I keep seeing the following talking point. Bernie knows he can't win and he is in this only

[totodeinhere]

Last edited Fri May 1, 2015, 12:11 AM - Edit history (1)

to push Hillary Clinton to the left.

We need to shoot that down as fast as we can. Bernie of course would love to see Hillary Clinton move to the left. But that's not why he is in this. He is in it to win. He entered the race because he believes he can win.

The latest PPP poll has Clinton at less than 50% in New Hampshire and Bernie in double digits and that was taken before Bernie had announced his candidacy. I look for the next poll to show Bernie in an even stronger position and as the voters get to know him better I look for his numbers to continue to improve. Remember that Clinton's strong name recognition has a lot to do with her lead in the polls and the leader in the polls this early in the campaign often falters.

If Bernie can have a respectable performance in Iowa and then either win New Hampshire or come close then it's off to the races. Eugene McCarthy knocked LBJ out of the race for the 1968 nomination with only a second place finish in New Hampshire. History can repeat itself. Hillary Clinton is considered so inevitable by some that it might be a liability. All Bernie has to so is make a respectable showing and he will show that Clinton is not invincible and then Bernie will have a real shot.

I need to edit this. I quoted the next to the latest poll. The latest poll has fluctuated as most polls do this early in the campaign.

[Agschmid]

1. Link to the polling...

On the Democratic side Hillary Clinton leads with 62% to 14% for Bernie Sanders, 6% for Martin O'Malley, 3% for Jim Webb, and 2% for Lincoln Chafee. We have now found Sanders polling at double digits in both Iowa and New Hampshire. He leads the non-Clinton candidates in name recognition at 56%, followed by 34% for O'Malley, 31% for Webb, and 25% for Chafee. Sanders is also the most frequently named second choice at 18% to 14% for O'Malley, and 12% for Clinton.

We didn't include them in the horse race question due to their lack of steps toward a candidacy but Joe Biden (71/15 favorability) and Elizabeth Warren (66/8) are both popular with Democratic voters in Iowa. Bill de Blasio (18/15) is largely unknown.

Clinton polls over 50% for the nomination with liberals, moderates, men, women, and voters in every age group.

Source.

[totodeinhere]

4. This has Clinton at less than 50% in New Hampshire.

For someone who is supposed to so invincible less than 50% is not very impressive.

On the Democratic side Hillary Clinton has one of her weaker recent polling performances, getting 45% to 23% for Elizabeth Warren, 12% for Bernie Sanders, 7% for Joe Biden, 3% for Martin O'Malley, and 1% each for Lincoln Chafee and Jim Webb

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/bernie-sanders/

[Agschmid]

6. ?

Clinton polls over 50% for the nomination with liberals, moderates, men, women, and voters in every age group.

[totodeinhere]

7. Two different polls. Polls this early will wildly fluctuate. n/t

[Agschmid]

8. Your link appears to go to the same place as mine?

Yet the data you report is different, I'm confused.

[merrily]

18. Hillary has been campaigning since 2006, if not earlier. Bernie just announced.

[TM99]

2. My problem with the talking point

is that Hilary Clinton can not be pushed to the left. Her economic and foreign policy positions are out there, and they are anything but leftist. They are firmly neo-con and neo-liberal. She may be laudably liberal in her social policies but so is Sanders.

As long as the message can get out there about their real differences, I am confident that he has a real chance at both the primary and the general.

[totodeinhere]

5. Her handlers are probably telling her that she needs to appear to be moving to the

left in order to placate the Democratic base. But I don't think that people are buying it. I know I don't.

[TM99]

10. Sadly, I think too many will buy it.

I don't.

There are many Democrats that put social issues over economics not really realizing how deeply intertwined they actually are.

[Dragonfli]

12. What I don't understand is why they think that is even a real choice to have to make

Reality break:

There are Republicans that are regressive regarding what is labeled social issues and regressive regarding economics
There are currently no other types of Republicans running or expecting to run.

There are Democrats that are socially liberal but economically regressive (Fiscal conservatives that are not sexist bigots)
There are Democrats that are socially liberal and economically progressive (What was once the majority of the party)
There are currently No Democrats running or expected to run that are Socially regressive but economically progressive
(Fiscal liberals that are sexist bigots)

Who in the hell is the Lutz style genius that sold this stupid frame that in order to champion liberal causes one must choose a fiscal conservative yet socially liberal third way Democrat (What used to be called a moderate Republican).

One will get a social champion even if they vote for a non trickle down Democrat, but the way people talk, they appear to believe the only way to get social justice is to vote for the Third way conservative hybrid Democrat when that is simply complete and total nonsense representing a choice that does not even exist or need to be made.

[TM99]

15. Exactly!

I grew up in a Eisenhower/Roosevelt Republican family. They were quite socially liberal for the day and perhaps surprisingly economically as well. My parents and grandparents would never have considered cutting social security and this trickle down Reaganomics/Ayn Randian bullshit post 1980 was seen for the narcissism that it represents.

I became an independent when I watched the Republican party become as you aptly describe, regressive. Moderate Republicans are all but gone today.

I am still somewhat conservative economically but ironically totally in line with Sanders positions. I agree on social security, medicare expansion, immigration, etc.

I don't know why Democrats believe that way today. We have had a black man as president for almost 8 years now, and things are no better for the inner cities than they were under Bush. Why? It certainly isn't because he isn't socially progressive enough. I would argue that it is because he isn't economically progressive enough.

I still say I am a conservative in the old school sense of the word. I want to conserve the New Deal as we continue to expand social liberties and civil rights in this country.

[msongs]

13. eh, we bought it from obama, so why not from hillary lol nt

[merrily]

19. Mine is similar. Elections, esp. Presidentials, have become so hoked up, I cannot trust

what people say when running anymore. If they have a track record, I feel I can go only by that.

[orpupilofnature57]

28. + 1000 !!!

[merrily]

22. Another talking point is that Hillary is already as liberal as Bernie (and always

as been?) except for that pesky Iraq War vote.

Are you kidding me?

[TM99]

24. No kidding.

She is a founding member of the DLC and Third Way. She is as neo-liberal and demonstrable neo-conservative with regards to foreign policy as they come.

[merrily]

25. Apparently, DLC and Third Way have been trivialized to "bogeymen."

What some of us would rather not contemplate for long is that a contingent of DU loves Third Way and hates the Party's left. And, if they can rationalize and perhaps support takeover of the Democratic Party by New Democrats, Hillary's advocacy for the Iraq War, and the "racially tinged" campaign she ran against Obama in 2008, they can probably rationalize and support just about anything that happens within the Party.

[MannyGoldstein]

3. It makes zero sense

Bernie knows that pushing Hillary to the left in the primaries would be of little or no benefit if she were elected.

[GoneFishin]

9. The M$M and some progressive radio is doing it too. It is not reporting, it is a campaign tactic

against Bernie. It is another sleazy way to undermine his campaign without addressing any actual issues.

[merrily]

21. MSNBC and "progressive" radio are establishment. Hillary is the establishment candidate.

Since at least 2012, the establishment has been doing its darndest to try to make sure she'd run unopposed in the 2016 primary, as did Obama in 2012. It's been obvious and creeping. Meanwhile, she's been running for President since 2006, and possibly longer than that that. (I've seen 1996 campaign buttons touting Bill for President and Hillary for President in 2000, but there's no saying who was behind them.)

In any event, they are going to continue to do that and we have to find ways to fight that. If call in is part of the show, call in often to point out what they are doing. (I rather suspect they will not put you on air after a time or two, which we why the more callers the better.)

I'm not sure what to do about MSNBC. Anyone have any thoughts.

[mahina]

11. Bernie can bring right and left together more than anyone since President Obama ran.

Republicans are sick of the same stuff we are, largely.

Imua Bernie. Imua Martin. Imua even Hillary. One of them will win, I am feeling very sure.

[BrotherIvan]

14. Amen!

This is the first point that we must not internalize. I see it here in language: a poster wishes Bernie could win, but Hillary is inevitable. It's pure illusion.

We have to make sure all the new/young/crossover people know that they must register as a Democrat to vote in the primary and they must be sure to participate in caucuses. Early on, Obama picked up quite a few delegates through the caucuses even when he lost the primary in that state before he got that huge momentum. It was a brilliant ground game. We have to talk to Reddit, Buzzfeed, any community that is springing up to support Bernie. They may not know how the process works. If Bernie wins the primary, he will win the general.

[merrily]

16. Thank you. I imagine we will be hearing a lot of "mind reading" and "prophesy."

[DJ13]

17. Maybe he's not trying to push her left

More like goading her into committing to be further left than she wants.

Hillary is very vulnerable from any opponent thats to her left.

We saw this movie before.

[Cleita]

20. He thought about it very long and hard. Those of us who follow him know this.

He's in it for the bloody win. Mark my words. He may not win, but he's going for it.

[merrily]

23. I think he feels he has to, if the country is not going to descend further into

1.2 party system hell. I don't think he ever WANTED to do this or he would not have waited this long. I think he thinks he HAS to. Which makes him the perfect candidate for POTUS.

I've posted before that no one who wants that job should have it. Until Bernie, I thought that was a Catch 22, impossible to occur, because only people who really want the job would run for it.

I saw a famous video from the Carter era the other day, of someone asking Ted Kennedy why he wanted to be President, and he had no ready answer.

I am sure he must have said something eventually, but the video, of course, was cut off before he did. In fairness, with one brother dead from fighting for his country in WWII, one dead from being President and another dead from running for President Ted may have been trying to contain his emotions before he opened his mouth ,and not really at a loss for words.But, that's never said when people refer to that moment.

They also played the video of Hillary trying to answer the same question in 2008. It was about her having had so many opportunities from this country and not wanting to see it all......trailed off. So, I guess she was saying it was all going to hell in a handbasket unless she defeated Obama? Nothing about what she wanted to put in place to help Americans.

[Scootaloo]

26. It's easy to shoot down; you can't "move to the left" just like that.

Nobody genuinely alters their political positions just like that.

Sanders is running because he thinks he can win. I'm supporting Sanders because i know he can win. And anyone who thinks we're all doing this just to squeeze some particular noises out of Clinton really needs to get it through their heads that there is more than one Democrat in the world.

[L0oniX]

30. "move to the left" is pandering. It doesn't really mean they ARE left.

[orpupilofnature57]

27. This is like a juror who plays the role of a lawyer, Just vote . And

the only people the see her as an inevitability are her supporters and sheep .

[L0oniX]

29. You either have been and are left (which is really the old Dem center) or your pandering.