You know, Bernie could be the one to beat Trump. Here's my reasoning...

[Kablooie]

Many who voted for Trump felt disenfranchised. They felt like government wasn't working for them anymore so they wanted a drastic change in the hopes that it would fix the things that have gone wrong. Now they've experienced the Trump version and it's not living up to it's promise. Things are going downhill even faster and the rich are still getting richer.

If a moderate candidate promises to restore the previous status-quo, they might just go with Trump because they don't want to go back to what wasn't working before. Bernie talks to the same people that Trump talked to. He offers change that will help the working class, not the rich elites. Since Trump is not working out as promised, Bernie would be the next flavor to try.

Many Obama/Trump voters may want to support Bernie while a moderate candidate could drive them back to Trump.

Of course there are so many other factors that this alone is probably not enough to swing the tide but it's one way to think about it that is less depressing than other ways.

[DanieRains]

1. I Heard The Head Of The Nebraska Democratic Party Say Farmers In Nebraska Like Bernie

She said the farmers are against "big" everything, and so is Bernie.

This was her saying it, not me.

[joethedrummer]

7. She also said something about not being an SOB

And that he wouldn't lie to them

[zak247]

2. Why Bernie wont beat Trump

But Bernie admits he will raise the taxes on middle-class people will not wash in those swing states.

Bernie is lying to the people about Medicare. IT IS NOT FREE. It doesn’t even have dental.

It takes 3 to 4 hundred a month to make it almost as good as the good union programs. There are co-payments and a monthly charge to the government of about 150 a month and you have to buy a supplemental policy from an insurance company or you better not get sick. Medicare as of now ONLY PAYS 80 PERCENT. is Bernie telling you that?

Bernie is right, he needs a revolution to win. But is the country ready for a revolution after Trump?

The two times the Dems nominated a Bernie-like nominee, in 1972 and 1984 they lost 49 states.

In the electoral college, all Trump has to do is win Pennsylvania and Florida and he gets in.

[DanieRains]

5. No He Doesn't He Will Lower Health Care Premiums And CoPays So You Save Money Overall

You will pay far less overall. I know this is being distorted, just like everything else. They are even running commercials full of lies.

We will pay for healthcare like other countries do. Not as a gift to PHARMA and Insurance Companies who decide who lives or dies.

And we can save 68,000 lives a year!

But we have to inform the rest of the country, so stop with the dis-information can we?

[elleng]

9. Thanks

[Garrett78]

10. As with our reliance on fossil fuels, the hidden costs of the current health care system...

...are massive. Of course, that isn't necessarily an easy sell. Just as it's not easy to sell some folks on the concept of short-term sacrifice for long-term gain. But Sanders is clearly resonating with a broad spectrum of people who intuitively understand that the US is really fucked up. And the difference between 2016 and now is that Sanders's base of support is much, much more reflective of the population as a whole. He's gone from getting crushed by the POC vote to being the leading candidate among POC. Someone on 538 made the point that Latino voters have not historically coalesced around a particular candidate, and it's a game-changer if they coalesce around Sanders, as they did in Nevada.

[Squinch]

20. What makes you think so? He's never put out anything that says

HOW so why do you think this?

[Kablooie]

6. But Bernie would need Congress to approve any of his policies.

So if Bernies policy has big problems the checks and balance would work as designed.

[loyalsister]

24. That means we may get Warren's plan after all

I bet he'd be happy to sign it.

[AlexSFCA]

26. considering that Warren might be his running mate

[loyalsister]

30. I hope not

He needs a much younger running mate. I'm not excited by the prospect of an 80 yr old president again, but the voting majority opinion appears to be up for it. I'm saying she could be the lead sponsor of the Senate bill.

[safeinOhio]

12. Not like it wouldn't cost or be as well liked as in the rest of the world.

I had great Union UAW insurance for 47 years and it didn't work for me until I got MC. Before that it would deny what my doctor ordered or make me jump thru hoops to get paid for emergency care. Not after I got MC, never got denied.

[redixdoragon]

13. Taxes will go up

Moreso for the rich than the poor. Somewhat for the middle class but will be less than one pays for their insurance right now. Medicare will get expanded. Dental will be covered, Eye wear will be covered. No more going bankrupt because you got injured when you were out of network, becuase there wont be network boundries. A great fear will be lifted from the common person trying to make it through life. It will be expensive, but we have the money to cover for it. It's being squandered right now on tax cuts for the rich and subsidies for the worst of the polluters.

It'll cost you in taxes. Yes, that's the point. Taxes, less than the corporate fees you pay now, and you will recieve a service without needing to be validated every time you come into a hospital, battered and bloodied or coughing and sick, from this thing we call life.

[thesquanderer]

22. You described the current Medicare. MFA is NOT that.

The basic idea of Medicare is that it is a single payer government run system. The specifics have changed numerous times since it was introduced. Part of expanding it to cover everyone is to make additional changes. It will still be a single payer government run system. But it will cover everyone. It will include dental. It will have almost no out-of-pocket, or premiums for additional coverage.

True, it is not free, but it is not specifically paid for by the recipients, it is paid for by taxes. Of course, most recipients do pay taxes, so in that respect, they are paying for it, and yes taxes will go up... but in a progressive way.

The idea is that most people will come out ahead because, even though they may be paying more in taxes, they won't be paying premiums, copays, deductibles, dental, or for numerous things that are now typically not covered. In a given year you may come out behind (if you're unlucky enough to stay completely healthy), but over time, you should come out ahead. At least that's the idea. And of course, you don't have to worry about losing the coverage you have if your employer changes plans or if you lose (or want to leave) your job.

[elleng]

3. Thanks for your thoughts.

Yes, 'populism' seems to be having a run, and we might (or might not) benefit from it.

I appreciate your optimism.

[mr_lebowski]

4. And sometimes 'less depressing' is about as good as we're gonna get, so ... (nt)

[Garrett78]

8. Disenchantment and a feeling that the status quo will doom us is certainly a driving force.

The Obama-Trump voters are given too much attention, though. On that topic: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/11/why-did-some-white-obama-voters-for-trump.html.

The bigger issue was we had 2 historically unpopular candidates facing off. 3rd party voting was much higher than normal, and many Obama voters simply didn't vote.

In another post, I echoed some of your sentiment:

Russia will do anything to undermine any candidate who becomes the frontrunner. I'm sure Russia is aware of the perception that Sanders can't win, so they're going to exploit that for all it's worth by trying to sow discord and create a self-fulfilling prophecy.

But that perception seems to be based largely on false assumptions about so-called independents, moderates, undecideds, etc. And the notion that 2018 was the result of Trump voters switching sides (stated repeatedly by a DU poster and echoed by others). Why do I say people here are making false assumptions? Read each of the following 4 articles:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-moderate-middle-is-a-myth/

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/what-everyone-gets-wrong-about-independent-voters/

https://www.vox.com/2016/1/22/10814522/independents-voters-facts-myths

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/10/18076872/trump-46-percent-solition

Regarding the first 3 articles, those who self-identify as [fill in the blank] are all over the map ideologically-speaking and the vast majority of so-called independents are completely wedded to a particular party. It's a myth that there's this large mass of astute, like-minded middle-of-the-road voters with some well-defined "moderate" ideology, who are just waiting to see which party will put up the candidate closest to the center.

Many people, especially young people, are starving to vote for someone who dreams big and will fight for a future that isn't filled with misery (many people recognize that that's where we're headed with the status quo, Trump or no Trump). From the first article:

The upshot of all this is that if you’re a campaign trying to appeal to independents, moderates or undecided voters — or a concerned citizen trying to make sense of these groups in the context of an election — policy and ideology aren’t good frames of reference. There just isn’t much in terms of policy or ideology that unites these groups.

Anybody who claims to have the winning formula for winning moderate, independent or undecided voters is making things up. Perhaps more centrist policies will appeal to some voters in each of these categories — but so will more extreme policies.

And come election day, these potential swing voters may not ultimately care all that much about policy. They don’t tend to identify themselves based on ideology, and they don’t follow politics all that closely.

Many of those so-called "extreme policies" poll very, very well.

As for the 4th article, what happened in 2018 is we saw Dems break turnout records. It wasn't that Trump voters switched sides, or that anti-Trump Republicans came to our rescue in droves. That simply isn't what happened. So, what did happen? Well, for instance, every single major ethnic and racial group had a greater increase in turnout from one midterm to the next (in this case, 2014 to 2018) than ever before in US history. And the age group that had the greatest increase in turnout between 2014 and 2018 was the 18-29 age group (20% in 2014 to 36% in 2018).

Yes, it's true that many moderates flipped districts (while some others lost statewide races for the US Senate). It's also true that some very progressive candidates got elected. We can have a more moderate candidate win a district while also having a very progressive candidate win a national election (especially in an era when straight-ticket voting is much more common than in the past). Those aren't mutually exclusive events, especially at a time when the driving force in the US as a whole is an opposition to the status quo, a general sense that we're in grave danger and that the US is - in the words of Howard Zinn - "topsy-turvy." A whole lot of people desperately want fundamental change.

So, yeah, I think Sanders can win states such as PA, MI, AZ, etc. His growing appeal among Latino voters is remarkable. Regardless of who our nominee is, I think it'll be a close election.

[uponit7771]

11. Sanders has no historical swing state appeal outside of MOE, Biden has the most

[James48]

14. I don't know why you say that.

Biden is a loser in Michigan.

He has never polled well here.

Please show me ANY evidence in Michigan that he can win. Hilliary couldn’t win here, for the same reason. Too moderate.

Show me ANYTHiNG that is evidence Biden could win. Polls? Show me, I’m all ears.

[uponit7771]

15. Yeah, you're dead wrong about MI and Biden ... I think you mean WI and you'd be wrong about that too

... historically.

Last 2 week snapshots and outlier polls don't mean anything right now

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/mi/michigan_trump_vs_biden-6761.html

[Squinch]

21. I took you off ignore. So happy we're on the same side again!

[Moderateguy]

23. Tell that toDavid Sirota--he will make put out a statement saying Bernie won WA

[lambchopp59]

17. I'm going to have my "okay, boomers" moment here

I've read relatively vicious anti-Bernie posts here, often employing Fox-Noise type socialism-scare tactics. The Overton Window has swung so far right that even on a "liberal" discussion board I get the same dismissive bullshit I've heard from much of my older boomer relatives... ahem... who inherited veritable fortunes, who went to major university educations for one quarter of the funds than my community college degree cost me a decade and two later.
And when I hear my city college education it took me many years to complete working though bashed by the boomers, especially when I witnessed their U of Pretentious State degrees were paid for by the MOM-N-POP grants, middle class fortunes all exhausted by my college years:



So when I read about some sort of moderate candidate unwilling to take on the 1 percenters because it might cost Boomer a bit more in taxes on their FIVE BEDROOM HOME, four stand empty for guests....
When I read Boomer's attempts to twist Bernie's fight to even the playing field even a bit for Gen-X and beyond summarily dismissed, I'd sure like to remind Boomer of something:

Say, groovy old Boomer, just how did you get that corn cob stuffed up your ass?

[Garrett78]

18. People at DU vastly underestimate how many there are like you. Great post.

[radius777]

19. 'ok boomer' is a meme often used by Trumpers

on social media to deride boomers for supporting social liberalism (poc/women/gay rights, nonwhite immigration, etc) of the 60s that has led to the diverse America of today.

I'm a PoC gen-x'er, always been a Clinton/Obama Dem - don't like Bernie at all.

[loyalsister]

25. No

It comes from the environmentalist youth activists who had run ins with pro dirty air and NRA loving legislators.

[Locrian]

33. gaslighting

People have been convinced that they shouldn't want things like healthcare, wages, climate action etc. It's stunning to see when offered at least hope and someone willing to fight that they prefer to opt for "the way things were". Which by the way didn't exist and certainly can't exist in the future.

Playing it "safe" is something a lot of people do. It's kinda natural I guess.... thing is, with climate change and the the ticking of the wealth inequality, medical care / people dying etc - that we've reached a point that there is no time left to not go "all in".

Change is coming. One way or another. Bernie is the "lite" version of that. We do NOT want to see the "heavy" version.

[Ferrets are Cool]

27. Socialism, Socialism, Socialism

Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism, Socialism

That is the ONLY thing you will see on reich wing ads if Bernie wins the nomination. And it will resound.

[cliffside]

31. That is all you read on DU :(. nt

[AlexSFCA]

28. many of those who voted for trump also liked bernie

[dawg day]

29. But many of them THINK they're doing better under Trump.

They talk about the stock market going up, though they don't have stock.
They say Trump lowered the capital gains tax, which helps, again, people who have stock.

We can talk till we're blue in the face, and some of them (many) will claim Trump's been great for them.

[emmaverybo]

32. Trojan horse.