Sanders’ “superior electability” is still a myth.

[onehandle]

Over the past year, Bernie Sanders’ supporters have repeatedly criticized the undemocratic role of superdelegates in choosing the Democratic presidential nominee. In February, for example, MoveOn, which had endorsed Sanders the month before, started a petition saying, “Democracy only works when the votes of the people—not the decision of a small number of elites—are what determines the outcome of elections.” The fear, then, was that Sanders would win the most pledged delegates but that Hillary Clinton would use her pull with insiders to trump the popular will.

It is more than a little ironic, then, that Sanders is now urging those same insiders to ignore the intention of the primary electorate—which has given Clinton an edge in both pledged delegates and raw votes—and bequeath the nomination to him instead. In a Washington press conference on Sunday, Sanders, who has no discernible path to a delegate majority, outlined a plan to force a contested convention, where he apparently believes some superdelegates will flip to his side on the basis of electability. “The evidence is extremely clear that I would be the stronger candidate to defeat Trump or any other Republican,” he said. Sanders reiterated this on Monday at a rally in Evansville, Indiana, saying, “We appeal to virtually all the Democrats, but we do a lot better with independents than Secretary Clinton. And I hope the Democrats at the national convention understand that while independents may not be able to vote in certain Democratic primaries, they do vote in the general election.”

I have no idea if Sanders is serious about this superdelegate plan. It might just be a rationale for him to keep fighting until the end of the primaries, garnering delegates that he could leverage to push Clinton and the party leftward at the convention. But if he is serious, then what he is proposing is a presumption based on a falsehood.

The presumption is that there is anything progressive about a plan that asks powerful figures to cast aside an electoral majority built on the choices of women and people of color. The falsehood is that Sanders’ superior electability is, as he asserted on Sunday, “extremely clear.”

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/05/bernie_sanders_electability_argument_is_still_a_myth.html

[NanceGreggs]

1. Bernie was against super-delegates ...

... before he was for them.

The man is a hypocrite of the first order.

[Armstead]

9. Considering your favored candidate...I wouldn't think hypocrisy would be a problem

[JaneyVee]

2. Three point two million.

[virtualobserver]

3. Hillary's ELECTABILITY is a myth until proven otherwise

[redstateblues]

4. She will beat Trump.

[virtualobserver]

5. also a myth until proven otherwise

[basselope]

18. LOL.

You have to seriously not have a clue about politics to make that statement.

She has no path to victory.

[baldguy]

12. She's certainly proven her electability against Sanders.

3 million more votes
800 more delegates

[virtualobserver]

16. not yet she hasn't

[baldguy]

19. I'm sure that's what all the blue birds, unicorns, & magic fairies tell you

But I'm looking at actual votes by human beings, and delegate counts. You know, the people that select the nominee.

[virtualobserver]

20. looks like another win tonight for Bernie

[baldguy]

21. Funny, it looks to me like a tie.

And with ALL of Indiana's SDs in her corner, Clinton still comes out on top.

[virtualobserver]

22. if Hillary was a strong nominee she wouldn't be losing primaries

[Lucinda]

6. It was always a myth. Hillary barely laid a glove on him, the GOP

would have eviscerated him. Fortunately we don't have to worry about it, but it is hella shady of him to claim those numbers ever meant anything, unless he is clueless enough to have believed it. That would be even worse IMO.

[DLCWIdem]

10. never vetted

You can say that again. I just got done showing a bernie supporter an article from daily kos about Sierra Blanca and the nuclear waste dump sight in that Hispanic community. She was completely surprised. I said, can you imagine what tRump would say about that.... "well i only wanted to deport you, you can always come back legally, but i would never dump nuclear waste in your back yard and poison your children" ...... You know nothing would be off color to tRump. And then.... maybe bring up foreign money in Bernies campaign that would play well with tRump's nationalism.

[BootinUp]

7. This is the hard truth some of us always knew

But I can't wait to read how progressives frame it in the coming weeks. Should be fascinating.

[Armstead]

8. Oh...Michelle Goldberg.....Next!

[Demnorth]

11. Sanders says:

"We appeal to virtually all the Democrats".

It seems to me that's an odd thing to say, even in that context.

[BootinUp]

13. kick

[Orsino]

14. Not a myth. Polling.

I am certainly suspicious of hypothetical questions asked during the primary, and don't think them particIlarly relevant...but they can't be wished away.

[Garrett78]

15. Suspect and not particularly relevant is putting it mildly.

Hypothetical general election match-up polls at this juncture are meaningless. Dukakis (and other eventual losers) would have become POTUS if premature hypothetical match-up polls were actually predictive.

[Orsino]

17. "Electability" is a slippery, undefined word.

I think it generally means whatever the speaker wants it to mean. Polls are really the only available measurements.

It made a weak talking point for Clinton before she won all those delegates, and is a weak talking point for Sanders now.