2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie Sanders Isn’t Electable, And Here’s Why
This column is about Sanders chances, which I think are virtually nil for two reasons.
Reason one: Hes not an enrolled Democrat. Understand that I say this not as a judgment on him, but as a description of what would surely become, were he the nominee, a deep practical liability. Let me explain.
That hes not an enrolled Democrat doesnt matter, obviously, to his fans. Im sure it doesnt matter to most rank-and-file Democrats. It doesnt matter to me. But youd better believe it matters to Democratic office holders and party officialsmembers of Congress, state legislators, governors, mayors, national committee members and state committee members across the country. These people are Democrats, and theyre Democrats for a reason. Its important to them.
A lot more at http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/01/27/bernie-sanders-isn-t-electable-and-here-s-why.html
Guys, I think we need to hold the revolution.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)"Proud to be liberal", my ass.
More like
Proud To Be always dissing the most Liberal candidate
pfft.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)This
OMG--Live now. Clinton has Iowa rally in a bowling alley. Less than 150 there.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511075914
This
In a town of 8,000, 2,000 show up to hear Bernie ...
www.democraticunderground.com/125110590
And this:
Gothmog
(145,718 posts)The main theme from the Sanders people is that Sanders will be viable in the general election because he will generate a revolution where millions of non-voters will come out and participate. The premise of this resolution seems to be falling apart http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/26/politics/bernie-sanders-barack-obama-2008-iowa/index.html
"Obama in 2008 ran a campaign which is really going to stay in the history books. It was an unbelievable campaign. In places they ran out of ballots, as I understand," Sanders told reporters after a meeting with the United Steelworkers in Des Moines, Iowa. "The turnout was so extraordinary, nobody expected it. Do I think in this campaign that we are going to match that? I would love to see us do that, I hope we can."
But he added, "Frankly, I don't think we can. What Obama did in 2008 is extraordinary."
Almost twice as many people showed up to caucus in 2008 for the Democratic candidates as had in recent Iowa presidential contests, something largely attributed to Obama's strong appeal and even stronger ground organization. Obama's upset of Clinton in the 2008 caucuses helped launch him to the nomination.
Sanders has been clear that he needs a high turnout at the caucuses Monday with many of his supporters being first-time caucus-goers. But he hasn't placed a cap on his expectations before.
Without a high turnout, Sanders' revolution is dead
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)for the reasons posted above
Gothmog
(145,718 posts)Sanders revolution is not going to be much of a revolution if he gets less votes than Obama
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511076352
Gothmog
(145,718 posts)Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)roguevalley
(40,656 posts)repug slaggers by up to 19 points and HRC not, then you can issue dire warnings.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)I bout pee'd my pants on this one
TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Take this trash out, & stop bringing it here.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Hillary is the one who if she's not indicted, will not win the GE. There is no enthusiasm for her. She can't bring out the vote.
But on the rethug side, they'll be MORE than enthused to vote against her.
So yes, electability is very important & Hillary will never be elected.
ProudToBeLiberal
(3,964 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)He's also the only one with true Democratic values, who actually wants money out of politics. He wants govt for the people, by the people.
Hillary wants Super Pacs & $250k speeches for govt favor.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)months? It will be a reasonable contribution.
newfie11
(8,159 posts)SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)m-lekktor
(3,675 posts)livetohike
(22,165 posts)of not trusting The Establishment, I don't trust people who are opportunists and join the party only when it suits them.
safeinOhio
(32,736 posts)They have the option to pick the correct path.
livetohike
(22,165 posts)go 😊.
safeinOhio
(32,736 posts)Part of being a Democrat is rejecting authoritarian people that tell me what to think. The Democratic Party is the Big Tent party, the other one is the party of being told what to think. If you wish to get rid of all the independent thinkers in this party and members of DU, you'll find yourself very lonely.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Fuck yes.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)form of tyranny over the mind of man."-Thomas Jefferson.
Words I have followed for almost all my life.
newfie11
(8,159 posts)safeinOhio
(32,736 posts)Whoever is the Democratic nom. I will vote for him or her. If the one I am now supporting does not win the nom. and runs as an idependent in the general, I will still vote for the Dem.
How about you?
livetohike
(22,165 posts)never voted for a Republican. Proudly voted for McGovern and remember the sadness of his crushing loss. It was the first experience I had with canvassing. Unless you count the election in 1960 when my Dad paid me 25 cents to drop campaign literature throughout the neighborhood for JFK 😊.
DeeDeeNY
(3,356 posts)In 1960 he kept repeating how JFK was unelectable because he was Catholic and people would never vote for a Catholic. I was 11 at the time and couldn't understand this. I said to him "but Dad, maybe if people vote for him then he will be electable".
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)"Commies, Incoming." I kid you not. It was a little town in Nebraska...4,000 or so...with a little puddle jumper airport. And I felt so proud out there when they handed me, little 7 or 8 year old me, the binoculars to literally...Take My Watch. (boring) The schedule was right there on the clipboard. I just remember it once, so maybe someone suggested there was a better use of our time? Who knows. But it's ingrained into my memory.
Me, too, McGovern. And we had to be 21. I was through 4 years of college working on my Teaching Credential. I think that was the last election before voting age was dropped to 18.
safeinOhio
(32,736 posts)1970 here. Also voted MccGovern.
global1
(25,285 posts)a hero here on DU. Now that he's declared he's a Dem and competing against St. Hillary all of a sudden he's an opportunist. This doesn't register in my book. Sorry Charlie.
Go Bernie!!!! Feel The Bern!!!
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)structures and not have enemies. They are composed of the opposite side. Bernie has transcended the dyadic tug of war/mano-a-mano set up. Can't think of a better example to set for a new age in how politics is viewed, funded, practiced and for getting out votes of the unwashed masses who have just given up.
His base is not with the entrenched politicians mentioned, the celebrities, et al. They have their own candidate. His base is much different. They don't know what to do about it since attacks only serve to make his campaign stronger. Bernie "Jui Jitsu" Sanders. And once the POC actually see, hear and watch who he is and a correct record of his background, well, we'll see.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)CorporatistNation
(2,546 posts)Bernie Sanders Is OUR ONLY Hope!
cali
(114,904 posts)With a sand bottom, as a newly washed window.
I kind of like watching you......
4dsc
(5,787 posts)because I'm not taking what you'll selling here.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)keep watching, hillary is either going to crash and Bern in the primaries or she will crash and burn in the GE. Either way she will never be president.
mikehiggins
(5,614 posts)"Every one of those roughly 3,200 elected officials is going to conduct a poll of his or her district to ascertain whether association with Sanders helps or hurts. Its my guess that for a lot of themand I would say the substantial majority of themthe answer is going to be hurts."
Okay, so its Tomasky writing this, not ProudToBeLiberal, and he is reputedly a reliable source (not marinara, that's a reliable SAUCE) and maybe he is. Who knows?
What he, and others seem to miss is that we (and I flatter myself as being part of SBS's we) knew all that going in. The "movement" (and I hate that term) never expected to be accepted/supported/endorsed by people with a vested (and real) interest in things going on the way they have. Supporting Sanders means you admit that, yeah, the system is corrupt and, yeah, it is set up to benefit the rich and, yeah, we like that just fine.
Just a point or two: the PTB seem to think one of the candidates is more likely to "get things done" than the others. For the life of me I cannot understand why that theory holds any water. While one candidate may be a "socialist" the other certainly has no vast reservoir of love and appreciation to call upon to soften the opposition of an entire political party who very often literally HATE the very idea of that person sitting in the Oval Office. They HATE that individual even more than they hate and despise the current occupant, and that is saying something considering how these "amenable" types fought him from the very day he was inaugurated.
Sanders, the balding old white Jew from Burlington and Brooklyn, may not be the GOPukes cup of tea and I have no doubt that, yeah, he will be attacked root-and-branch from the right. His positions are anathema to the Limbaugh's and Kochs and Hedge fund folks and so on and so on. A Sanders win would be their worse nightmare, even if he is rendered impotent by the right wing's control of Congress. But that is politics.
The other candidate? For the GOPukes, this time its personal.
Just a guess, of course, and I don't write for major publications, so what do I know? Right? Right!
ejbr
(5,857 posts)if only you could get the millions of people who are supporting him to read this piece, it may be of value. Yet, considering I only chose to only read the title, and not the article, even with the link available to me, good luck with that.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)I don't use this one often but..
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Who will defect to Bloomberg if Sanders "steals" the nomination from Hillary again!
We're doomed!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Okay guy, if you say so.
farleftlib
(2,125 posts)you sound like a bleating windbag toadying up to those who profit from the status quo.
Odin2005
(53,521 posts)Highway61
(2,568 posts)You know why Bernie IS electable? He tells the truth. The blunt truth.
EOM
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)Tell it! (bluntly)
Tien1985
(920 posts)Every thing else is just talk.
The real question is, will people vote their values or not? It's really that simple. I'm voting my values.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)CanonRay
(14,123 posts)bought and paid for by the Dem elite. They've chosen their candidate. How dare we non-professionals get uppity.
jillan
(39,451 posts)have negative feelings about you.
Just sayin'
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Obama has started the great sea change, Clinton is going to continue to progress off his accomplishments and expand on them.
The change is happening and we are being held back by those laughably claiming to be revolutionaries.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)Oh, you meant put the revolution on hold?
Nevermind that shit. It won't be stopped.
There's still room for you to come help.
Avalux
(35,015 posts)Do you realize how absurd that sentence appears? It's your opinion and it may be YOUR truth, but it's not the blunt truth, and it's not my truth.
#feelthebern
Dems to Win
(2,161 posts)1. Iraq War vote -- anti war activists may hold their nose and vote for her, but many won't
2. $250,000 speeches to CitiBank - OWS activists may hold their nose and vote for her, but many won't
3. Sexual Harasser in Chief - many feminists will vote for Hillary, but some will balk at returning Bill to the White House in any capacity
4. Forward, Not Back - nothing more same-old same-old than returning the same married couple to the White House who left it 16 years ago. The 90s are done and in the history books.
5. All Drama, All The Time Clintons. After 8 years of No Drama Obama, not a whiff of personal scandal, who wants to return to the Clinton years?
6. The Saudis are not our friends. Anyone who gets $25 million from the Saudis for their Foundation is not who we need in the White House.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)I already read the article yesterday.
Binkie The Clown
(7,911 posts)Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)antigop
(12,778 posts)Gothmog
(145,718 posts)antigop
(12,778 posts)antigop
(12,778 posts)Behind this effort is an alarmed corporate old guard that still runs the Democratic Party establishment and their allies in the corporate think tanks and the media, with a special nod to NBC/MSNBC, which is owned and operated by General Electric and Comcast.
Punkingal
(9,522 posts)Hillary is the one who isn't electable.
Orsino
(37,428 posts)Polling isn't the last word, but how one gets to "unelectable" is obscure.
aikoaiko
(34,185 posts)His biggest "concern" is that establishment Democrats wont play nice, but they if he American people (especially rank and file Democrats) are behind Bernie (and they are), then the established politicians will fall in line or be primaried out.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)No sale.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Thank you, ProudToBeLiberal.
Beacool
(30,253 posts)who have been praised in the past on this site, but the minute they call out Sanders, they are promptly dismissed as "centrists".
They remind me of children putting their fingers in their ears while claiming not to hear what is being said to them. Same tone deafness that afflicts Trump supporters.