A Sanders Comeback

[Demsrule86]

A Sanders Comeback Would Be Unprecedented
Share on Facebook
APR 28, 2016 AT 6:39 PM

A Sanders Comeback Would Be Unprecedented
By Milo Beckman

Filed under 2016 Election

Bernie Sanders during a rally in Springfield, Oregon, on Thursday. RYAN KANG / AP
Dear democratic socialists, political revolutionaries, Bern-feelers at large: We need to have a talk.

Let me begin by saying that I bear no ill will towards Mr. Sanders. Nothing that follows should be misconstrued as an attack on his policies, his track record, his electability in November or his character. I’m not a corporate media crony, or a plant from a pro-Hillary Clinton super PAC. I’m just a guy who believes in the predictive power of cold, hard data.

And the unsexy truth is that, barring some catastrophic news event, Sanders will not win the Democratic nomination for president in 2016. In fact, most past candidates in Sanders’s position dropped out long before this point in the race, and those who stayed in made little pretense of winning. (The Sanders campaign, which announced Wednesday it was laying off a ton of staff, may be recognizing this.)

Historically speaking, Democratic primary races do not have many twists and turns. Rather, the eventual winner tends to take an early lead — on or before Super Tuesday — and stay there. Runner-ups can kick for a while, but they tend to concede the race by February or early March.

As it stands, Sanders is firmly in runner-up territory. He is losing 9 million to 12 million among those who have already voted, and polls show him lagging by an average of 8.8 percentage points in the states yet to vote1. Sanders has gained substantially in national polls but is still the less popular candidate (outside of the Bernietopia that is social media2).

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-sanders-comeback-would-be-unprecedented/

[Gomez163]

1. AND IMPOSSIBLE.

[Demsrule86]

3. I know

It had so much math in it that shows Bernie can not win and discusses the historical perspective as well. Too long to post the entire thing.

[NurseJackie]

66. ** Another Sanders Comeback ** :-P

[Human101948]

77. Isn't that the guy who masturbates in movie theaters?

Kind of like what they do in the Hillary Group.

[elleng]

2. 'Let me begin by saying that I bear no ill will towards Mr. Sanders. (OH RIGHT, we can tell!)

Nothing that follows should be misconstrued as an attack on his policies, his track record, his electability in November or his character. I’m not a corporate media crony, or a plant from a pro-Hillary Clinton super PAC. I’m just a guy who believes in the predictive power of cold, hard data.

And the unsexy truth is that, barring some catastrophic news event, Sanders will not win the Democratic nomination for president in 2016.'

THANKS

[Demsrule86]

5. you are very welcome

Hope you read it.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

76. Nonsense, 538 is the same people it was before the new found love of Bernie by some.

You lose ALL credibility when you do this. ALL

[Jester Messiah]

4. He's going to the convention.

After that, what happens, happens. I'll admit, I'm just about checked out of the whole process. No Bernie on the ticket = I'm gone.
Cue the whining from people who think they're entitled to my vote to save them from Trump.

[Jester Messiah]

12. I don't support Trump.

I only support progressive candidates. Doesn't look like there's going to be one in this race though.

[Jester Messiah]

17. Gee, that's funny.

Because it is also said that failure to support Trump equals support for Hillary. So I guess that pathetic little bullshit argument ends up a wash. Too bad, so sad, try harder next time.

[Jester Messiah]

22. Well, at least you can admit your ignorance.

But I'm done with you. I've seen what you've had to say in other threads and you don't seem to be a person worth hearing or speaking to, so on the list you go.

[Samantha]

44. You are mistaken -- not voting is exercising one's civic right to abstain (eom)

Civics 101.

Sam

[GulfCoast66]

24. Whose supporters

Are doing the whining?

Perhaps a little projection happening here?

[Demsrule86]

8. Yeah Nate was hero for most dems in 2008

Now he is evil too.

[Demsrule86]

15. I am left too..

too left to let a GOP win without fighting like hell

[Demsrule86]

25. You are correct

I have been shocked at some of the anti-Hillary posts. She is a liberal people.

[Armstead]

31. Socially liberal Corporatist

[bettyellen]

56. THIS:"far too privileged to stop and think about why the millions more who voted for Clinton don't

....believe those things" Yep.

[Armstead]

29. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[bettyellen]

57. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Pure herringbone!

[Lil Missy]

54. and he's always right.

[BootinUp]

7. good article and analysis. nt

[Demsrule86]

10. I thought it was an excellent article

The Howard Dean part...I was so disappointed when he did not get the nomination. I did vote for Kerry of course. Oops corrected post...put Gore down!

[BootinUp]

18. I supported Clark in '04.

I always vote D.

[Demsrule86]

26. I vote straight Dem

Sometimes here in Ohio for certain offices, it is non-partisan so you have to do research.

[rog]

13. re: the very astute Milo Beckman

It's good to know who the 'pundits' are.

Profile in the Harvard Crimson:
http://www.thecrimson.com/topic/fifteen-most-interesting/milo-beckman/

Beckman, a New Yorker whose only constant commitment at Harvard has been to a youth civic education program at the IOP, speaks simply and cheerfully about himself and his unusual array of quirks and talents.

“I just find something and am like, ‘Well that’s cool. I’m going to spend my entire life on that for a little while,’” Beckman says.

.rog.

[Demsrule86]

14. He is brilliant and a cutie

He wrote an article about how Scalia's death would be felt until 2060 that was very very good.

[rog]

39. re: Milo

A cutie? That is a matter of taste, I suppose. I'm not really into men, but even if I were I suspect I'd find him distasteful. As far as his so-called brilliance is concerned, he strikes me as a dilettante ... by his own definition in the quote above, i.e., " ... a person who cultivates an area of interest without real commitment or knowledge." Seems like a person who may be at Harvard on his daddy's buck, but who is not taking advantage of many things that Harvard may offer. I'm sure this privileged young man will do very well as his life progresses ... but not really a person I would turn to for in depth analysis. I prefer folks who have been around the block at least once. YMMV.

Have a nice evening.

[Demsrule86]

43. Try reading the article about Scalia's death

The Bernie piece he wrote is meticulous...not the work of a dilettante. He is brilliant and if you looked at the Data, you might notice. You just don't like the message.

[rog]

46. re: "... not the work of a dilettante."

Once again, I would refer you to the opening sentence of his profile in the Harvard Crimson, cited above.

Milo B. Beckman is really, really good at dabbling.

Thank you for understanding my inclination not to take him seriously. I did read the article about Bernie.

.rog.

[Demsrule86]

48. That means to mean strength and interest

In a variety of things. He is smart...great analysis. If you looked at it...fascinating look back as well.

[oasis]

21. Vermont beckons "Come back Bernie, come back".

There, all better now.

[Demsrule86]

27. haha funny stuff

I used to like Bernie. In fact, I voted for him in Ohio...he would never win Ohio by the way...so I knew I could pull the party a bit left. The way he has acted, I am sorry I did that. I heard him bring up the Clinton foundation as if it was a bad thing...it is not.

[Armstead]

28. He'll never get more that 5 or 6 percent and will only win Vermont

[Demsrule86]

30. You may be right

I don't know. This country is not far far left...wish it were so sometimes, but it is not. And I don't want the banks broken up...should the financial capital of the world be in China? Let's have meaningful regulation...not destruction.

[Armstead]

32. It needs politicians to lead it to the left -- or support everyone's existing liberal instincts

<My comment was what peolpe were saying for many months in the primary...and they were dead wrong.


For 35 years we have been allowing a small number of massive corporations and banks swallow up all competition, use the accumulated power to buy the government and abuse the population.

This is not a good thing. Most average people realize that, to varying degrees of sophistication. And they don;t like it.

Problem is our empty politics fuels apathy and cynicism, and does not offer any way to channel that.

Unril more politicians start talking about it and take a stand against it, and start offering a way to address it, it'll only get worse.

[Urchin]

36. China can have the big banks if it wants them

China can have the big banks.

I hear China executes business leaders who screw thing up.

[Demsrule86]

59. Of Course what do millions of jobs mean to us

Why nothingl

[Urchin]

62. How about the jobs lost when the banks destroyed our economy?

Or do only jobs working for a bank shuffling paper while gambling other people's money, count for anything?

[Demsrule86]

65. Thanks to president Obama

We have regained jobs. Unemployment is less than what it was in 07 as well as early 08. Trashing the banks would be a really stupid idea. We need to regulate them for sure. But being the country that houses the financial center of the world is a very good thing. Bernie is just plain wrong on this issue...you don't destroy, you regulate. FDR did not destroy or nationalize the banks (something Sander advocated at one time), He regulated them and we have years of prosperity.

[Urchin]

67. I didn't mean nationalize the banks

I mean reinstate Glass-Steagall (which Clinton I repealed, thereby bringing on the Financial Crisis a few years later; so let's make Clinton II president, to see what she can wreck).

And if the banks ever create another financial crisis, let them declare bankruptcy and wind-down like Lehman is doing.

(Reinstating Glass-Steagall may result in the big banks breaking up, because big banks won't be able to gamble with FDIC insured bank accounts anymore)

[Demsrule86]

69. Most Democrats think Bush wrecked the economy

Of course, your candidate is not a Democrat ...what a Democratic socialist? Well in any case ...he is an independent. And all this stuff about Glass-Steagall. Clinton was not a Senator when that was passed now was she? However, Bernie is not that pure in terms of banking...he was in Congress and voted for a major cause of the 2008 crash:deregulation of CDS (credit default swaps). In 2000, Sanders voted for the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, a bill that blocked federal agencies from regulating credit default swaps which played a huge roll in the 2008 financial crisis. Don't you think? All those mortgages cut up and sold in pieces as CDS? Tsk tsk...what was Bernie thinking to support such a thing. It was a Gramm...bill you know.

[passiveporcupine]

33. As long as he's still in the race

they cannot relax, and they are tired of worrying. Well, I'm tired of worrying too, but I'm sticking with Bernie till the end. Because whether or not he's the ultimate nominee, the longer he stays in and the more delegates he wins, the stronger the message of the people is in shaping the future of this country.

And I am fucking tired of worrying about where this country is headed. And of course I see no course change with Hillary at the helm, unless pressured by Bernie's revolution. So go Bernie. Make them worry. I'm with you all the way.

[Demsrule86]

34. He will be in until California which is a good thing

California has a weird system where everyone is on the same ballot...could be two GOP type running in the general...32 people running for one Sen. seat...so we want Dem turnout. After that, he gets out or his is finished and loses his influence over the party. And we have all seen how much third parts have. He won't want to name post offices.

[passiveporcupine]

35. After that, he gets out or his is finished and loses his influence over the party

Says you?

Pffffft!

[Demsrule86]

41. Pretty obvious

He is not the well-liked in the Senate...and if he screws up the convention by putting on a show...he will be naming post offices.

[w4rma]

47. The "New" Democrats sure are a vengeful, nasty bunch. (nt)

[Demsrule86]

49. yeah if you screw the party and Democratic nominee

You are toast.

[Urchin]

38. Wouldn't you keep trying to save your country

even if the odds of success were only a fraction of one-percent?

[Demsrule86]

42. Allowing the GOP to win

Would not save the country.

[Urchin]

45. Electing anyone who take money from

the same big banks that wrecked our financial system doesn't save the country either.

[Demsrule86]

50. I don't like United but it is there

Until it is repealed...there will be money in politics. As for this obsession with the banks...no one is breaking up any banks...they need regulation for sure...but do you guys really want to move the banking capital of the world from New York to China...that is almost the same as destroying autos. It would cause a huge loss of jobs, everyone's 401 K would evaporate and I doubt a Democrat would be elected for years.

[Urchin]

55. Good. China can have the banks

But the big banks should remember that China executes business leaders who screw up the economy.

[Demsrule86]

60. Since United is law

It is meaningless Bernie could not find one example of quid pro quo...not one. Today he is accusing her of money laundering...he is rolling in the mud...sad end to a guy who had big dreams and some good ideas.

[Demsrule86]

73. Again

Electing Trump would destroy the country...possibly with nuclear weapons as he has said he will use them repeatedly.Trump is unqualified and dangerous...you want to save the country, help Hillary our candidate defeat him.

[sadoldgirl]

40. However, this whole election is unprecedented.

2 years ago I was betting that HRC would run, but
not Bernie.

11 months ago I thought it would be Bush on the other
side, and I never had even the slightest thought
about Trump.

[Demsrule86]

51. Yeah no one thought he would do as well as he did

However, by all measures, he has lost. And now is causing trouble for us...those of us who care about not electing Trump or any Republican...as news gets out about the things he said yesterday...shocking...he is going to lose more support. No one wants a person who would negate millions of votes. Americans are a country that plays fair.

[Urchin]

58. Throughout the 1930s, Churchill was politically ostracized

for his repeated warnings for over a decade, about the growing menace of Nazi Germany.

Churchill didn't stop making his point when just about everyone else was telling him what he was saying was bad for business with Germany--Germany might stop buying our stuff, like airplane engines-- so Churchill needed to shut up.

In the end, his country saw he had been right all along and made him prime minister.

[Demsrule86]

61. Had England listened to Churchill earlier.

They would have been invaded by the Germans. The much maligned Chamberlain save the British by delaying their entry into the war. By the way, what you have posted is a rightwing meme.

[Urchin]

63. No, the germans would not have invaded England earlier

For at least the first few years of Churchill's warnings, Germany was still a long way from the war machine it had later. Hitler didn't even want to go to war with England when it finally happened.

I read history and don't know from "memes," right-wing or otherwise.

[Demsrule86]

64. Of course they would have

Most of the books praising Churchill are Republican in nature. You have to read extensively to pick out the truth...peace at any cost saved England. They were ill prepared for war...Churchill was a hothead. He was a good war leader...and of course we saved their bacon honestly.

[Urchin]

79. meme this

Michael Parenti - The Real Causes of World War II, Part 1 of 2 (I'm sure you can find your way to part 2):

[Urchin]

68. I find it ironic

That this country elected an actor as president, because public life is an act, you know.

And now as a backlash to the corruption of government by .01%, a large number of people are in favor of making a member of the .01% the president.

That's like appointing the fox to guard the henhouse.

This country has gone crazy. Collapse can't be far away.

[Buzz Clik]

52. ..

[MrMickeysMom]

53. Then, let the unprecedented BEGIN!

Sure, you do...

[Demsrule86]

72. Bernie has lost

It does not matter if he takes it to the convention...bitter and angry. The supers will vote for Hillary and with her numbers it becomes official. She has won already. Bernie is not ready to face the truth or he needs money...don't know.

[lame54]

74. or maybe...

he wants the people who worked so hard for him to actually have an opportunity TO FUCKING VOTE

those states get screwed every primary

and, oh yeah, Bernies always been about the money - give it a rest

[MrMickeysMom]

75. Yeah, Yeah... bitter and angry ... let's not forget grumpy and sleepy and dopey...

Nothing like the transparency coming through your missives...

Please note: Supers may not be what you THINK they are. Were they, then a good idea would be that a candidate who thinks they have it in the bag goes on a shopping spree every time there's a presidential election, using political currency before another opponent is even announced. Using that logic, the who who thinks their nomination is in the bag can count on the "supers" as back up singers at the fantasy Democratic Convention.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

70. Don't call it a comeback. He's been here for years.

Sorry, couldn't resist the low-hanging fruit.

[Demsrule86]

71. No problem

He has indeed been here for years and years...hardly an outsider. In my defense that is the name of the article.

[NorthCarolina]

78. Bernie has already accomplished many "unprecedented" milestones in his campaign.

I think he can manage one more.