Ok then, Let's spell it out for Sanders "Democrats"

[factfinder_77]

Ok then, Let's spell it out for Sanders "Democrats"

They are having a hard time with this concept.

If Sanders can't win democratic voters he will not win the general election. Period.

He has unprecedented favorable ratings among independents, due to the lack of negative campaign adds from republicans.
And favorable ratings do not equal actual votes, as the + 3,2 million Clioton votes proves.
Clinton: 12,135,109
Sanders: 8,967,401

Even Trumph beats Sanders with 10,056,690 votes

That's the math that Sanders fans don't want to talk about.

This is why comments like DWS "We don't need the democratic voters" comment is so damn stupid.

Americans, it seems, on the whole reject socialism and have always rejected Sanders socialism.

African American voters, elderly voters, women, independents, and moderate republicans does not share Sanders values.

The only voters that share sanders world view is Millennials that have voted in the undemocratic caucuses.

And did I forget, people that identify themselves as Democrats, the establishment as Sanders call them, are Clinton voters.

[uppityperson]

1. Why did you put the word Democrats in quotes? Twice? I don't understand.

[brooklynite]

13. Presumably for the same reason the OP about Hillary "Democrats" did...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1887908

[uppityperson]

28. Thank you, I'm skimming and missed that

[ismnotwasm]

14. The poster is referencing this thread

Ok then, Let's spell it out for Hillary "Democrats"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1887908

[uppityperson]

29. thank you, I'm skimming gdp and missed that

[Orsino]

2. Democratic voters tend to line up behind the Democratic nominee.

There are probably or-busters on either side who wouldn't, but the general election is a different animal. If Sanders somehow captures the nomination in such a way that Clinton supports him, we'll win. And vice-versa.

There's no real basis for translating primary success into November-speak.

[factfinder_77]

4. You should read:Seymour Lipset’s ,Gary Marks’ book It Didn’t Happen Here: Why Socialism Failed i USA

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/3/17/1497934/-Why-Americans-Reject-Socialism

[-none]

8. Socialism didn't fail.

It is being garroted by the corporatists. Socialism used to be supported by good Democrats for the benefit fo the people.

[bkkyosemite]

9. He was accepted by the Democratic Party and millions of Dems voted for him ...get real

[Orsino]

10. Should we expect Clinton to head down the chained-CPI path, then?

Or is socialism okay, after all?

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. I hlonestly expect the US to go down the road of Chile

Best case scenario...

[Jester Messiah]

3. Garbage thread.

On the pile with it.

[pinebox]

5. In a GE setting, Sanders does better

And that is because it isn't some little exclusive club where only Democrats get to vote but people like me who are indy voters.
This is the scenario you guys don't like to talk about, the reality that Hillary has very little in the way of indy support. 55% Dem only support equals a massive landslide loss for Camp Weathervane in a GE.

In fact, one of your fellow supporters posted this http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1887976

Sorry, you can scream Sanders socialism all you want and red bait but it doesn't change the fact that most American's agree with his policies and not Hillary's http://www.politicususa.com/2015/06/03/polls-americans-socialists-bernie-sanders.html It's only inside your protected little bubble things are different. The GE is the real world and Hillary is going to lose should she be the nominee.

We've said this to you and your ilk for awhile now.

[mmonk]

6. Everyone would share our values if we weren't lied about everyday.

[Smarmie Doofus]

7. OTOH, with Sanders as nominee... where are Clinton DEMs going to go?

To SANDERS of course. It's a lock.

Certainly not to Trump.

I GOT IT ! A THIRD PARTY!! But what on earth will they call themselves?

[libdem4life]

12. Don't tempt me. n/t

[Turin_C3PO]

11. Calling him a socialist

is republican talking points. I don't like them when they're used against Hillary and I don't like them used against Bernie either. There's a HUGE difference between Democratic Socialism and actual Socialism.

[brooklynite]

15. ...and the fact that you have to keep explaining what the difference is...

...is why Sanders will be in trouble as the nominee.

[Turin_C3PO]

16. I think his favorables

would likely go down, yes. But I don't think Americans fear that word as much as they used to.

[azurnoir]

17. we have to keep explaining because Hillary's surrogates keep promoting otherwise

interesting

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. Keep red baiting

I am sure it plays well in the salons

[brooklynite]

38. I, like others, am pointing out what the Republicans will drop on him...

It doesn't play well outside of Vermont.

[nadinbrzezinski]

40. It is you who is red baiting

It is you engaging in that behavior... Please proceed. Keep making sure that people get turned off by these antics. I know I am...not you...DWS to be specific.

[libdem4life]

22. Willful ignorance...or old-fashioned Group Think.

[Stallion]

18. Clinton is Likely Winning Close to 2 to 1 With Registered Democrats

The Democratic Party has rejected the Revolution

[kaleckim]

25. For what?

They've rejected fundamentally changing an inequitable (prove otherwise with data) and corrupt system that is leading us to ecological collapse. They, by a two to one margin you say, support a war hawk, neoliberal that is neck deep in corporate and Wall Street cash. Says a lot about what your party has become, it has proven itself to not be a vehicle of progressive change, and the left should leave it entirely.

[libdem4life]

31. Of course they do. Status quo is Easy.

Being an agent for badly need change not so much.

DWS and HRC...joined to the hip have Devasted the Party. But since The In Crowd chooses to overlook the facts, including the really unpleasant fact that Bernie leads Trump in double digits , well not much to crow about .

So all theTrump as Boogeyman is one big fail. Her numbers, at their best have her within the MOE

So we'll likely get a candidate with an equal unfavorability rating thanks to the HRC Bubble.

[TCJ70]

19. "African American voters, elderly voters, women, independents, and moderate republicans does not..."

..."share Sanders values".

How do you define "Sanders values"? Which of his values, which I'll interpret as policy proposals, do you not agree with? Healthcare for all? Increased wages? Protecting the environment? Policing the police?

Three of those groups you mentioned have been touted uncountable times as being the base of the Democratic Party. If they don't share Sanders values, which are by and large traditional Democratic Party values, are they not Democrats? Or has what it means to be a Democrat changed?

[factfinder_77]

23. Swing voters view of finger-pointing populism

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/29/clinton-s-key-never-mind-the-bernie-bros-here-come-the-swing-voters.html


Trump’s solid majorities mean that GOP voters, in their inscrutable wisdom, have spoken, choosing a political neophyte who’s never held any public office, has no discernable governing philosophy, and whose campaign consists mainly of bigoted outbursts and vicious personal attacks on anyone who gets in his way.

In contrast, the Democratic center seems to have held. Bernie Sanders’s call for an anti-capitalist “revolution” enthralled millenials, but his dream of turning America into a European-style welfare state—a colossal Denmark—struck out with black and Latino voters, and with women, who preferred the pragmatic Clinton.

A new PPI poll provides fresh evidence that the pragmatic center’s demise has been greatly exaggerated. Swing voters still exist, and they likely will play a decisive role in determining which party wins control of the White House and Senate in November.

Conducted by veteran Democratic pollster Peter Brodnitz, the PPI survey examined four presidential battleground states that also feature competitive Senate and House races this year: Florida, Ohio, Colorado, and Nevada. We found that just over 20 percent of electorate in these swing states is made up of voters who lend their support equally to Democrats and Republicans, do not strongly identify with either party, and did not vote for the same party in the last two elections.

Who are the swing voters in 2016? Most describe themselves as Independent (84%) and moderate (56%). In political outlook they lie between the two parties: Just 11% are liberals, compared to 49% of Democrats; 24% are conservatives, compared to 69% of Republicans. They are slightly more female than male and a little less likely to have a college degree than voters overall. Nearly a third of them are non-white.

Our survey indicates that to win them, Democrats must move beyond the finger-pointing populism that’s dominated their primary campaign. Swing voters aren’t drawn to an angry narrative of economic grievance and victimhood. Most don’t believe the economic deck is stacked against them (only 39% say it is, compared to 47% of Democrats).

Swing voters are worried about the economy, but they have little interest in a “revolution” to fetter corporations or trade wars with China and Mexico. Instead, they seem eager for a hopeful account of how to make America a stronger competitor in the global economy. They reject Donald Trump’s overblown claims that the U.S. economy is in shambles. Nor do they share the populist left’s hostility toward American business.

On the contrary, they favor policies that help entrepreneurs and businesses succeed as the best way to get wages rising again and help U.S. workers get ahead. For example, they support dramatically lowering the corporate income tax—to 15%—to put U.S. companies on an even competitive footing and prevent more jobs from going overseas.

Here’s the message that comes through loud and clear in this poll:

In the general election, Democrats can’t afford to cede the high ground of economic growth and competitiveness.

While they see reducing inequality as important, swing voters show less intensity on this score than Democrats. Like Republicans, they give higher priority to stimulating growth than to fairness.

On trade, the PPI poll found a striking incongruity between the fiercely protectionist rhetoric that has pervaded the primary season and the attitudes of voters in the four battleground states. Fully three-fourths of all voters believe that, to have a strong economy the United States must rely on trade. Strikingly, Democrats are the most likely to agree (82%). They also strongly support new trade agreements.

Strong majorities of voters reject the Trump-Sanders diagnosis that bad trade agreements are to blame for U.S. jobs going abroad; they say cheaper labor is the main reason. And more say they want to train U.S. workers for new jobs in high-tech manufacturing than to bring back manufacturing jobs that don’t require advanced skills, like textiles or automobiles.

Swing voters are interested in new and pragmatic ways to stimulate economic growth and opportunity. For example, they were more likely than Democrats to favor reducing regulatory burdens on U.S. businesses (70-57%).

They strongly endorsed (78%) a regulatory improvement commission to prune old rules that have accumulated over decades. They also backed a two-year limit on environmental reviews of new infrastructure projects, as well as reining in the proliferation of state and local occupational licensing requirements, which make it especially difficult for low-income people to market their skills.

Swing voters and Democrats strongly believe that higher levels of skill and education are the key to boosting U.S. competitiveness. They favor creation of a robust system of “career pathways” that combines classroom instruction with on-the-job training, and offers credentials to certify the technical skills workers need to land middle-income jobs.

In general, the swing voters are more fiscally conservative and mistrustful of government than Democrats. To take one example, Democrats by 52-39 favor Sanders’ call for “free college.” Swing voters instead endorsed (60-36) the idea of allowing students to get college degrees after three years, thereby shaving a year off tuition costs.

Democrats and swing voters enthusiastically endorsed “universal pensions” to help all workers save for retirement from their very first job, as well as “HomeK” plans that also allow them to put aside money tax-free for a down payment on a home. There was also strong support for a carbon tax to slow climate change, and swing voters agreed with Democrats that the bigger danger is that America will move away from fossil fuels too slowly rather than too fast.

All in all, our survey of swing voters in swing states illuminates the key task facing Democrats as they pivot from the primaries to the general election: Fashioning a forward-looking message that unites the interests of swing voters and the party’s core partisans.

That means offering a progressive alternative to an angry and polarizing populism—a hopeful vision for reviving economic growth that works for everyone, not just the fortunate few.

[TCJ70]

26. None of that answers my questions...

...and, in general, it's bad form to just post the entire text of some link back to someone.

[kaleckim]

27. The very definition of cognitive dissonance

"That means offering a progressive alternative to an angry and polarizing populism—a hopeful vision for reviving economic growth that works for everyone, not just the fortunate few."

How do you create a more equitable economy without confronting the banks, the rich, and corporate interests funding Clinton and the Republicans, writing our trade laws, writing our regulations and staffing the agencies that are supposed to regulate them? Those policies have benefited them, so what fantasy, pie in the sky path towards an equitable economy do you Clinton supporters propose?How do you possibly create an equitable economy when Wall Street now earns almost 40% of domestic profits and Wall Street's product is debt? How do you create a more equitable economy while supporting the horrific trade model Clinton supports? Better yet, how in the world do you really avoid ecological collapse with that trade model and institutions like the WTO?

You Clinton supporters like to pretend that Sanders and his supporters are the dreamers, classic case of projection. That logic you posted is the fantasy thinking, a bunch of fluffy words that don't make any logical sense.

[Betty Karlson]

20. More of the same Brock bullshit and the mythical math and the ubiquitous sense of entitlement.

Pass.

[kaleckim]

21. Oh my god

Americans have rejected Sanders' policies, that's why they overwhelmingly agree with him on the issues...wait.

Well, Democrats most definitely reject things like single payer, higher taxes on the rich, universal college education, etc.? There's polls to show this?

African-Americans (and Latinos) are, according to countless polls, much more likely to support socialism than whites.

For example:

http://reason.com/blog/2015/02/12/poll-americans-like-free-markets-more-t2

White Americans favor capitalism over socialism 56 to 29 percent. However, African-Americans report being favorable to both capitalism (51%) and socialism (55%). Hispanics are more supportive of capitalism with 53 percent supportive of capitalism, and 45 favorable of socialism.

Democrats are split in half on capitalism and socialism. Fifty-three percent say they have a favorable view of capitalism and 50 percent a favorable view of socialism. In fact nearly 3 in 10 Democrats have a favorable opinion of both socialism and capitalism.

http://www.people-press.org/2010/05/04/socialism-not-so-negative-capitalism-not-so-positive/

In this poll, African-Americans had a more positive opinion of socialism (53% to 35%) than capitalism (50% to 40%).

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/11/20/poll-watch-democrats-even-clinton-supporters-warm-to-socialism/

"Socialism gets some of its highest marks from Democratic voters under 30, 63 percent of whom rate it positively, and from another crucial demographic that has largely eluded Mr. Sanders — African-Americans, who say they support socialism by a ratio of 2 to 1."

Your logic on the votes is nonsense too. Sanders does better than Clinton does versus Trump, and has for months now. This is beyond question. I struggle as far as deciding if people like yourself are lying to us, yourself, of if this isn't really about logic but human psychology.

Seriously, what does your party stand for, if it opposes the policies Sanders is offering? Those policies are not only popular with the rank and file in your own damn party, they're popular with the general public, have proven to work in every other country, and worked in this country in years past (college education was funded by tax dollars in numerous states in the past, for example).

[99Forever]

24. Some fucking clown with 8 hides in less than a month and a couple hundred posts...

...ain't spelling out jack shit to anyone, least of all Sanders Supporters.

[oasis]

30. What would a Sanders anti-establishment/socialist cabinet look like?

[libdem4life]

33. Your smiley is right on.

You don't understand a Socialist Democrat. How do I know...you can't put the right adjective with the noun.

[oasis]

34. If you are unable to give me the answer, then just move on

and finish grading the rest of your English exams, Professor

[libdem4life]

35. Sorry but I'm not in that loop. I'm a voter.

Pretty sure he has a list. At least he's not like Cruz...picking VP like way prematurely. Bad form. Equally so for the Cabinet..

What I do know is that it will be from a much larger than known list of those who espouse his vision moving forward, regardless of the Democratic Party likely snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

It may actually be better NOT to be president. He can turn his organizing into a grass roots program for the 99 percent...even those who didn't vote for him. While HRC is stuck fighting off the real Right Wing plus her unfavorabiliy rating, we'll be moving right along.

[oasis]

39. "We'll be moving right along".

Good, do that. Hillary meanwhile, as chief executive, will appoint people familiar with the operation of a smooth running government.

[libdem4life]

43. and wars. The Establishment does indeed have experience

...with waging wars and the rest of the dirty laundry. And no, her "governing" will make what Obama experienced exponential. His was primarily racism. Hers has been 20 years in the making and with the "new stuff" Democrats have enabled her with apathy. It will be a big megaphone drumbeat.

The Republican party has been saving up for this. Don't blame thinking liberal Democrats for, at worst, being aware or having the audacity to bring up the truth. She did it to herself and is counting on the Clinton Shuffle to protect her.

This is a bad omen and nothing to do with a "smooth running government".

[oasis]

44. Hillary will be a "no nonsense" President. (eom)

[libdem4life]

45. How can that be? She's full of nonsense. But when one is in a

Bubble lacking facts, making declarative statements that belie the facts, well, I'm done here. Her "nonsense" has been put forth many times here, so I don't feel it necessary to review just for someone who has a one-liner put down mentality.

[liberalnarb]

32. A factless garbage thread with no proof to back it up.

Numbers pulled out of thin air and no links to sources.

[lumberjack_jeff]

42. You're confused. The nominee can't win without the 39% of the public who are independents.

http://www.people-press.org/interactives/party-id-trend/

It appears from the posts upthread that some facts are finding you.

[BootinUp]

46. You bring up some points worth repeating

Bernie has not been tested or vetted on the national stage because no one has attacked him. His unfavorables would jump by over 10 points to who knows how high if he was attacked on his record and past statements and personal history, just like anyone's unfavorables would. I could make a case that Bernie has some real surprises in there too. Meaning unusal things that would surprise voters.

[Bluenorthwest]

47. You pretty pompous for a poster here less than a month who has so many hides already

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=332534&sub=trans

You are one of the posters that is definitive of Reagan Democrats, aka Hillary supporters.

[ibegurpard]

48. And you are?

I've been on this board a long time and never noticed you before.