This says it all really

[octoberlib]

Last edited Mon Feb 3, 2020, 04:41 PM - Edit history (1)

[highplainsdem]

1. Yes, that does say it all. Unfortunately.

[HarlanPepper]

2. What a surprise.

[ChubbyStar]

52. Here one day. You havent ruined Best In Show for me

[C_U_L8R]

3. That's no way to earn the respect they crave

We are one.

[grantcart]

42. Bingo

[Bananaluver]

4. This is why I say Warren supporters are solid Democratic base.

[Kurt V.]

6. Experts are predicting record turnout. again. this helps warren the most.

[OMGWTF]

41. Get a woman in the WH on the 100th anniversary of womens' suffrage. Senator Professor Warren 2020

[Volaris]

43. Senator Professor Warren...

Somebody's been reading Charles Pierce haha!!

[homegirl]

48. Thank you for

expressing my choice and deepest political desire.

Amen Sister!

[Bananaluver]

58. I am with Amy too. I can go either way.

[Bananaluver]

57. Sounds good to me.

[Bananaluver]

56. Good to hear.

[UniteFightBack]

11. +1000

[comradebillyboy]

24. Right you are. And Warren is a solid Democrat as well.

If Warren wins the nomination I will be happy to support her.

[W_HAMILTON]

5. At some point, the question must be asked...

...whether these people that candidates like Sanders and Yang brag about bringing into the party are really worth it. Their divisive attacks and constant shitting on Democrats do more harm to our party than good. Anyone truly for progressive/liberal values will find their way into our party regardless -- unless, of course, they are led elsewhere by these persona-centric candidates.

[DanTex]

7. Bringing more voters into the party is worth it, yes.

We need to beat Trump.

Bernie is the most progressive candidate in the field, I wouldn't worry the progressiveness of his supporters. That's what people like about him. There's no "right-wingers for single payer" movement.

[W_HAMILTON]

12. If they aren't going to vote for the nominee and instead trash us from within...

…and make it tougher for the Democratic nominee to win, then, no, I do not think it is worth it.

Jill Stein voters were enough to swing the last election, but the Democrats didn't need her voters to win -- they needed OUR voters not to listen to her voters' bullshit and instead turn out and support the Democratic nominee.

[Thekaspervote]

18. Right there with ya!!

[DanTex]

23. What about the suburban moderates everyone tells us will only vote

for a centrist like Biden or Bloomberg?

Is there a difference? I mean, a vote is a vote.

[W_HAMILTON]

26. What has Biden done to discourage people from voting for the eventual Democratic nominee?

When has Biden trashed the Democratic Party?

[sheshe2]

54. That would be never.

[dsc]

28. 87/5/9

vs 53/15/31 think there is a substantial difference.

[DanTex]

31. So there aren't too many of those suburban moderates?

What’s the whole Biden electability argument based on then?

[dsc]

33. where they are located

Philly, Detroit, and Milwaukee suburbs.

[Blue_true]

35. If you look at the numbers, those suburban people stay with whoever our nominee is.

Only 54% of the Sanders voters are a sure thing, even less for Yang voters.

[CaptYossarian]

36. Forget Stein, since she was at Putin's table with Michael Flynn.

Pat Paulsen would have a better chance than she does.

[CMYK]

59. Bull Feathers

Nice Smothers Brothers reference!

[CaptYossarian]

63. I always think of the show with Rosey Grier.

"Ohhh...you're a BIG mother!"

[Amimnoch]

8. Has Yang actually done something to encourage that behavior though?

Personally, I'm 100% willing to support Yang if he does manage to etch out the nomination and become our candidate. It's discouraging, but has he actually done or said things to encourage that behavior and those numbers like BS, his Stein supporting Staff, and a large number of his surrogates and shills have?

[W_HAMILTON]

15. He's pretty much done what Sanders has, in my opinion.

Take subtle jabs about rigging and other nonsense, supporting people that speak out against Democrats (e.g., Gabbard), and letting his supporters do the trashing while he turns a blind eye.

There's a reason why these candidates (and Gabbard) attract such anti-Democratic support...

[Blue_true]

37. Yes, he has trashed democrats at times. Not as much as Sanders, but he has done it.

I believe that Yang attracts a lot of people that somehow feel that the economy has screwed them over. Trump also attracts a lot of that type, along with the flake religious right.

[Recursion]

64. He's reached out to people who don't normally vote

I don't think that 41% is going to Trump; I think they would mostly stay home.

[octoberlib]

14. I think Yang attracts a lot of Libertarians.

[Blue_true]

38. Economic populists that feel that the economy has screwed them over.

They really don't care about much else.

[MH1]

51. Ugh, if that is true.

I don't want any part of a candidate who wins the approval of Libertarians. Yikes.

OTOH, the support of Libertarians doesn't fit with what I thought Yang's policies are. If he pulls into the top 3 I'll have to take a closer look.

[Thekaspervote]

17. Excellent point. The DNC passed a bylaw following the 16 election that no one would run under

The dem flag without signing on to the party and being a loyal dem. Too bad they didn’t stick to that!! We wouldn’t be in this mess

[Blue_true]

34. Look like Yang and Sanders supporters believe in the economic populism,

but don't really care about the other things democrats care about.

[Bleacher Creature]

9. That's not an accident.

It's encouraged by the rhetoric used, by a person's actions, and by the open contempt for our party.

[tiredtoo]

10. For what its worth 18 percent of Hillary supporters did not vote for Obama. EOM

[octoberlib]

20. Sanders supporters' Depends number is 31%, though

That's pretty high.

[MrsCoffee]

65. Pulled that number out of where?

Clinton's most ardent backers overwhelmingly followed her enthusiastic endorsement of Obama. PUMA's threats never materialized. No Clinton delegates led a walkout during the convention or tried to shout over speakers.

[tiredtoo]

67. https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/08/29/data-manipulators-team-clinton-still-blaming-sanders-for-tru

[Scotch-Irish]

13. That's a lot under the "no" column, except for Elizabeth Warren.

She's pretty awesome, and exceedingly brilliant.

[doc03]

16. I have no idea what this is about all I see is "This says it all really"

nothing in message

[octoberlib]

19. It's a screenshot of an Emerson College poll shown on MSNBC

Question was "will you vote for the Democratic nominee even if it is not your candidate"

Biden Yes 87% No 5% Depends 9%

Sanders Yes 53% No 16% Depends 31%

Warren Yes 90% No -- Depends 10%

Buttigieg Yes 86% No -- Depends 14%

Yang Yes 50% No 42% Depends 9%

Bloomberg 78% No 11% Depends 11%

[doc03]

21. It is blank on mine? Anyway it appears Sanders and Yang voters are not very

loyal Democrats.

[Sherman A1]

22. Perhaps because they are drawing from

other groups as their message resonates better to a broader base?

[redqueen]

40. A lot of Yang's supporters are not democrats or even people who normally get involved with politics.

This comment on a YouTube video sums it up well.

Link to tweet

[Scurrilous]

25. Bernie Sanders has the most supporters in depends.

[octoberlib]

30. Lol.

[Amimnoch]

46. OMG.. you went there!

[MrsCoffee]

66. Ok, that was hilarious.

[mcar]

27. Have you noticed whose supporters always ask (on social media)

"will you commit to vote blue no matter who?" I always turn the ? back to them.

[octoberlib]

29. I've noticed that , too. I don't trust them.

[mcar]

32. They are not trustworthy

They have shown themselves to be untrustworthy. I believe what they show me.

[Efilroft Sul]

39. I like Sanders and Yang, but this is not the year to pull any no/depends crap.

You have problems with the party's eventual nominee? Fine. But our nominee needs your support if you are going to have any chance of your concerns being addressed. So help get our party's nominee elected. Work things out through your representative and senators. Keep our president's feet to the fire. We have miles to go just to get back to the status quo ante Russia and we can't do it without you.

[redqueen]

45. Please see post 40. nt

[Efilroft Sul]

49. I'll have to watch and listen to his supporters more carefully.

I never before considered what you said, so, thanks. I'm all for more voices on our side.

[NoMoreRepugs]

44. Sorry, but if you want 4 more years of Rump vs supporting

a different Democratic candidate other than yours you are a Fucking Moron and no different than a Deplorable, you don’t belong in the Democratic Party.

[LiberalArkie]

47. Being in the south, I guess I am supposed to say that I can not support a Democratic nominee who is

Jewish,
Catholic,
A woman,
Gay

I think that fits the bill down here. And no foreign types either.

[flor-de-jasmim]

50. And Amy K. is not on the list...

[Cornell Engineer]

53. Those numbers are shameful if accurate

I'm not placing too much importance on who wins Iowa or some of the other early states. But what I really wanna see is huge turnouts...that would probably signify another Blue Wave starting to build.

Had to piece together some numbers from different sources and can't vouch for the overall accuracy but these are what I found so far regarding Democratic participation in the Iowa caucuses...

2004: 124,000
2008: 236,000
2016: 171,000

I'd like to see total turnout top at least 200,000...and the higher the better.

[musicblind]

55. How is it not 100% across the board? n/t

[Gothmog]

60. For this thread

Link to tweet

[octoberlib]

62. Yeah!

[ecstatic]

61. This makes sense. Warren supporters hate trump and want him

removed by any means possible. Every other candidate's base of support includes non Democrats and / or people who don't feel a sense of urgency to remove trump.