "Obama Derangement Syndrome"? SMH.

BTW, if "Obama sounds like Bush and Clinton on trade" is your evidence of Sanders' supposed "ODS", that was Yahoo's headline, Sanders never said it. Here's what he did say:

I agree with President Obama on a number of issues, but on trade he is dead wrong,” Sanders said. “He is following in the footsteps of George W. Bush; he’s following in the footsteps of Bill Clinton, of Bush I, of Ronald Reagan.

“All these presidents have told us how great these trade agreements would be … how many jobs NAFTA would create, and how many jobs permanent normal trade relations with China would create,” Sanders said, citing two trade accords ratified under Clinton. “Well, you know what? Didn’t quite turn out that way. What in fact turned out is that we lost millions of decent-paying jobs.”

“Trade is a good thing; trade is a very positive thing,” Sanders said. “But trade has got to work for the workers who are involved; it cannot only lead to large corporate profits.”

And “what we have right now is a disastrous and unfair trade policy, which primarily benefits the wealthiest and large corporations,” he said.

He's right. Are you going to accuse me of having ODS because I think President Obama is following in the footsteps of Clinton and Bush in regard to the TPP?

[Autumn]

183. Love those links, thanks

Bernie is so right on those issues.

[ucrdem]

113. Sanders Calls Hillary Clinton Foundation Money ‘A Very Serious Problem’

Link to DU OP (not mine): http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280526

DU rebuttal: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251406096

It should also be noted that Bernie did not shy away from this important "issue" and gave it lots of face time in his post-announcement inteviews of which there were many.

[ucrdem]

117. Sanders accuses Hillary Clinton of 'cop-out' on trade

Bernie Sanders accuses Hillary Clinton of 'cop-out' on trade
By NICK GASS 6/12/15 8:24 AM EDT

Hillary Clinton’s reluctance to comment on President Barack Obama’s Pacific trade deal is a cop-out, Democratic presidential candidate and independent Sen. Bernie Sanders charged in a “Charlie Rose” interview with Bloomberg’s Al Hunt aired Thursday on PBS.
....

“I frankly don’t understand how you could be a major candidate for president of the United States — Hillary Clinton, or anybody else — and not have an opinion on that issue,” he said.

Clinton has outlined a few general principles for what the TPP ought to accomplish, but has declined to say explicitly whether she thinks the trade pact has actually met those conditions.

Asked whether he thought her silence is a “cop-out,” Sanders replied, that, “Yes. It is.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bernie-sanders-criticize-hillary-clinton-trade-118924.html#ixzz3dq9ETIOx

[ljm2002]

160. Sanders' speeches are loaded with policy positions...

...not, "Oh I am looking at that and will decide what my position is later", but actual policy positions.

Sanders has never run negative political ads and has pledged not to do so in this race either.

Sanders has carefully and effectively avoided being critical of Hillary Clinton even when interviewers tried to egg him on. It is par for the course for interviewers to ask him nothing but questions related to Hillary. He responds by reiterating his own positions and tells them to ask Hillary for hers. He is clear that he is not running to "push Hillary to the left", but rather to win the nomination. The strongest statement he has made about Hillary that I am aware of is that she ought to take a position on the TPP. Wow, what dirty politics...

Damn I am sick of the lying and smearing that is going on here. Go ahead and criticize his positions, go ahead and say why he can't win, sure -- it's politics and those are valid points. But to say that Bernie isn't running on policy -- and to say that Paul took the high road in comparison! -- not nice at all.

[hifiguy]

74. I will let The Dude speak for me.

[Gothmog]

76. Elections and primaries are expensive

I have been concerned that Sanders would not be a viable general eleciton candidate. Organization and ground games are important in caucus states and Sanders appears to lack the resources to run an effective campaign

[GeorgeGist]

79. Subtlety.

[MannyGoldstein]

81. Because there will not come a point when those intrigued by Sanders say

"Holy @#$&, he believes that all the gold's been slipped out of Fort Knox?"

Bernie's views are the opposite of nuts - they're the positions of most Americans. And they've been his views for decades, not months. And he doesn't tell nutty lies.

[Rex]

99. You mean to say Bernie doesn't hang out at salons with Ron Paul?

So far the Jewish Scare did not work, him being a White Supremest did not work, him being a strange and scary 'S' word still does not work. They couldn't crybaby OWS out of existence and now someone is going to take all those numbers and get votes.

People are pissed off at losing their life savings and they know who is to blame. That rich guy trying to avoid a conversation, yep people still hurt even after 7 years. Still so many homeless.

The plutocracy never understands how someone can not love the status quo and only get upset when the traditionalists want to go back to the 1950s.

They have nothing to stop human curiosity, people will find the answers.

[Blue_Tires]

90. Because he doesn't hate blacks and jews?

[sadoldgirl]

92. Ron Paul is a libertarian.

I have never heard Bernie describe himself as that. Have you?

Bernie is authentic, answers questions from the media as well
as from people in his audience without prior selection.

His answers are straight forward without any conditioning words
like "if possible" or "I need to read the treaty before I can comment".

He does not need 200 economic advisors to tell him what to say.

Lastly Bernie gives people the idea that they are heard and that
their votes count.

[mother earth]

93. What are you missing? Objectivity. nt

[Art_from_Ark]

108. That, and empathy

for people who aren't one-percenters.

[mother earth]

182. Agreed.

[Rex]

94. He kinda has this thing against billionaires for almost destroy the world economy.

You wouldn't get it.

[deutsey]

137. +1

[tularetom]

96. First we heard that Sanders should drop out because he didn't have a chance of winning the general

Then we heard he was a "gun nut".

Next we heard he was a "racist".

I read earlier today that he was a "homophobe".

Now he's "Ron Paul".

By the time the primaries get here he'll probably be a "Muslim", or a "Kenyan".

This whole thing is taking on the familiar desperate stench of a Clinton campaign. Apparently today, they even rolled out Lanny Davis to go on the Ed Schultz TV show and bad mouth Sanders.

It's a long time before the convention and at this rate they will use up their arsenal long before the first primary.

[smokey nj]

114. The Ron Paul thing is another stab at the racist thing. They've been doing it since before he

announced.

[brooklynite]

98. It case you didn't notice (and it's clear that most of you didn't)

I never suggested an equivalence to Paul's ideology or his message. This thread is about his political strategy.

[monmouth4]

104. The way Bernie is going I think he will win the nomination....IMHO...n/t

[tularetom]

120. Do you actually read your posts before pushing that "Post my reply!" button?

I ask because some of them seem awfully condescending.

[brooklynite]

139. Condescending...

i asked (as I've asked frequently) for an explanation as to how Sanders could win a national election .

I presented an alternative scenario which matches what I know of Sanders's apparent campaign strategy.

Feel free to show where I'm wrong...and why.

[orpupilofnature57]

105. Your talking about Chess not Views and Solutions, Two different Species . That's Our

biggest difference between supporters, We do sound idealistic and you guy's are all K-Street sounding, Rand Paul is a person who appeals to Teabaggers, people who would defend the Confederate flag. Bernie Sanders is faulted for not weighing in on Social Issues, that he doesn't seem passionate, He is courageous and was of the first to warn us about a host of things he's come to know as senior Senator .

[onehandle]

115. He's Senator Howard Stackhouse from The West Wing.

He's a good man who has things to say, but knows he won't be nominee.

He has a few not ready for prime time operatives who are using him to build up their cred with the party.

[Blue_In_AK]

122. What do you care?

As such a staunch Clinton fan, you shouldn't even trouble your mind worrying about these insignificant things.

[smokey nj]

124. It's another way to smear Bernie as a racist without actually calling him a racist.

[DonCoquixote]

126. who says he needs to

If nothign else, he gives Hillary an excuse to go to the left, which her handlers will try very very very hard to prevent. That is why when Wall Street cracked the whip on the party, they sank warren;'s chances, thus she did not run.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/15/elizabeth-warren-wall-street_n_2695212.html

If there was no leftist running, than all Hillary would have to do is have her followers bark at us "get in line" something we see a lot of already, and implicit in that "get in line" is what the Lloyd Blankfelds and Evan Bayhs already have planned, the fact that we will be expected to shut up and like it when they start ripping up the New Deal, cutting social security in order to make Wall Street happy. At the very least, Bernie is ensuring she has to listen to the left, as opposed to this call of "SHUTUP and get behind Hillary already!" that has been going on since 2008, despite, or even in spite of, the lessons of 2008 where Hillary let her Centrist advisers (her husband among them) make a flaming wreck of her campaign.

She gets NO pass from having to try and make the left happy, period. And we are doing her a favor because there is nothing more that a Jeb would want than to have her play the "I am just a GOP with a socially liberal flavor" that loses elections every time.

[Omaha Steve]

133. Bernie doesn't ask people donate...

Simply for standing next to his cardboard cutout when he isn't at a D party event.

[geek tragedy]

134. Ron Paul is batshit insane, for one. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

135. LBJ polled way ahead of Eugene McCarthy in '68.

1968



Gold denotes a state won by Lyndon B. Johnson. Purple denotes a state won by Robert Kennedy Green denotes a state won by Eugene McCarthy. Blue denotes a state won by George Smathers. Orange denotes a state won by Stephen M. Young. Grey denotes a state that did not hold a primary.

[1StrongBlackMan]

136. I see a lot of responses; but, few addressing your question ...

But then, that is your fault ... you mentioned/compared Bernie to Paul, giving people too many non-responsive outs.

[djean111]

166. Or - the "question" is more of a condescending explanation of why we delusional Sanders supporters

Last edited Tue Jun 23, 2015, 11:24 AM - Edit history (1)

should just support Hillary right now, because MONEY, and is really more rhetorical than genuine.
Plus - it is not like anybody must answer it, and failing to do so, satisfactorily, will force Bernie's supporters to say Oh, dang! Principles and policy! WTF were we thinking! and hurriedly ordering some HRC bumper stickers.
Plus, yeah, comparing Bernie to someone running as a third party candidate and with dissimilar views on the majority of things - a "question" with questionable premises. So, doesn't really deserve an answer, IMO.

Whydon't Hillary supporters just sit back, support Hillary, and gloat amongst themselves? That's my question.

[1StrongBlackMan]

168. Are you lumping me in with HRC supporters? n/t

[djean111]

170. I was referring to the OP, and the author of the OP.

[1StrongBlackMan]

174. Oh ... Okay ...

I was thrown off by:

Why not just sit back, support Hillary, and gloat amongst yourselves? That's my question.

[djean111]

175. I meant the people who are busily enlightening Bernie supporters with tales of money over policy,

And in another thread we are told that he points too much to win a debate. Then there are the Socialist, Jewish dog-whistles. Stuff like that.

[1StrongBlackMan]

176. Have I done any of that? n/t

[djean111]

177. Your initial post was directed at the OP. My answers were about the OP. I will fix my post

to make that clear.

[1StrongBlackMan]

179. Thank you. n/t

[DCBob]

140. There are similarities.

He's tapped into the pissed off wing of the party much like Paul did.

[Caretha]

143. WOW

You are like the NRA!!!

YOU WENT THERE!

Shame on you...disgusting. I hope your stomach produces nothing but bile tonight like the kind you just vomited on DU.

Have you now shame?

What a stupid question...obviously not.

[Marr]

145. What are you missing? Besides the experience of working for a living?

Not much, I expect.

But people who don't have plenty have been hurting for a very long time, and working very hard. Many of us are sick of politics as an exclusive horse race where the 1% always wins.

[brooklynite]

150. Feel free to embellish your stereotypes some more...

I've had a Government job in public transportation for nearly 30 years. And I've never inherited a penny.

[Marr]

153. My sincere apologies-- I made an unfair assumption. /nt

[ibegurpard]

147. I don't need to explain anything

I will continue to support the person who best articulates my values and hope that he can connect with others as well.

[kentuck]

148. One big difference:

The Republican Party almost always nominates the establishment candidate. Not always so with the Democrats. Also, if Bernie Sanders wins the nomination, he will have the Democratic Party behind him. Ron Paul was never assured that the Republican Party would have backed him...

[riderinthestorm]

149. Harry Truman v Dewey. It's almost exactly the same political climate

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/truman-politics/

[AgingAmerican]

156. Bernie tells the truth

It's that simple.

[AgingAmerican]

162. Another smear attempt

...from the, "I agree with everything Bernie says, but...," brigade.

[KingCharlemagne]

167. Explain to me why Hillary isn't 2016's LBJ who will have us at war with

Iran or the Russian Federation within six months of her inauguration.

[Orsino]

172. Ask again in a year.

Followers of the victor will get to crow all they want, I guess.

[Jeroen]

180. “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.”

Martin Luther King Jr.

That's whats happening, the arc is bending.
Therefore future predictions based on equivalents in the past may not be as accurate as you might think.