You say Hillary would win the GE and Sanders would lose because...?

[Bonobo]

A. Hillary would draw more Republican votes.

B. Hillary would draw more Independent votes.

C. There are many Democrats that won't vote for Sanders, but will vote for Hillary.


Which one(s)?

[restorefreedom]

1. d.

none of the above

[Gman]

2. E. Stupid question.

[Krytan11c]

3. Don't you know?

It's because he's a socialist and Americans would never vote for a socialist. Just like they'll never vote for a black man. Oh wait.

[brooklynite]

9. That was a Black man with a huge war chest, right?

[mak3cats]

12. Yes, how much money someone has should be our first consideration...

...off to change to my affiliation to Republican! Makes sense, right?

[dorkzilla]

26. That’s his response to EVERYTHING - always points out the MONEY nt.

[cui bono]

31. I don't really have anything to say right now...

Just wanted to see two "It's Happening" gifs in a row.

[dorkzilla]

34. Hahahahahahaha! YOU MADE ME SPIT UP MY DRINK!

That was NOT FAIR cui...I was expecting something profound when I clicked on your reply

[cui bono]

37. I hope your keyboard is okay!

Expecting something profound from me on DU during this gossip shitstorm is too high of a standard for me to meet.

[dorkzilla]

38. Yeah profundity is not one of my strong suits right now either

I’m sure it will come back to me at some point, usually after a shot of Jameson’s.

[Scootaloo]

33. He's what you might call "insulated"

Has it in his head that owning a five bedroom home in New York City and having dinner with the Vice President isn't the least bit indicative of economic privilege.

[dorkzilla]

36. He claims he’s also had dinner with Bernie and Jane

and his wife. Just the 4 of them. How cozy.

ALL he ever says is “money money money money”. I’m fucking SICK TO DEATH of money money money. The object of the game is NOT “he who dies with the most toys wins”. The grave is a great leveler. Hopefully he’ll learn government SHOULDN’T be pay for play. This is as much ours as it is his.

We have a money-fucking-worshiping society going on, and a money-hoarding bunch of operatives that are trying to keep it all, while also rigging the system so we can’t pay for an education or health care, or clean air and water, or even a one way ticket to get out of here. I’m not going along with the reintroduction to Feudalism. Fuck them.

Sickening.

[brooklynite]

47. Talk about the horns of a dilemma...

...either I'm a 1%er who gets to hang out with all these people. or I'm making it all up. You can't beat me up for both.

As for "money, money, money", why is Sanders raising any money at all? Either he doesn't need it, or he does. If he does, he either has enough, or he doesn't. If you think he has enough, why is he still collecting? If not, how much does he need?

[dorkzilla]

51. He's raised money. Just not the familiar slimy quid pro quo way this country traditionally does

And I might venture to guess if you'd actually dined with him you'd know all about, as I doubt he is the type inclined toward small talk. But then again you did claim that we Bernistas weren't truthful about the attendance at his NC rally and wouldn't correct your assertion even when repeatedly shown evidence so...

[brooklynite]

57. Actually I did correct my assertion, but you probably didn't bother to check...

...because of course you knew better.

[dorkzilla]

59. Well, if you had it either was buried in the thread or you did it several days later.

I stopped looking after 24 hours when many of us had called you on it. If indeed you updated the OP with an apology, then I will admit I'm wrong and offer you an apology. But I looked back at that thread a lot and didn't see squat.

ETA: Hmmm...here's the thread, looks like you kept the inflammatory headline and made a wee correction at #243. Not really much of a correction is it????
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=591120

[Gothmog]

61. I have been to a bundler event and made a decent size contribution

I am not one of the one percent but I understand how fundraising works

[brooklynite]

60. "Bernie Sanders Courts Martha’s Vineyard Donors"

Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has risen in the polls thanks in part to his denunciations of the forces of concentrated wealth, drawing thousands of liberals to hear his jeremiads against corporate power in early nominating states and liberal hubs such as Madison, Wis.

But Mr. Sanders quietly stepped off the campaign trail this weekend to visit Martha’s Vineyard, a favorite summer destination of the country’s elite, in order to mix with representatives of some of the same interests he inveighs against in his stump speech.

Mr. Sanders attended the annual Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee fund-raiser on the Massachusetts island, a popular gathering that draws some of the most prominent business lobbyists and fund-raisers in the Democratic Party.

One prominent attendee, a supporter of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign, suggested Mr. Sanders’s appearance suggested he was more pragmatic than his rhetoric would let on.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/07/11/sanders-courts-marthas-vineyard-donors/

Rather "practical" of him, don't you think?

This was this summer's DSCC event for their deep-pockets donors. My wife and I attended back in 2011, which is when we had dinner with Bernie and his wife.

[cascadiance]

63. That's like saying someone is a hypocrite for voting on an electronic voting machine...

... if they've actively campaigned against using electronic voting machines, even if that's the only way they can vote in an election.

Sometimes when a system is rigged, you have to play by its rigged and corrupt rules to find a way to change it.

Bernie's trying to stay away from the big campaign donors that are corrupting this country, but appealing to rank and file for donations, and perhaps some of those more well off who are more inclined to support trying to vote him in to change the system to get money out of politics, instead of using it as an excuse to say that people have to play by those rules to get elected and damn everything else including policy platforms to do so.

[brooklynite]

65. "you have to play by its rigged and corrupt rules"

I ABSOLUTELY agree that you have to play by the rules. But I keep being told by Sanders supporters that he DOESN'T have to and WON'T play by those rules, and can win a national election without the level of financial support every candidate for the past 50 years has needed.

[cascadiance]

66. Some rules you can push on...

You are REQUIRED in some cases to use electronic voting machines to vote. Some choose to move to states with vote by mail. Some go for absentee ballots to work around this.

Bernie can still get money from most of us, who are wanting to put money in a campaign that will help later put someone in power that takes money OUT of this system, not someone that just continues to have us play by these rules where we continue to lose power more and more, which is what Hillary and other more corporate Democrats appear to live by. Obama made it sound like he'd change this system, but he pushed more with the TPA/TPP bill than on any other legislation to reinforce and empower the corrupt elements of our system that much more. We need someone that is committed to changing the system. Someone that just hands us token crap as being "better" than Republicans is not going to do any more.

Bernie has a lot more power than the money people are able to deal with, and don't want us to understand either as much as they are able with the corporate controlled media. There is enough independent media, and social media, etc. that people can mobilize to inform the public in different ways that they are now THIRSTY for, and it doesn't have to mean that we own the corporations, or spend gobs of money that only rich people can give us any more to control the corporate media's message.

In a way, the Arab Spring was a sign of things to come here too. Before those events, many would have thought it impossible for regimes like Egypt's to be torn down like they were. Not that they are in the best shape yet, but when there's enough frustration, change will come one way or the other. You can wait and something like the French Revolution will come and we likely will all regret the outcomes, or we can work now to try to force change on the system in a more civilized way so that we can peacefully kick the criminals that control our lives out of power.

[Historic NY]

67. Title should be Sanders courts rich uber-liberals....

in POTUS's vacation playland. My guess is he got more than the usual 31.95 dollar donation too...

[dorkzilla]

69. Again that was 2011

Also, I often vacation on the Vineyard but I'm not in POTUS' playland. Many middle class families have been going there for generations.

[dorkzilla]

68. That was 2011

He wasn't running for President then and you said you has dinner with Bernie and Jane with just your wife.

[brooklynite]

70. We did.

The Senators sat with the guests, and Bernie, his wife, my wife and I were the only people at the table for the entire dinner. Outside of listening to speeches, I'd say we chatted for about an hour.

[dorkzilla]

71. Holy cow dude

That's not having dinner with Bernie and Jane, that's sharing a table at an event with Bernie and Jane. Not the same thing, is it? Context matters!

I go to a lot of sports dinners, but I don't claim hubby and I had dinner with Roger Staubach because we shared a small table and listened to speeches and chit chatted for 30 minutes.

[brooklynite]

77. I never said he invited me home...I said I had dinner with him...

...which means I had uninterrupted time to talk politics with him.

The ONLY reason this ever came up was because of the assertions that Clinton supporters, must, OF COURSE, hate Bernie Sanders. As I've said before, "having had dinner with him", I'm prepared to state that I like him personally, and support almost every position he holds. My SOLE issue is his electability outside of Vermont.

[dorkzilla]

79. Time will tell...and you’re not going to win anyone over by constantly talking $

Money is the thing most of us are railing against. Not that there is anything with money per se, its money as an influencer, money in politics most particularly. It’s a different world, and having the most money doesn’t insure elections anymore, my learned friend. Certainly you know that. Social media may turn out to have more influence now and in the coming years as ay media. Just look at how much traction Bernie has gotten in spite of all his “hurdles”. No ads, no surrogates, just the pure power of people and the consistency of his message.

And for most of us, his being a “socialist” doesn’t mean shit. Young people are coming out for Bernie, and they certainly don’t care about the label. And they’re talking to each other one on one about Bernie over FB, Twitter, reddit and all sorts of forums that didn’t exist when you were first involved in politics.

I would have bigger issues with Hillary’s electability full stop. A lot of the stories are BS, I agree, but the fact that she is now coming up with the third reason about the email server, even if legit, does not help her trustworthiness quotient. And it all just does seem too much like ’08. She came out of that last election smelling like a big turd. And her current vacillations don’t help either.

(and i never thought you said you were invited to his home but you did say it was just the 4 of you, alone. Which implies that you went out to dinner with him personally, not sat at a table at a fundraiser).

[brooklynite]

80. When money stops being an issue in campaigns, I'll stop talking about it...

As for "dinnergate", saying I had dinner with Bernie DOES NOT imply that "we went out to dinner". It implies that we ate together and had extended time to talk with each other, without interruptions from anyone else.

[dorkzilla]

81. That day may be at hand. One can hope. nt

[brooklynite]

46. Because it's a threshold requirement...

...once you've got enough for a baseline campaign, THEN you can apply you great policy ideas and campaign skills.

[dorkzilla]

48. That's merely your theory

But just keep reinforcing it and let the rest of us try and change it.

[brooklynite]

50. That theory has been built on every campaign for the last 80 years...

YOUR theory, based on...nothing, apparently is that money is no longer needed for a national General Election campaign.

[dorkzilla]

52. Your obsession with money is tiresome. Nt

[brooklynite]

55. Think of it as being my obsession with the Democrats actually winning the election.

It's something I've been obsessed about since my days as a Ward Committeeman in Philadelphia in the 70s.

[daleanime]

76. OK, that explains it.....

Just as long as you're happy.

[RBInMaine]

49. Being a self-declared socialist is whole different ballgame. He can not win the American presidency.

[tularetom]

54. Hey, good to see you back and still pushing the "a socialist can't become POTUS" canard

Sure he could lose because he gets outspent by an order of magnitude (even in the primary this could happen) but he won't lose because he is a "socialist".

You should try a new meme.

[brooklynite]

58. Before calling it a "canard", care to provide evidence that a Socialist CAN become President?

[cascadiance]

64. Hey better being that than someone who lives off of Joseph Stalin empire money through the Kochs...

... who are the ones that are buying off most of the Republican Party as well as the corporate Democrats through their control of the DLC and it's offspring...

Who do you think Americans would rather elect? Someone that is being bought by those using communist dictator Joseph Stalin's money to keep the 1% in power, or someone that wants *DEMOCRATIC* socialism like they have in many places like Sweden where they are amongst the happiest citizenships in the world as noted here...

https://emsnews.wordpress.com/2011/01/23/happiest-nations-are-mostly-northern-socialist-nations/

... and Sweden provides the model of wealth divide that people think ours in the U.S. is closer to than the real numbers, and is more like what they feel is the ideal than what we have too that favor the 1%ers.

http://www.rawstory.com/2010/09/poll-wealth-distribution-similar-sweden/

The American citizens in this election are getting VERY FED UP with CRAP they are getting from our media and politicians about what they should want and are looking for new voices to provide the change that they haven't been getting for the last 30-40 years that have screwed us all royally. This election will be like those right around FDR's time when people were seeking to change the creep towards fascism that was happening then, and is happening now too.

[MindfulOne]

4. Truth: Sanders beats many Republicans among Republicans!

I've seen polls where his numbers are higher than many GOP among registered Republicans.
And with Independents, well, they should be an easy demo.

[corkhead]

6. That was taken on Mackinac Island last weekend

I was there, wearing my Bernie shirt for 2 straight days. I need to post some pics but I unloaded them on to my work computer. I'll try to do that tomorrow.

[MindfulOne]

20. Cool!

I hope I'll get to see them, not miss them!

[Hortensis]

18. Not first, but on the list definitely. Skating along on social media

will only take one so far. Most of the GOP candidates who are dropping out are doing so because they didn't raise enough campaign money to stay in.

[oneshooter]

28. Jury Results

Truth: Sanders beats many Republicans among Republicans!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=627218

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This is racist and hurtful to me because it is a picture of Bernie Sanders talking in fake and insulting African-American dialect similar to what you might find on a very racist website.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Sep 27, 2015, 02:15 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Please stop with alert swarming ffs this post is innocuous. I find it hard to give any credibility to this alert.
Interesting is the alerts claim of offence because its a photo of Bernie. As to the phony accent....." Ah ain't no ways tarred"
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No worse than Hillery faking a black southern drawl.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Like it or not, America is composed of various dialects, grammars, etc. The case here is a fair use of a common dialect.

I thought the alert was for Jeb Bush who provokes my gag reflex, but still not hide worthy.
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: No explanation given

[MindfulOne]

32. Well!

The alerter clearly applies stereotypes, how very progressive of them.

Jurors 1 and 2:

[cui bono]

39. Real oR photoshopped?

The second photo... that is Jeb right? Is he in agreement that his name stands for "Just Elect Sanders" then?

Did he not see the t-shirts?

WHAT'S HAPPENING???????!!!!!!!!!1

[hootinholler]

56. AFAIK it was an epic photo bomb n/t

[99th_Monkey]

5. Where voters know Sanders best (Vermont) Bernie ties GOP front-runners.

To know Bernie is to love him.

[brooklynite]

8. ...and Vermont is a bellwether for national Republican voting trends?

[99th_Monkey]

13. Vermonters know Bernie best. You must be thinking of New Hampshire, Bernie's ahead there too.

"NH polls are a leading indicator of National Polls" - Nate Silver
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/09/25/1424878/--NH-polls-are-a-leading-indicator-of-National-Polls-Nate-Silver-of-2007

[brooklynite]

22. Actually, I'm thinking about Ohio and Michigan.

Show me where Sanders appeals to republicans in battleground States.

[99th_Monkey]

23. Team Bernie is working on that

now that they seem to have NH and Iowa. Like I said, the more voters learn
about Bernie, the more support he receives. One 1-2 states at a time.

True, super Tues. is still in play.. but so far Bernie's staying ahead of the curve
where it most counts.

[stillwaiting]

25. We probably should care more about which candidate is stronger with independents in

battleground states.

[Chan790]

72. That would be Sanders too I suspect.

Most of the independents I know are independents either because they're former Republicans whose embarrassment with the GOP has driven them from the tent as they realized there's only one party and they ain't in it or because they're former Democrats that don't want to share a party with the Clintons because they're kowtowing quislings to DLC positions co-opted straight from the early 1980s GOP. Hillary avoidance, in short, largely drives the existence of the pool of self-identified "moderates"; none of whom are really moderates but Democrats and Republicans that have grown embarrassed with their party and shucked the label. (Which in-itself makes them likely to eschew establishment candidates of either party in favor of outsiders.)

The myth of the great unaffiliated voting center is just that, a myth. It doesn't exist--people that vote consistently are very unlikely to be moderate or centrist. The great mass of "moderates" in the middle tends to be very vote-apathetic. Running to appeal to moderates is vapor-candidacy--running to appeal to non-existent voters.

But to take a different tack...you're really not interested in true independents anyways since they don't exist (and false moderates would favor Sanders); a better question is "who has greater cross-aisle appeal?" and that's also Sanders, not Clinton.

[brooklynite]

7. A and B.

Nobody I'm aware has suggested that Sanders won't get Democrats to vote for him.

Unless you subscribe to the premise (stated here) that anyone who's not a progressive isn't a "real" Democrat...

[Recursion]

15. His depth of support among Democrats is really bad

At least to date the lowest "never support" he's gotten among Dems nationally is 15%; it's usually closer to 20.

[Hortensis]

19. "Progressive" is being misused all over the place by various

interests who either see it as nice and try to coopt it for themselves or are hard-right conservative and see it as a bad thing to be used as a smear against the left.

Liberals and conservatives come in all degrees and various flavors. One is a progressive liberal or a progressive conservative if one believes in using the power of government to apply large solutions to large problems that may be unsolvable otherwise.

(Moderates are not a third type -- they are mixtures of relatively mild-degree liberal and/or conservative personalities. Moderate conservatives would average out conservative.)

An example of a progressive program supported by liberals and most conservatives alike is providing every school child in America one good meal 5 days a week through the National School Lunch Program.

Examples of progressive liberals are HRC supporters, Bernie supporters, O'Malley supporters, and in fact all other Democratic candidate supporters.

No GOP candidate is progressive. They are all too far right these days.

[Fumesucker]

21. Hillary claims she is the Moderate candidate

[Chan790]

74. ...and has repeatedly rejected identification by others of being either "liberal" or "progressive".

I'm willing to take her at her word at that.

Hillary isn't a progressive or a liberal, she's a moderate...I just think she's currently in the wrong party too.

[Chan790]

73. They're not real Democrats.

It's high time for the tent to shrink...some positions should be disqualifying of self-identification as a Democrat.

We need to be more than the vast open tent willing to drift ever rightward as we take in every single Republican that their own rightward creep has pushed out of their own tent; it's fairly simple from where I sit...adopt Democratic values or stay the fuck out of the Democratic party. Just because the GOP has become unwelcoming to center-rightists doesn't mean they are or should be welcome here.

[99Forever]

10. You just say that 'cuz you are one of us mean Sanders supporters.

How dare you question illogical thinking!

[AgingAmerican]

11. Hillary garners no Republican or Independent votes

That is the big difference between her and Sanders. He will get LOTS of crossover votes. More than enough to make up for any Hillary supporters who sit out once he wins the primaries.

[Recursion]

14. A and C

Sanders would probably do better with independents. But polling says he loses 20% of the Democratic vote if he's nominated; for Clinton that number is about 3%.

[Robbins]

17. and other polling suggests

more would say they would never vote for her than say they would never vote for him.

[anti partisan]

27. I just saw a poll that said he had 5% unfavorability within his party

While Biden had 6 and Hillary had over 10...

Where did you pull this 20% number from?

[jfern]

35. What polling? He's doing better in the general election polls than Hillary.

[Chan790]

75. I'm assuming that you're familiar with the concept of the "grudging vote?"

that is...the 97% or so of those 20 and 3 percents that will grit their teeth, no matter what they claim today, and pull the lever for the Democratic nominee because it's better than the alternative. The remainder are voters we were never going to have anyways.

So, those Democrats that "won't vote for the Democrat" don't matter because they will either vote for the Democrat...or were never going to vote for the Democrat. That margin with independents is what matters.

The total margin of people in the Democratic party that actually won't vote for Clinton but will vote for Sanders or vice-versa isn't enough to change even one state, let alone the results of the election. They don't matter.

[Vinca]

16. I would be concerned about Michael Bloomberg getting in as an Independent.

He'd scoop up both semi-sane Republicans and Hillary Democrats. I doubt Bernie would get any more or less as a result, but Trump and his band of crazies would be out of the game.

[Recursion]

24. Unfortunately a Sanders/Trump or Sanders/Cruz contest essentially guarantees that

Bloomberg has been salivating for both parties to stray off the reservation in the same election cycle.

[DanTex]

30. That's a good point, hadn't thought about it that way before. nt

[DanTex]

29. A, B, and a little C. He's a self-described socialist. Grossly underfunded. If anyone as far left

had won any major election outside of a few deep blue states, you might have a point. But it's never happened. The Easter Bunny is a fun fantasy, but at some point reality sets in.

[Bonobo]

40. I disagree with A and B but think that C might be true.

It is apparent, to me anyway, that Bernie would pull in more independent votes. He is perceived more as an outsider and seems to have more Libertarian appeal.

Not sure about Republicans actually, you may be right. Being more of a war hawk and financial conservative may mean Hillary would pick up more Republican votes.

My concern is C, democrats that are actually rather conservative and may not turn out to vote.

[DanTex]

41. OK, so we disagree about electability. That's basically what the primary is about anyway.

Obviously, Hillary is neither a war hawk or a financial conservative, she's just not a socialist. Which is why she can win and Bernie can't.

[Bonobo]

42. It's relative.

Hillary IS more of a war hawk than I like. It is clear in her words and her actions.

But then again, neither is Bernie a socialist (if the word has the dictionary meaning you seem to like that is)

And yes, that IS what primaries are about.

Naturally as the leader, it is understandable why Hillary must be torn down in order to win. The reverse is not as true.

[DanTex]

44. "More of" sure, but that doesn't make her an actual war hawk.

If you honestly think she would have mislead the nation into a pointless war in Iraq, you're kidding yourself.

I'm glad we agree that the primaries are about electing a Democrat. I think Hillary is the most likely to win the GE. If I thought it was Bernie, I'd support him in a second, but I just don't. Maybe I'm a cynic.

And like I've told you before, I agree with Bernie more than Hillary overall on issues, though I don't agree with either of them 100%. But the small differences between them are nothing compared to the differences with the GOP.

[Bonobo]

45. Making sense mostly.

DO I think Hillary, on her own, would have led us to war in Iraq?

No.

Do I think Hillary has a much better chance in the GE than Bernie?

No. Not really. People really don't like her much. She is a one-time loser also. Doesn't bode well. Bernie has minuses for sure, but he comes off as much more sincere and full of conviction. I think that's sought after in these days of people fed up with business as usual aka being bullshitted to.

As for the small difference, yes, well. Did you know that human and bonobo DNA are 96% in common?

[hifiguy]

43. It's a ridiculous assertion.

No one, and I mean NO ONE would motivate the reichwing cave orcs to get out and vote for whatever klown eventually wins the Repig nomination than HRH would. She's worth an extra million or more Repig votes.

[HooptieWagon]

53. Shit, the GOP could nominate Boehner....

...and republicans will turn out in droves to vote against Hillary.

[Gothmog]

62. Clinton is likely to be able to run an adequately fianced campaign

The GOP and the Kochs will outspend her but she will be able to keep it close. In 2012, Romney outspent Obama but Obama still won because he kept the spending battle close. I have asked numerous times for an explanation as to how Sanders will be able to compete in a general election contest where the Kochs will be spending $887 million and the RNC candidate may spend another billion dollars. I have yet to receive a good explanation.

Viability is a valid criteria for supporting one candidate over another candidate. The Sanders campaign will have trouble expanding its support beyond a very narrow base without a good explanation

[olddots]

78. he just doesn't have TV Q

Duh I want a characture president as a shallow drone .