One candidate holds small events and is winning; one candidate holds large rallies and is losing

[brooklynite]

What can we learn from this?

[LexVegas]

1. People whose parents drive them to the rallies don't vote?

[tonyt53]

2. Pretty much sums it up

[kaleckim]

5. You deserve to see the Democratic Party collapse

The young people that back Sanders could be the leadership of your party going forward, but you offer no solutions for them. Instead of appreciating how utterly screwed they are thanks to the decisions their parents' generation made (horrible economy, on the way to ecological collapse, multi-trillion dollar infrastructure gap because you people didn't want to pay taxes, de-industrialization, massive private and student loan debt, etc), you want to mock them. Brilliant.

By the way, she is winning because you people all live in a damn bubble. She is a horrible, weak candidate, that has historically bad net favorables, is not trusted, does horribly with independents (big problem when they are a much larger share of the public than your party) and polls much worse than Sanders does versus Trump nationally and in the swing states. You all didn't want to listen to this stuff and will be in full panic mode in the coming months as that reality sinks in.

[LexVegas]

6. ...

[kaleckim]

8. Simply amazing

You're all children, you really are. Incapable of having adult conversations or thinking with any complexity. You have zero interest in understanding the changes the country is going through or why she is entirely beatable (versus the most disliked candidate in polling history). That's fine, mock, stick your head in the sand. It isn't me who will be whining and crying come November if current trends continue.

[LexVegas]

9. Are you preaching in the numerous anti-Hillary threads or just this one?

[kaleckim]

19. "Preaching"

Otherwise known as trying to have adult conversations with Clinton supporters. You all seem to also like emojis a lot, which is equal parts annoying and immature.

[My Good Babushka]

28. I've noticed that a lot, too.

There are either emojis, memes, or gifs of someone laughing in place of a dialogue. It does no good to reason with people, when they've got the laughing gas on, full blast.

[Hortensis]

41. Oh, come on. Check your pockets for your

senses of humor. It was a funny-enough answer, with just enough of the bitter truth for success.

If even 5% more young left-oriented people vote across the nation, it would transform our nation. It would have changed everything and it still can. A whole lot of us were rooting for Bernie to inspire late-stage adolescents to get off their butts and embrace adulthood. And of course, those in their 30s who needed some special inspiring too.

Now we're hoping Bernie and Trump will double team those who are paying some attenion from both sides in some kind of carrot-and-stick, aspiration-versus-degradation routine.

[brooklynite]

36. Well, they DO take up less space than the animated GIFs...

[1StrongBlackMan]

56. If you have to tell folks you are "trying to have adult conversations" ...

chances are, you're not ... especially when you start the adult conversations with name-calling.

Just say ...

[Hare Krishna]

69. I gave up on those Clinton supporters weeks ago

when they couldn't even see the writing on the wall.

[frylock]

16. This one is the king of inanity.

And that is really saying a lot.

[LonePirate]

58. So, if Trump wins, are you going to be less angry than in post #5?

You - heck all of us - have a right to be angry about what you listed. However, many Bernie supporters fail to realize that Hillary supporters agree with them in general on most of the issues. (Hillary supporters often fail to make the same realizations about Bernie supports.) Yes, the two groups disagree on variations related to the solutions of the problems. However, your post (#8) implies you are OK with Trump being elected because you'll be able to extract some revenge against Hillary supporters. Do you honestly think Trump and his supporters are more likely to agree with your world view than Hillary's supporters?

[kaleckim]

74. I don't really care

what Clinton supporters believe in, honestly. I care far more about the person they are supporting, cause that person doesn't share my values, has a record well to my right (and to the right of the general public), etc. I have no interest anymore for more rhetoric and talk, and I place no value in the ideals you say you have if you vote for someone that doesn't share those values. Her actions, her record, what she's done, her largest donors, mean more than any speech you can link me to.

[lastone]

11. ^^^ very well said ^^^

[onehandle]

7. Exactly. Also, one candidate can inspire people to vote, and one can't. nt

[scscholar]

72. Voting is a lot easier than going to a rally

They'll vote.

[Ken Burch]

20. Bernie's supporters are not spoiled children...and a lot of us AREN'T young.

There is no excuse for your condescension.

[seabeyond]

42. Lol. Nt

[Skink]

3. The fix is in

[COLGATE4]

12. Obviously. You candidate is losing. Case closed.

[-none]

33. The case is not closed.

Why is he "losing"?
Is it the shortages of voting machines, from 200 to 60, creating the many block long lines of people waiting to vote?
Is it the changed party preference on the voter rolls, that the voter did not know was switched until he tried to vote? - This one seems to be a biggey in closed primary states.
Is it the Electronic touch screen voting machines that did not properly register votes for not-Hillary properly?
Is it county/precincts where the vote totals do not equal the number of people voting? Somehow always seeming to favoring Hillary.

Naa, nothin' ta see here. Move along now.

[dbackjon]

34. When you mix in Arizona in your Hillary bashing

It is clear you do not understand what happened in Arizona.


And thus, none of your ranting can be taken serious.

[-none]

38. It is clear you do not want to understand.

Arizona was only ONE state where there were serous voting irregularities too place. Not the one state...

[dbackjon]

47. I understand that

But when you include Arizona, then the rest of your list is AUTOMATICALLY suspect, since Clinton, or the Democratic Party had ZERO to do with the issues there.


To include it is DISHONEST, and frankly a despicable move of desperation.

[-none]

49. OK then. If you say so.

Why wasn't Debbie or her subordinates on top of it then? Instead of making excuses, until they came up with the idea of blaming the Republicans for all of it? Including the switched voter preferences on the Democratic voter rolls? Something is not right here.

[dbackjon]

51. The Arizona Democratic Party DID object before the election

The Democrats on the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors DID vote against the plan



The GOP controls the County, the County Recorders Office and the Secretary of State. That is who is in charge of polling locations, and voter rules.


So yes, in Arizona, it was 100% the GOP's fault for the debacle. To suggest otherwise is a smear, a lie and shows that you are incapable of anything other than tells lies about Clinton.


You are the type of person that is bad for the country.


The only thing not right here is YOU.

[-none]

62. Me, bad for the country?

Little ol me? Just because I have an affinity for wanting to know the facts and want the truth? Because I am fed up with the status quo and want the American people to come before corporations and Wall Street? Because I want some honesty in my 'leaders'.

Problems are like jig saw puzzles. Get enough pieces in place and a picture appears, making it easier to place the rest of the pieces in place. There are plenty enough pieces in place to see the picture. The picture emerging, in the Hillary part, is a jumbled mess.
But there are too many pieces that do not even belong in this patuclar puzzle. Hillary using a private E-mail server, she placed in her home, that she used for her job as SoS. No transcripts for her $250,000+ speeches. Where are they? She needs them to help prove she actually did give those speeches, in return for the money she was paid. There are starting to be some doubts.
Then there is the little problem of Hillary's 400 some Super delegates she lined up before anyone else even indicated they might be interested in running. Why? Was she afraid she might lose to herself? That she thought she might not actually be the best candidate for the people? So she had to game the system a bit?

Back to her E-mail server. What happens if they pull her security clearance because of what they found on her unsecured server? Assuming she manages to win the general, which is a long shot, how will she be able to function as President without a security clearance? That is a very real possibility.

[dbackjon]

64. LOL - And sometimes things are EXACTLY as they appear

I told you the truth, but since it doesn't fit your narrative, you reject it, and move on to other lies and smears.

[-none]

65. You are correct

Some things are exactly as they appear. Too bad some cannot see the corruption.

[CoffeeCat]

60. Each state has a unique excuse!

With these shit-show primaries where people were disenfranchused, kicked off voter rolls, not allowed to vote, waited for six hours to vote, etc--there's ALWAYS an excuse. Always a "reason" or "clerical error" or administrative snafu" or "accidental purge".

This is horrifying!! The Republican primaries were smooth sailing. Our side was shit show after shit show. Gee, I wonder why?? Because that's how people cheat and steal elections.

And don't forget the exit polls!! Oh those horrible exit polls that are soooooooo inaccurate and terribly flawed on the Democratic side! Off by 10, 20 points in some cases. Meanwhile the Republican exit polls matched their election results. Why is that?

Starting with the Iowa caucuses--it was chaos, irregularities, problems, snafus and assorted anomalies state after state. I've never witnessed a Primary season like this; nor have I witnessed the unprecedented chaos that happened in our Iowa Caucuses.

This is one for the history books!

[dbackjon]

61. In Arizona the GOP had the same number of polling places

Waited in the same lines as the Democrats


And in Arizona, the exit polls were off for the GOP as well, because 40% of Arizonans early voted.





so again, you are as clueless as the other poster.

[CoffeeCat]

66. My aren't you lovely. You should write for Hallmark

CLEARLY, I was discussing the totality of all of the state primaries and the unprecedented confluence of problems, state after state after state---signaling to anyone with more than two neurons that this was planned and intentional.

I never mentioned Arizona.

But you did and you're dead wrong and way off in your third-rate analysis. The areas that were primarily affected by the horrendous lack of voting machines were in Maricopa County, an area that is home to several major colleges and more than 150,000 college students. These machine shortages hurt Bernie the most; not Clinton and not the Republicans. If you wanted to hurt Bernie that's exactly how you'd do it. Make sure that you cut the number of voting machines by 70 percent in an area of the state that has an extremely high concentration of younger, college student.

Again, state after state after state--not just Arizona--unprecedented chaos!

The odds of all of this chaos happening randomly--are probably a billion to one.

[dbackjon]

71. I live in Maricopa County

I am well aware of what happened.

The areas most affected by the lack of polling places where in the black and Hispanic areas, which hurt Clinton the most. ANYONE that looks at this objectively would understand that CLINTON, not Sanders, was hurt more by this.


Maricopa County as over 4 million residents. College students are a minor part of the voting age population. With over a million Hispanic residents, and 250K black residents, that far outways any college population.

ASU, which is the main university in Maricopa county, was surrounded by three poling places within bike rides of campus. I live two miles north of campus, so I had mapped out the polling places before I went (and went to the one on the nearby reservation, where in the morning I waited 45 minutes).


So again, you post is full of inaccurate statements.

Your analysis isn't even third rate, it is so bad it is unrateable.

[COLGATE4]

67. Yeah, that must be it. It couldn't possibly be that a majority of

Democratic voters prefer Hillary. No, that would be way too simple. Conspiracy theories are always much more credible.

[KingFlorez]

4. Less is more (at least when it comes to events)

Voters appreciate smaller events because the candidate seems more accessible. You can't win a race being a lecturer basically making stops on a circuit. You have to connect.

https://politicalwire.com/2015/10/31/sanders-avoids-retail-politics/

“For a candidate who has inspired the most impassioned followers since Barack Obama in 2008, Mr. Sanders is surprisingly impersonal, even uninterested, in one-on-one exchanges — the sort of momentary encounters in which a candidate can show warmth and humility by gripping every open palm.”

“He rarely drops by diners or coffee shops with news cameras in tow, unlike most politicians. He hardly ever kisses babies, aides say, and does not mingle much at fund-raisers. To Mr. Sanders, the independent senator from Vermont, political schmoozing is a phony business, and anathema to his total focus on weighty issues.”

[NurseJackie]

10. My guess: Listening is more productive than shouting.

[COLGATE4]

13. But not nearly as much fun...

[NurseJackie]

14. :-P

[frylock]

18. Does Hillary just stand at the podium and listen to the dozens of people who came to see her?

Or is she like, oh, I don't know, talking?

[Ken Burch]

22. Bernie is just as good a listener as HRC.

He has never dismissed anyone's cause or anyone's concerns in this campaign. And he is just as feminist and anti-racist as your candidate(but without the militarism and pointless economic conservatism).

[NurseJackie]

24. Oh, you guys! :-P

[Ken Burch]

26. How do you think you're going to unify the party

If you mock and sneer at people?

You can't simply DEMAND that everyone back HR if she gets nominated.

Yes, Trump is horrible, but just stopping Trump isn't anything-especially if your candidate tries to parrot him on things like "law and order&quot which is always just code for killing black people) or on looking "tough" with the rest of the world(which is just code for killing black and brown people in other countries).

She can't win if the young people who flocked to Bernie are dissed and treated as if they wasted their time. You NEED their votes, and you need to make it easy for people like me, if HRC is nominated, to make the case that they should support her.

And there was nothing bad in Bernie's candidacy and the issues he and his supporters fight for. Without that campaign, there would have been no passion and no strong commitment to anything from any Democratic presidential candidates. None of the others cared about working people or the poor, none of the others cared about stopping war or doing anything serious to stop global warming-all of which are JUST as important as fighting racism and sexism(fights Bernie was always just as committed to as your candidate and her supporters).

We are SUPPOSED to be a party that stands for the people instead of the rich. We are supposed to be the party of the dispossessed and the powerless, not the party of the smug and privileged.

You hurt your candidate by posting things like that. In the interest of helping her, you should stop.

[NurseJackie]

30. I hardly think that the snarky comments of an anonymous user (such as myself)

... which are posted on a political web site, are going to fracture the Democratic party. Look around and you'll see that each individual post and each reply does not exist in an isolated vacuum. This is the climate of this website ... one that's devolved to comparing crowd sizes (instead of votes) as an indicator of how well a candidate is doing. Ugh. Such absurd things are absolutely worthy of mocking. The history of all that has come before didn't start yesterday. Being in the minority here, Hillary supporters have put up with a lot of shit from Bernie supporters who demonstrably used their majority to harass and bully and "stalk" and over-alert and abuse their majority status in "randomly chosen juries" to shut down threads, and target individual users for forced "time-outs". This has been going on for MONTHS and MONTHS. Now, with just weeks remaining in the campaign, suddenly many Bernie supporters are concerned about "unity" and being "mocked" and demanding more respect than they were previously willing to give. Cry me a river! It won't be much longer anyway. This too shall pass. In short order (I hope) everyone will have gotten it out of their systems and we can all lick our wounds, abandon grudges, shake hands, and rally together to defeat the GOP.

[Ken Burch]

35. You should be concerned about unity for the fall.

If your candidate does get nominated, she can ONLY win if there is a mass turnout for her from former Bernie supporters. You don't have enough votes to elect her if you alienate the young and the activists.

THAT is why I am talking about unity. You can't diss and then demand support. You need to convince those people that the fall campaign will not JUST be about stopping Trump-that a significant part of what we have fought for will be part of that campaign, and that the project will not just be lesser-evil but will actually be an inspiring call for change(economic as well as social, since both types of change are equally crucial). If Bernie were in HRC's delegate position right now, he and his supporters would be making it clear that your concerns will not be ignored or disregarded, that your side would not walk away from Philly feeling crushed and disregarded. That is the approach your side should be taking towards Bernie's supporters and the issue we care about. And your side has nothing to lose by doing that.

BTW, HRC supporters have always been just as unpleasant as the worst of those who purport to be Bernie supporters(let's face, it, it's likely that a lot of the so-called "bros" are either right-wing infiltrators totally unconnected with Bernie or trolls recruited by David Brock for the price of a few months' worth of Hot Pockets). Your side has been smug, it has been dismissive, it has treated Bernie's supporters and Bernie's issues as though they were silly, and it has refused, even now, to admit that Bernie never deserved to be accused of not caring enough about racism or sexism. Your campaign has never had any real claim to victimhood, and supporting and it's not as though you are fighting for anything any more noble than we are. The good things HRC has emphasized(there has never been any reason for her to run as an all-out hawk-the country is sick of war and there is no massive public support for continuing to intervene militarily in the Middle East, and there has never been any reason for her to insist on leaving Wall Street's control of life totally unchallenged) were things our campaign, and those of us who support it were always equally committed to supporting, and if Bernie were elected, he would be just as willing to compromise(while continuing to fight for a bold vision of the future, which is the only way to keep voters engaged)and to use presidential power when needed to achieve change in times when Congress is hostile to change.

Whoever gets nominated, we will need to work together in the fall, and that can only happen if your side loses the "go away, boy, ya bother me" tone towards Bernie supporters(especially young Bernie supporters). You need us, we need you.

[NurseJackie]

39. There will be wounds to heal and grudges to abandon ...

... apologies to be made and forgiveness to be given ... and I anticipate that most will successfully rise to the challenge, as individuals and as a group.

[Ken Burch]

40. In the meantime, you have no reason to be treating Bernie supporters and what they care about

as if they are silly.

Your side is not superior. You're only ahead because of the smears about Bernie and race.

[NurseJackie]

43. I see you're not there yet either.

Each individual in their own time and at their own pace, I suppose.

[PufPuf23]

15. Something stinks in Denmark and it is not cheese?

Maybe the Democratic establishment and DNC made a mistake in treating Hillary Clinton as an incumbent and presumptive nominee prior to any other potential party candidate formally declaring an intent to compete for Democratic 2016 nominee for POTUS?

[frylock]

17. One candidate has fewer than a dozen inquirers reviewing her email server.

[GeorgeGist]

21. Rich people rule?

[whatchamacallit]

23. That silly people invent bogus causation for any correlation?

She's "winning" because of name recognition and early victories, not because people at rallies don't vote. But I get it, you've got to explain her enthusiasm problems somehow.

[Lucinda]

25. Are they still going on about rally size?

I can only assume it's people who haven't looked much at campaign history. Lots of people have had huge rallies, doesn't often translate into wins.

[uponit7771]

27. Rallies matter dammit!!! /sarcasm

[Yurovsky]

29. That it's difficult to fight corporate money, but it's the right thing to do...

Especially when you can look in the mirror and know that you haven't sold your soul to Goldman Sachs, WalMart, or ExxonMobil.

Despite every conceivable advantage going into this race, Hillary is struggling to put away the biggest political underdog of my lifetime. The best thing that could happen is for her to drop out and prevent a Trump presidency, because Bernie is far and away the best chance the party has yo win in November.

[morningfog]

31. Not much at all. Lazy op.

We have nonwaynof knowing the extent to which Bernie's rallies influenced his success. Nor do we have any way of knowing whether Hillary could have done better with large rallies. If she could
Have even brought the people out.

Silly op.

[NCTraveler]

32. That the UF football team won't be winning the Presidency?

That Glenn Beck won't be winning the Presidency after spending years drawing crowds in the thousands, sometimes in the tens of thousands?

Am I onto something?

[NurseJackie]

45. Go Gators! Beat Georgia!

[NCTraveler]

48. Absolutely!!!!!

[ViseGrip]

37. You can learn the many ways of cheating, discussed here on DU since 2004.

That is what you should learn....

[J_J_]

54. exactly

exit polls are all off, not even popular enough to draw a crowd to a rally...but we should just trust em

[Doctor_J]

44. One candidate gets wall street money and loving media and is winning. What can we learn from

this?

[brooklynite]

46. So your opinion is that the entire Sanders race was hopeless?

My opinion is that he got up to a respectable level after a year of campaigning, and just isn't popular enough to win a majority.

You DO believe that it's possible for real Democrats to support Hillary Clinton, don't you?

[mcar]

50. K&R

[ThePhilosopher04]

52. Voter suppression and election fraud is real.

That's what I've learned.

[reformist2]

57. +1. I don't believe the official results either.

[dubyadiprecession]

53. BS supporters don't always show up at the polls...

many of them are too busy studying for exams.

[guillaumeb]

55. In a corrupt, money driven system......

well, we are seeing the outcome.

[silvershadow]

59. Neither is winning. Worst case scenario is both arrive

at convention without the required number. Best is, my candidate arrives with the required number. In no case will the other candidate arrive with the required number.

[Mary Mac]

63. introverts vote

Also people say nonsensical things even at small rallies because its expected see football games. Better to address the Council on Foreign relations.

[Hare Krishna]

68. I see the OP is continuing the propaganda.

Good day, sir.

[polly7]

70. That due to the DNC, the Brock slime machine, big-money backers, the MSM, etc. etc.

she was the chosen one from the beginning and Sanders started as an unknown - with nothing.

[pansypoo53219]

73. media managed selection. very democratic. + democratic DEFENSE. we need the OFFENSE.