2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forum"Only Hillary can stop Bernie Sanders from being US President, says Michael Moore"
link; excerpt:
"If everybody shows up to vote, Bernie Sanders will be the next President of the United States," predicts Michael Moore, the provocative filmmaker whose Fahrenheit 9/11 remains the highest-grossing documentary of all time.
"But first," he adds, "he has to get through the hurdles of the Democratic Party, which does not want him as their nominee."
Moore ... pays far more attention to the politics of the US than most, and is convinced the only way Donald Trump could become the next president assuming the Republican establishment doesn't find some way to block his seemingly inevitable nomination is if he squares off against Hillary Clinton rather than Sanders....
"Keep this statistic in mind: 81 per cent of this country is either women, people of colour or young adults under the age of 35. That's who's voting this year, and Mr Trump has done marvellously offending all three of those groups of people. The chance of him winning is only possible if people stay home on election day."
metroins
(2,550 posts)On popular and delegates.
She has a better campaign.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)about her unfavorables.
metroins
(2,550 posts)And she's overwhelmingly being voted for.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)and of course they must be the right votes. Don't want unapproved people weighting in. But you have a lovely evening anyways.
Autumn
(44,980 posts)if they don't have a favorable opinion of that politician.
Herman4747
(1,825 posts)...at the start, when Bernie was at about 4% in the polls. She has lost nearly all her lead over Bernie, and her unfavorable rating has increased to 55%. (Lying so frequently will do this).
So I wouldn't say "a better campaign."
metroins
(2,550 posts)Aka better.
longship
(40,416 posts)Explains David Brock...
She doesnt
metroins
(2,550 posts)metroins
(2,550 posts)There is no nope about it.
Avalon Sparks
(2,560 posts)Does that make him "better" for the Repugs?
metroins
(2,550 posts)I'll focus on Democrats.
Avalon Sparks
(2,560 posts)From my understand it seems you're claiming that because a candidate has more votes at this point in the primary, that makes them the 'better' candidate.
It seems that point holds no validity across the spectrum.
But nice try.
metroins
(2,550 posts)HRC needs to win 3/10 of every race and BS needs to win 7/10 of every race.
I find it absolutely disbursing that BS keeps feeding the line he can win when his campaign was over a month ago.
I feel that it's fraud for BS to continue to try to raise money by telling people he can win.
Avalon Sparks
(2,560 posts)I've analyzed the numbers myself, there's a chance neither will have the min number of delegates to clinch the deal.
The convention is over three months away, a lot can happen between now and then.
The other states should absolutely have their say.
Futhermore Bernie isn't telling his supporters he can win. He's telling us WE can win if we get the vote out. Considering how far we've come in the last 3 months, it seems the message is being heard rather clearly.
ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)Who make up less than 30% of the voting population. And she's not capturing all of that 30%...so tell me Mr Math...where does she get the rest of the votes to get to 50% plus 1 of the entire US voting population.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)the only path to the presidency for either Hillary or Drumpf is through the other.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)He was against the Iraq War that Clinton Voted on. Even even made speech about it during Oscars.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)redstateblues
(10,565 posts)He would be a disaster for down ballot Dems and he would be a disaster as President. He has been a do nothing back bencher in Congress for a quarter century. He would be one and done as POTUS when his pie in the sky promises became DOA.
Metric System
(6,048 posts)and the endorsements then Sen. Obama racked up from his Senate colleagues.
Land Shark
(6,346 posts)I would expect the incumbents to go for the more senior Dem politician, but that doesn't mean that Sanders isn't the superior candidate in terms of his positions, which is mostly all I or most people care about. Sanders could be JFK or the greatest potential president to ever live and I would still expect Senate official endorsements to be exactly as they are. It's not really a slam on Sanders it is recognition of Clinton's insider status / more work for the party itself.
The same does not apply any longer to Cruz. There is no current or former Senator in the race to compete with CRUZ for endorsements. So of course he is getting a couple from people who absolutely denounced him before.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)Something odd about that
Land Shark
(6,346 posts)If you're going to be on the right side of history, you will oftentimes be largely alone. But history vindicates. (That said, he does have allies few wish to risk the wrath of a queen and I understand that)
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)NT
sibelian
(7,804 posts)? perhaps ?
politicaljunkie41910
(3,335 posts)As if he would get a second term to do nothing as well. The only reason he is doing as well as he is, is his promises of free stuff that he now claims that he never expected to get those things through in his first term. How disengenuous can he be.
Avalon Sparks
(2,560 posts)Yes because the DLC has been so successful the last 8 years at helping the down Dems. Helping them lose seats running on the Repub lite platform.
sadoldgirl
(3,431 posts)or went into hibernation?
Are you telling me that CA and OR voted
already?
Oh my, and I did not put my plants out at
the right time, in that case.
Funny though we are expecting snow again.
AzDar
(14,023 posts)Land Shark
(6,346 posts)RufusTFirefly
(8,812 posts)With an electorate used to voting "against" instead of "for," "Anyone but Trump" looked like a winner. Trump may have originally been designed to make Jeb! seem more palatable. That obviously was a miserable failure.
Now he's seen as achieving the impossible: actually making Hillary seem more likable and reasonable in comparison. But there's only so much that one man can do. As it turns out, America is torn as to which candidate it dislikes more. Besides, for all his truly appalling viewpoints, Trump, unlike his anointed rival, is seen as "telling it like it is."
Meanwhile, Bernie is going to ruin everything. He's refreshingly authentic, trustworthy, and popular. And unlike the bigoted blowhard Berlusconi from Queens, Brooklyn Bernie is a genuine progressive, who appeals to the better angels of our nature.
If he makes it to the GE, people will vote for Sanders in unprecedented numbers: some out of fear of the alternative, but many more filled with hope and inspiration for a more equitable America.
No wonder the corporatists are terrified.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)What was the turnout in the recent caucuses 5%? Your quote "If he makes it to the GE, people will vote for Sanders in unprecedented numbers" Not so much in the primaries? Kind of lets the air out of your "unprecedented" meme. The prospect of having a Socialist in the White House would definitely fire up the Republicans.
Attorney in Texas
(3,373 posts)Michigan was a primary, Vermont was a primary, Illinois was a primary, and Democrats Abroad was a primary.
Oklahoma's Democratic primary set a new turnout record and Sanders won.
Michigan's Democratic primary set a new turnout record and Sanders won.
Illinois' Democratic primary set a new turnout record and Sanders tied Hillary 78 pledged delegates to 78 pledged delegates in Hillary's home state.
Beowulf
(761 posts)the largest block of voters and often prohibited from participating in primaries and caucuses. Hillary has built her lead on a small subset of the electorate.
Segami
(14,923 posts)Vote2016
(1,198 posts)BainsBane
(53,012 posts)What those who assume Bernie is owed lament in Hillary Clinton daring to run for the nomination is that she has earned 2.5 million more votes than Bernie. The entire language of the presidency being "denied" Bernie assumes he is owed it. He nor anyone else is owed political office. They have to EARN a majority of votes, something Sanders has not been able to do. So sure, if Bernie faced no opposition, Clinton wouldn't be an obstacle to his ascension to the Oval Office. But then that doesn't speak well of his popular appeal, does it?
The fact is, Sanders does best in states with low turnout--caucus systems--rather than in primary states where far more voters participate. His campaign is well aware of this, which is why Tad Devine announced back in January a strategy targeting caucus states with low voter turnout:
With a dozen such contests coming before the end of March and Clinton expected to perform well on March 1, the first big multi-state primary day -- the caucuses are emerging as an integral part of Sanders long-shot plan.
Caucuses are very good for Bernie Sanders, explained chief Sanders strategist Tad Devine, likening the 2016 strategy to the one he deployed as Mike Dukakis field director in 1988. Caucuses tend to be in the much-lower turnout universe, and having people who intensely support you in events like that makes a huge difference. You saw that with President Obama in 2008, and youre going to see it with Bernie Sanders.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/bernie-sanders-iowa-obama-playbook-218137#ixzz44kuBzzz7
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
The campaign has reaped the results of that strategy, sweeping caucus states but earning a far lower percentage of the vote in primaries states with much higher voters participation rates. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_vote_count.html