2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie's down to his last Hail Mary. And it won't work.
The realization that Bernie can't catch up in pledged delegates is sinking in with his campaign and his fans. You've Jeff Weaver talking about a contested convention and wooing superdelegates to overturn the pledges. Even HA Goodman is writing about how Bernie's going to win with supers. (Interestingly, none of the Bernie fans that were so adamantly opposed to superdelegates earlier in the race seem to have any problem with Bernie's plan to subvert the will of the electorate).
But it's not going to work. Here's why.
There is exactly one argument that Bernie can use to woo superdelegates: that he's doing better in GE polls against Trump. The problem is, supers aren't stupid, they are seasoned politicians. They know that GE polls this early don't carry much information, and this is particularly true for Bernie, who's never been attacked by the GOP.
If Bernie were to become the candidate, here is a partial list of things that very few Americans know now, but 100% of Americans would know before November:
Bernie's healthcare plan will take away every single American's private coverage (about 65% Americans are happy with their current coverage) and replace it with a government plan.
Also, his healthcare plan was rejected by his home state because the taxes required were too big.
Bernie's honeymoon was in the USSR.
Earlier in his political career, Bernie was an outright socialist, advocating things like public ownership of the means of production.
Bernie is on video saying good things about the likes of Fidel Castro.
He's written some pretty creepy essays.
And this is a very partial list. Everything on this list is 100% true, but the GOP doesn't mind stretching or outright breaking the truth. Moreover, there hasn't been any real oppo research done on Bernie, so who knows what other crazy stuff the GOP will find in his past.
Now, here's the thing. Bernie fans are going to respond by saying that nobody is going to care about that stuff, and that people love Bernie because of his socialism and not in spite of it, and blah blah blah. Those arguments mean nothing. Like I said, superdelegates aren't dumb, they know the electorate. They know that running on a massive middle class tax hike is a loser. They know that the GOP will tear apart single payer.
Which means that, no matter how much Bernie fans deface the facebook pages of superdelegates, and now matter how many threatening phone calls Bernie fans make to superdelegates in the middle of the night, the supers aren't going to overturn the will of the electorate in order to nominate a guy that the GOP will crush.
JonathanRackham
(1,604 posts)And paid off the super delagates.
Hillary, stop stealing the people's election.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)The anointed one.
Hail Hillary!
JonathanRackham
(1,604 posts)Bernie reminded me of FDR when I heard bits and pieces of his Buffalo stop.
I hope Obama remembers who helped elect him when he beat Hillary! (The inspired and educated college vote.)
My daughter was texting me from NY yesterday. Extreme energy and motivation in the college crowd. For a 7pm rally, people were there at noon and stood in the rain! They had to turn people away at the door! Probable 8000 to 9000 seats filled plus the overflow. Hillary had problems getting 3000 people to her rally earlier in the week (Buffalo); she was the laughing stock of the local media.
Obama was the first step in the right direction, Bernie is the next. Hillary is SSDD. A career politician from the privileged class.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)So Bernie is part of the solution.
Neoliberalism = taking from the poor and giving to the rich. Globally. By playing groups off against one another.
Sorry.
JonathanRackham
(1,604 posts)Obama could have done better; the alternatives really sucked. Hillary would have done a worse job than Obama.
I don't worship politicians but I'll hedge my bets.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)nt
Baobab
(4,667 posts)nt
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)he will never be able to be President with that lop sided representation.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)By their fruits shall you know them.
KPN
(15,646 posts)Hillary's the one with the narrow representation. Bernie cleans up across all races, genders among younger voters. Hillary does well with the geriatric cohort. Her time is sunsetting.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Don't let anybody tell you differently. We have a big enough problem with Obama and the lame duck session. Voting for Hillary would be like endorsing a huge scam that is trying to take over the world and prevent democracy, and privatize public services, with stealth secret deals. Just like it. In fact, it would be it. Get that? That's what she's doing.
So it would be the hugest of mistakes. Shhh! This is a big secret.
CajunBlazer
(5,648 posts)Bernie never was able to gather in the remaining portions and that is why he is losing. In addition he has frighten the hell out of moderates and moderate progressives in the party. That segment, combined with the blacks, Hispanics and women who have been of voting age for a while have been impossible for Sanders to overcome.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)JonathanRackham
(1,604 posts)Pardon me while I continue to work for Bernie.
You may want to consider Wall Streets corruptive influence on Hillary.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Hillary has fought for progressive issues all her adult life, including gun control. So excuse me while I continue to support the most qualified candidate for president in this election, or possibly any other in history.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)nt
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)When you're talking about institutions of wealth and power trying to manipulate elections, might as well name all the players, eh? And I actually think Hillary will stand up for the middle and working classes in ways Bernie can't.
JonathanRackham
(1,604 posts)One person, one vote. Party superdelagates influenced by corruption, voting against the people be damned. Voter suppression and voter fraud be damned as well.
I don't see the church corrupting Bernie as bad as big money corrupting Hillary.
nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)It takes money to get elected. I'm not as wrapped up in Hillary's donors as some are but I would be if I felt she was kowtowing to every corporate interest and I don't think that's the case. No, I don't like the corporate money in politics but I dislike religion in it more. Far more.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)about how primary elections work before posting this kind of dreck. You're just embarrassing yourself with inane comments like this.
JonathanRackham
(1,604 posts)The inner circle of the democratic party is the one that should be embarrassed. Why waste money if the whole process is an illusion?
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..................
I'm not alone in my assessment. It's a First Amendment thing.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)"a First Amendment thing"? (Please be specific)
JonathanRackham
(1,604 posts)Then read your original post to me.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)JonathanRackham
(1,604 posts)If I explain it, I'll have to send a bill.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)behind. You're just making foolish statements now.
JonathanRackham
(1,604 posts)COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)I said you were saying some foolish things. If that's your idea of a 'personal attack' you probably won't stay on DU for long.
JonathanRackham
(1,604 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)that airplane could still fall out of the sky onto Hillary's head. I'm sufficiently glad to have Sanders every time I look to the right.
Another big problem with imagining Sanders could just woo over the superdelegates, though, is that Hillary carries the popular vote by something like 2.5 million more than he does, and that margin is expected to grow as we move to states that favor her. The only time superdelegates did not go with the committed delegates was to support the candidate who had the popular vote.
Plus, superdelegates are party professionals who know they are choosing their party leader, as well as presidential candidate. They want a candidate with coattails for downticket candidates and who has demonstrated party leadership by assisting other candidates. HRC does both, and deserves their loyalty. BS is famously an anti-Democrat who has done little to nothing to earn their support.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)In fact, she loses to Kasich and is in a virtual tie with Cruz. You better hope to God that Trump can get that nomination.
And to make matters worse, she has the highest negatives in history.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)and running scared.
Only Bernie's subgroup of ultrapartisan supporters don't seem to realize that, and then only when talking about Hillary. Everyone else knows.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)Could it be that her negatives are so oustandingly enormous?
I sure hope you don't end up looking like Karl Rove on election night.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Last edited Tue Apr 12, 2016, 08:36 AM - Edit history (1)
As for our candidates, HRC has negatives, but her public image is AFTER 30 years of character assassination.
Sanders has negatives, but his current public image is BEFORE the right-wing character-assassination machines get to work on him.
Not to worry, too much. The GOP candidates are all extremist, corrupt, dysfunctional, and incompetent to lead any nation, with enormous negatives that cannot stand scrutiny.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)He is literally character assassination proof. He's frumpy, he's real, he clearly is not the usual egotistical shill for mega-corporate interests.
That's why they hate him. He's not like them.
Sorry.
Response to Baobab (Reply #36)
Post removed
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)1) He's a 74 year old man, out of touch with reality
2) He's a Socialist (= Communist), who honeymooned in Russia and applauded Fidel and Ortega
3) He's a Jew (think that won't matter? Don't bet money on it, particularly a) south of the Mason Dixon line and b) among Evangelical Xians
4) He's never done anything as a Senator, aside from naming a Post Office
5) His only other governmental experience is being Mayor of Burlington
6) HE'S GONNA RAISE YOUR TAXES
I don't share any of this, and will vote enthusiastically for Bernie if he's the candidate. But to believe that he is untouchable in a general election is beyond naive. Remember how John Kerry, a highly decorated Vietnam combat veteran was savaged by the Swiftboaters on his combat performance. They'll have a field day with Bernie.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Shhh!
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Everything we know is wrong.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)Bernie has yet to be vetted by the type of intense scrutiny and attacks that the Repubs have in their pockets just hoping hope against hope that Bernie's the candidate for our party. They understand that with the crop of losers they have on deck this year that the only way the can possibly win is if the Democrats' candidate isn't Hillary.
Human101948
(3,457 posts)They know which side of the bread the butter is on.
Which lead to this situation--
In their conclusion, Gilens and Page go even further, asserting that In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not ruleat least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/is-america-an-oligarchy
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)so the conclusion is that it's worth every penny they are spending to try and have Bernie win the nomination...wonder why?
Baobab
(4,667 posts)You need to take a bath and relax a bit. Calm down.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Please explain in what way you think I am desperate?
I actually feel very calm and confident and it's your lashing out that seems manic, crazed and frazzled
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Hillary is a phony - Bernie isn't.
The establishment is freaking out because its corrupt. That's not Bernie's fault.
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)You know, to show strength and all that.
I wonder what fresh Trade agreements that she will sign that will shoe off more American Jobs?
I wonder how many favors she will pay back for the donations of all these rich A$$pipes who are funding her campaign.
Her campaign slogan should be "Lets Keep Things The Same".
Human101948
(3,457 posts)Got to strike while the iron is hot!
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)I figure if we split it in 3's we have 33 day segments.
I'm thinking probably somewhere in the first third of a 33 day segment.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)I can't see how it would be any different with Hillary. She having gotten Dick Cheney's blessing and all.
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)in fact there seems to be a huge shortage of bombs
http://aviationweek.com/awin/bomb-shortage-crimps-air-war
Unless the U.S. begins severely rationing high-accuracy, all-weather bombs and air-launched cruise missiles, the Air Force could run out of its weapons of choice in NATO's air war against Yugoslavia before the end of May. ``At the current expenditure rate, it's going to really be touch and go as to whether we will [run out of] JDAMs before we get the next delivery,'' said Gen. Richard Hawley, chief of Air Combat Command.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)DanTex
(20,709 posts)Do you think supers are going to jump to Bernie? Do you think they're not aware of how badly the GOP would crush him?
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)personal attacks. Some of them can't handle the truth.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Maybe it exists, maybe it doesn't. One thing is for certain; not many people have actually seen evidence of either one.
BlindTiresias
(1,563 posts)Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)Bernie has Beaten Trump and about any Repuke they put up by a far greater percentage than Hillary does, In fact she loses to Kasich.
You keep saying "Crush". I do not think it means what you think it means
DanTex
(20,709 posts)against him at all, which makes the numbers meaningless. In fact, it's the opposite: the GOP has run ads in favor of Bernie because they'd love to run against him.
What fraction of Americans do you think are aware that Bernie honeymooned in the USSR? What fraction do you think would be aware by November if he were the nominee?
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)Your favorite candidate is only electable if there is an independent run on the republican side and the party is split.
People hate her. Period! Look around you. People don't like her. At least half of the females I know don't like her.
Independent voters don't like her. Young voters don't like her.
But when it comes to believing that Bernie would do worse than Hillary is bananapants crazy!
But , Please Proceed.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)have the GOP attacks baked into them, unlike Bernie's. As for "look around you", internet Bernie fans are not representative of the electorate as a whole. If they were, then Hillary wouldn't be so far ahead of him in the primaries.
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)Bernie's is +16.5.
But I thought these numbers didn't matter?
DanTex
(20,709 posts)The betting markets have Hillary as about 60% favorite to win the presidency. And like I said, she's already been vetted and attacked, unlike Bernie, who is extremely fertile ground for GOP smears.
There is no basis whatsoever for the claim that Hillary can't beat the GOP. And the supers know that.
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)I'm talking about real people who I have been in company with
Never mind. I keep forgetting that Brick walls lack reasoning skills.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)knows other people do you?
Tell me, if nobody will vote for Hillary, why is she beating Bernie? Who are all those people who voted for her over him?
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)that we rarely if ever win. Oh wait. Brickwall.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Hillary has won convincingly in Ohio and Florida, probably the two most important swing states in the whole country. And also in Virginia.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Maybe they are being paid to go there?
Ive even seen a fair amount of Bernie paraphenalia on attendees.
Maybe they just go out of curiosity's sake. To see a train wreck in slow motion.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)revbones
(3,660 posts)You were arguing before that not voting for Hillary is a vote for Trump. Why can't she beat Trump in polls?
Demsrule86
(68,586 posts)You hate Hillary and as many do imagine that everyone thinks like you...we don't I like and respect Secretary Clinton. I did vote for Bernie in Ohio...because of his views on trade which he has since back peddled on...I was torn. At that time, I like them both. I don't like Bernie anymore...his behavior is disgusting and he risks helping to elect a GOP president with his attacks on Hillary Clinton...now I don't think Bernie is stupid, thus, he must see the delegate situation...so I can't understand what he is thinking. The courts are at stake.
Vinca
(50,276 posts)once she's the nominee. Sure, maybe the sheeple have heard it all before, but they'll get a kick out of the spectacle. I think I read that Kathleen Willey has agreed to go on the campaign trail and camera lovers like Paula Jones can't be far behind. Ah, what a happy trip down Memory Lane. And then there's that you-know-what still up in the air. Bernie's history is going to seem downright boring.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Vinca
(50,276 posts)I'm just hoping they haven't got anything new . . . which wouldn't surprise me given the long trips Hillary took overseas as SOS.
CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)You're actually hoping there is something new.
Vinca
(50,276 posts)The problem is, we won't know until it's too late.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Geneva, Brussels, Nairobi, etc.
Helsinki+Nuremberg?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Michael Dukakis had a seventeen point lead after the Convention and lost by eight points. That's a twenty five point swing:
That is because a lot of things Dukakis couldn't be hit with in a Democratic primary he could be hit with in a general election.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Bernie is the real deal, he's essentially called it the way he has seen it- the system is rigged. If the Dems frce through Hillary, which i know those who do things things will, we do it at our peril. Frankly, I am not one of those people who wants to see a big mess but a lot of people seem to be. Bluntly, thats a huge mistake.
Whatever plans they have, they are unlikely to work the way they think.
FAR SMARTER TO JUST LET THE SYSTEM WORK FOR A CHANGE.
Buddyblazon
(3,014 posts)You guys keep using "hail mary" over and over again. I've seen it in thread titles repeatedly for the last few weeks.
Could one of you tell me which one of these many events you guys keep bringing up as "Hail Marys" is the ACTUAL Hail Mary? And could you figure out a way to denote it in the subject line? I'm using up precious time clicking on "Hail Mary" threads.
....daily affirmation with Hillarians.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Sees and knows both Hillary and Bernie, many have worked with them in Congress. They probably have heard interview after interview where he has been ask questions and he danced off to his standard financial statement. There is not enough time left until the convention to correct these interviews, they know his agenda is not realistic and they know his record and know he has nit been vetted by the GOP. They also know the GOP does not want to run against Hillary in the GE.
Tarc
(10,476 posts)They tried in Nevada, and Missouri, and are currently trying to give it a go in Wyoming.
Funny how quickly principles go out the window when desperation sets in.
jmg257
(11,996 posts)for Bernie are small. Thought there IS a chance.
But still very interesting watching the struggle. The longer it goes the more comes out, the more we learn about the status quo, the corruption, etc.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)jmg257
(11,996 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)to find Republican propaganda.
CorkySt.Clair
(1,507 posts)Especially when it's unfairly critical of their most hated pols: our president and HRC.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)enjoys working with their insurance company? Not to mention the overall costs savings associated with single payer.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)the super-delegates to re-evaluate who they are supporting.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)the gap is widening
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)He's increased his numbers massively there recently
frylock
(34,825 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)Gothmog
(145,293 posts)Dana Milbank has some good comments on general election match up polls https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/democrats-would-be-insane-to-nominate-bernie-sanders/2016/01/26/0590e624-c472-11e5-a4aa-f25866ba0dc6_story.html?hpid=hp_opinions-for-wide-side_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
Watching Sanders at Monday nights Democratic presidential forum in Des Moines, I imagined how Trump or another Republican nominee would disembowel the relatively unknown Vermonter.
The first questioner from the audience asked Sanders to explain why he embraces the socialist label and requested that Sanders define it so that it doesnt concern the rest of us citizens.
Sanders, explaining that much of what he proposes is happening in Scandinavia and Germany (a concept that itself alarms Americans who dont want to be like socialized Europe), answered vaguely: Creating a government that works for all of us, not just a handful of people on the top thats my definition of democratic socialism.
But thats not how Republicans will define socialism and theyll have the dictionary on their side. Theyll portray Sanders as one who wants the government to own and control major industries and the means of production and distribution of goods. Theyll say he wants to take away private property. That wouldnt be fair, but it would be easy. Socialists dont win national elections in the United States .
Sanders on Monday night also admitted he would seek massive tax increases one of the biggest tax hikes in history, as moderator Chris Cuomo put it to expand Medicare to all. Sanders, this time making a comparison with Britain and France, allowed that hypothetically, youre going to pay $5,000 more in taxes, and declared, W e will raise taxes, yes we will. He said this would be offset by lower health-insurance premiums and protested that its demagogic to say, oh, youre paying more in taxes.
Well, yes and Trump is a demagogue.
Sanders also made clear he would be happy to identify Democrats as the party of big government and of wealth redistribution. When Cuomo said Sanders seemed to be saying he would grow government bigger than ever, Sanders didnt quarrel, saying, P eople want to criticize me, okay, and F ine, if thats the criticism, I accept it.
Sanders accepts it, but are Democrats ready to accept ownership of socialism, massive tax increases and a dramatic expansion of government? If so, they will lose.
Match up polls are worthless because these polls do not measure what would happen to Sanders in a general election where Sanders is very vulnerable to negative ads.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Americans want Single payer public healthcare and have wanted it for decades. Sanders is wildly overestimating the costs of his proposals (single payer actually costs less than what we do now so it would effectively cost nothing) and people still want them.
Gothmog
(145,293 posts)If single payer can not work in Vermont, then there is no chance that it will be adopted in the entire country http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/single-payer-vermont-113711#ixzz3xciq2Nj5
Vermont under Shumlin became the most visible trailblazer. Until Wednesday, when the governor admitted what critics had said all along: He couldnt pay for it.
It is not the right time for Vermont to pass a single-payer system, Shumlin acknowledged in a public statement ending his signature initiative. He concluded the 11.5 percent payroll assessments on businesses and sliding premiums up to 9.5 percent of individuals income might hurt our economy.
Vermonts outcome is a small speed bump, said New York Assembly member Richard Gottfried, whos been pushing single-payer bills for more than 20 years. But opponents says its the end of the road.
If cobalt blue Vermont couldnt find a way to make single-payer happen, then its very unlikely that any other state will, said Jack Mozloom, spokesman for the National Federation of Independent Business.
There will never be a good time for a massive tax increase on employers and consumers in Vermont, so they should abandon that silly idea now and get serious, Mozloom added.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/single-payer-vermont-113711#ixzz3xdKH1mGn
Sanders is proposing a skeleton of a plan (not a real plan at all) that has no chance of passage. The refusal of Sanders to answer the question was an admission that even Sanders knows that this plan is not real.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)It was a multi-payer system!!!
Also, STATES CANNOT IMPLEMENT SINGLE PAYER WITHOUT VIOLATING THE {OTW BACKWARDS}{STAG BACKWARDS} TRADE AGREEMENT!
Gothmog
(145,293 posts)Facts are important.
Baobab
(4,667 posts)read this paper and everything will suddenly be crystal clear.-
Baobab
(4,667 posts)Last edited Tue Apr 12, 2016, 09:49 PM - Edit history (2)
They are hiding it because its been the position of the US, driven by the drug and health insurance industries, among others, that THE WTO GATS Services "agreement" blocks everything that is necessary to have *single* payer.
See http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.405.5725 - this is an important paper-
First and most important- just have one payer, meaning no insurance companies. No other payers- they have to join and not charge money so people can go to the doctor when they get sick and not delay. But the financial factors are the most important.
Existing single payer system are "grandfathered" in.
(See discussion here about the situation in Canada)
The WTO GATS has literally dozens of provisions that block money saving aspects of health care that we need. GATS was promoted by and signed by Bill Clinton. Its arguable that Hillary Clintons much talked about "health care plan" was basically - like Obamacare, a form of diversion or cover up that prevented the news media from seeing or understanding the real situation, that the rights to have a functional affordable health care system in the US -
" target="_blank">were being signed away by a trade deal. (and in other signatory nations, new public services are also blocked) TiSA does the same thing.
It worked, people in the US still have been kept in the dark about this and its an important lapse. Now they are trying to pull the same set of tricks a third time.
Gothmog
(145,293 posts)I trust Prof. Krugman on this http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/weakened-at-bernies/?_r=0
On health care: leave on one side the virtual impossibility of achieving single-payer. Beyond the politics, the Sanders plan isnt just lacking in detail; as Ezra Klein notes, it both promises more comprehensive coverage than Medicare or for that matter single-payer systems in other countries, and assumes huge cost savings that are at best unlikely given that kind of generosity. This lets Sanders claim that he could make it work with much lower middle-class taxes than would probably be needed in practice.
To be harsh but accurate: the Sanders health plan looks a little bit like a standard Republican tax-cut plan, which relies on fantasies about huge supply-side effects to make the numbers supposedly add up. Only a little bit: after all, this is a plan seeking to provide health care, not lavish windfalls on the rich and single-payer really does save money, whereas theres no evidence that tax cuts deliver growth. Still, its not the kind of brave truth-telling the Sanders campaign pitch might have led you to expect.
Again, as noted by Prof. Krugman this plan does not add up.
democrank
(11,096 posts)Bernie has helped give voice to millions of Americans the corporate/establishment wing of the Democratic Party consistently ridicules....until just before it`s time for the general election.
I seriously doubt that the enthusiasm for Bernie`s ideas will suddenly evaporate after The Coronation.
Bernie Sanders....We, not me.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Don't you know he is the perfect candidate?
LAS14
(13,783 posts)KPN
(15,646 posts)That's all.
CalvinballPro
(1,019 posts)It would explain a lot of the derangement going on in his articles.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)He keeps making ground.
So, let's say he doesn't get the magic number of delegates by the convention. But let's say he keeps winning the primaries by 55/45 or more. Let's say that puts him with more raw votes than Clinton going into the convention and neither has the magic number. You are saying that the arguments that it should be Clinton because she is ahead in votes should now mean it shouldn't be Sanders?
And how about if you stop the red-baiting with the "because of his socialism"? That would be nice if we didn't have to see that on a progressive website.
LonePirate
(13,424 posts)Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)LonePirate
(13,424 posts)And Bernie did not win Michigan by 10 points. Your comparisons do not work.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)of her Labor. Third Way or the Highway! The power of Debbie commands you!
Orsino
(37,428 posts)anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)American's have a very deep bias against a leader who does not at least appear to be religious. And this article doesn't really even address the evangelical radicals who would never vote for a Democrat anyway, but are loud and obnoxious enough to influence the vote.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/03/23/americans-are-deeply-religious-so-will-we-ever-see-an-atheist-president-heres-what-we-know/
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)But I'm almost certain that it IS enough to dissuade many Americans to NOT vote for him.
LexVegas
(6,067 posts)Blue Owl
(50,405 posts)n/t