A question on sanders voter revolution

[Gothmog]

I have asked questions about this revolution repeatedly. It appears that none of sanders platform can be adopted in the real world without a voter revolution which cause new voters to rise up and make the GOP be reasonable. This concept makes no sense to me and I note that sanders has NO major legislative accomplishments

Here is on one more question

Link to tweet

[loveboy]

1. Everything looks impossible ...

Until it becomes possible.

[ehrnst]

2. One can make all the grand promises in the world...

as long as one knows that failure to deliver can be blamed on someone or something else "thwarting" them.

Also, that which ls actually impossible often indeed appears impossible to someone looking at it with reliable data and a clear understanding of what the obstacles actually are.

[Gothmog]

4. sanders has been in Congress for 30 years and had no legislative accomplishments

How long will this voter revolution take?

[boomer_wv]

6. Whatabout

Those post office he got named???? BOTH OF THEM!!!!!!

[The Valley Below]

9. I still can't believe we don't know the name of the 2nd post office.

One was named for the Radical Republican/Know-Nothing Thaddeus Stevens. That we know.

What about the other one????

No one seems to know.

[boomer_wv]

10. Matthew Lyon

A bit player in the early days of Vermont. Most famous for being the first person jailed under the Alien and Sedition act when he published some articles about John Adams.

[The Valley Below]

11. Thank you!

This has been driving me crazy.

[Gothmog]

20. Thank you

[musicman65]

17. You speak

the truth as always,others need to smell the coffee

[Scurrilous]

50. He's just beginning. LOL Standard line. Used for 40 years.

Link to tweet

[Malmsy]

13. I agree. You can't achieve it saying that it won't happen.

[brooklynite]

25. But you can NOT achieve it while endlessly saying that you can...

[LanternWaste]

33. Every answer is a reponse. Not every reponse is an answer.

As we're seemingly just trading bumper-stickers in place of actual answers...

[MH1]

34. Or until it becomes even further away by electing a Trump. nt

[Gothmog]

61. Down ballot candidate would be killed by this platform

Link to tweet

?s=20

[Gothmog]

62. Where is this voter revolution?

Link to tweet

[ehrnst]

3. Yes, I've noticed an uncharacteristic silence on that issue from the candiate.

[romachrome]

5. Having the "bully pulpit" would help

Currently he's a lone senator with very little political clout.

Also, being a senator, he's required to be in the actual hearings instead of out rabble-rousing. I have seen him post his fair share of comments about impeachment however, so he's doing what he can in that regard.

[boomer_wv]

7. Not really.

He doesn't have the leverage to pressure any of them to vote for something they don't want at all. He's unwilling to compromise, so he'll get nothing and the Republicans will gain seats in the process.

[flor-de-jasmim]

51. That's true of every Democrat at this point.

[Gothmog]

21. Again, how does this voter revolution work in the real world?

[romachrome]

23. Beats me.

Guess we'll just have to see what happens (if he even wins the nomination, let alone the GE).

I have a feeling though that if we don't see some kind of non-violent revolution pretty soon... Well, I prefer not to think about the alternative, I'd like to see some grandchildren before I die.

[Gothmog]

24. sanders' platform is dependent on this revolution

Sanders has zero legislative accomplishments. Without this voter revolution, sanders will accomplish nothing if he is the nominee

[romachrome]

37. Politics is the art of the possible.

Telling me that what I want is not possible will not bring me to your side if you can't offer to get me what I want. And I find it hard to believe that the people of Vermont were dumb enough to keep re-electing someone who got nothing done. I heard it said once that it's amazing what you can get done in Washington when you don't care who gets the credit - maybe that's why people can claim he has "no legislative accomplishments", because he got them done without getting the credit. Just speculating there. And wasn't there a president who had some crazy idea about going to the moon? Now there's something that must have seemed impossible. I bet there were a lot of naysayers right after JFK gave that speech. Really negative people. Negativity turns people off...

[Gothmog]

38. What are sanders' legislative a. Omplishmentsin the real world?

I live in the real world none of sanders platform can pass in the real world

[delisen]

54. Going to the moon did not seem impossible in 60s

Russians had already beat us into space years before which was a source of great embarrassment to us. We needed to one-up, thus we aimed for moon landing.
Part of the Cold War rivalry.

[NYMinute]

8. Bernie cannot convince anyone unless

they're wearing blinders

[Malmsy]

12. He inspires people who weren't inspired by any other candidate.

That's what we need in the White House, especially after the Trump era.

[Gothmog]

15. Where are these people?

Why has sanders failed to get even one major bill passed? What is sanders waiting for?

[wyldwolf]

16. "progressives" have claimed an invisible "progressive" majority exists for a 100 years

So far, they've not shown up.

But THIS could be the year...

[Gothmog]

18. Where are these so-called progressives?

[wyldwolf]

22. Its like some prophesy on ancient scrolls...

... that inspired a religion.

[betsuni]

14. K&R

[Gothmog]

19. All of sanders plans are pipedreams that will never be adopted in the real world

Last edited Sun Jan 26, 2020, 03:06 PM - Edit history (1)

Link to tweet

?s=20

[samnsara]

26. why is it called a revolution? Im still trying to figure out what BS has done as a Senator...

[LonePirate]

27. Is this any different than Biden saying he'll get Republican support for his proposals?

Doesn't seem to be that much different to me.

[Oldest_Millenial]

28. The same can be said of Biden's agenda...

...which I have yet to see much of any real substance. I think we can both acknowledge that the Senate is the problem with passing any legislation. Its where Obama's agenda was snuffed out after Brown was elected to replace Kennnedy. Killing the fillibuster rule needs to happen if either Biden or Sanders wins. That said, starting your negotiating position from the far left ensures a much better final outcome than from starting from the middle.

[Gothmog]

29. Again why trust sanders when his agenda is dependent on a voter revolution

I have issues trusting this voter revolution. sanders has failed to get any major legislation passed in the real world. Why trust him now? How does this voter revolution. Work?

[DanTex]

30. I think everyone understands that the GOP will stand in the way of any candidate's agenda.

It doesn't matter which candidate becomes president, the GOP isn't going to magically become reasonable.

[Gothmog]

31. But sanders keeps promising his voter revolution will force the GOP to be reasonable

Head sanders over promising? Does the concept of a voter revolution has any basis in reality ?

[DanTex]

32. Yeah, and Biden promises his collegiality will get the GOP to be reasonable.

That's the sort of thing politicians say. No candidate is going to say "here's my platform, but the GOP won't vote for it, so it doesn't really matter."

[LanternWaste]

35. No such promises made by Biden... simply an expressed sentiment on his part.

Pretending a promise is the same as a sentiment though, does reduces any credibility the bearer may otherwise have, and tends to cast their own candidate in a poorer light.

[DanTex]

36. Not exactly sure where you get that one is a "promise" and the other is a "sentiment".

Bernie doesn't say "I promise there will be a voter revolution" and Biden doesn't say "my sentiment is that I can get cooperation from Republicans".

[Gothmog]

58. sanders does not have a magic wand

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

41. So sanders is promising pipedreams that cannot be adopted in the real world

[dalton99a]

39. "If you don't vote for My Revolution, I'll just go around and yell louder

and collect more money"

[Gothmog]

40. I have questions about this voter revolution that sanders supporters are unable to answer

Last edited Sat Feb 29, 2020, 04:37 PM - Edit history (1)

I have never taken sanders seriously due to a complete lack of legislative accomplishments of sanders and the fact that I do not understand sanders voter revolution The NYT also did not understand how sanders voter revolution works

Link to tweet

Like the NYT, I have questions about this voter revolution concept. I have asked sanders supporters to explain this concept to me and so far no one seems to know how this voter revolution will work in the real world https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=430371

Gothmog (78,308 posts)
64. Exactly how does sanders voter revolution work in the real world?

It is my understanding that even sanders has acknowledged that he cannot adopt his platform unless he holds rallies and this voter revolution occurs. Is this correct? How does this voter revolution work in the real world? Again as I understand this concept, so many new voters will rise up and force the GOP to be reasonable. Is this correct? How many new voters does it take to accomplish this goal and where are these voters? How will these new voters force the GOP to be reasonable when so many GOP officeholders are in gerrymandered districts? Will these new voters move to these districts in time to vote for sanders’ platform? If these new voters are real, then why are theses new voters not showing up in the polls? New voters in such large numbers so as to cause the GOP to be reasonable should show up in polling. Are these new voters waiting for something? If these new voters really exist in the real world, why has sanders not used these new voters to get some meaningful legislation passed?

I look forward to answers to these questions

sanders interview with the NYT may have gone better if he had explained how this revolution would work in the real world. I am still curious

[NurseJackie]

42. "I have never taken sanders seriously due to a complete lack of legislative accomplishments"

I have never taken sanders seriously due to a complete lack of legislative accomplishments

Yes, this, exactly. Lots of empty promises. Pie in the sky. Fantasies that simply won't come true. We don't elect kings and queens. We don't elect dictators.

Smart voters (who live in the real world) understand these things. Intelligent voters know that real progress is incremental. Mature voters know that you don't always get what you want. Rational voters know that you can't bully your way into success and that you've got to find common ground and mutual interests with the opposition. Adult voters who have real world experience know all these things.

The candidate that I support will know all these things too and will be someone who has the temperament and demeanor to make me proud that he (or she) is our party's nominee.

[Gothmog]

43. Without this voter revolution. None of sanders' propsal will be adopted

[NurseJackie]

44. It would be a regressive move.

It would be a regressive move. As much as the BS supporters gripe about "status-quo" this and "status-quo" that... it cannot be denied that the no-compromise philosophy that they promote will end up with NO PROGRESS at all, not even incremental progress (which they also decry as being "not enough"... but happily settle for nothing as long as they can boast about "holding firm"?? How strange!)

Anyway, what I'm trying to point out is this: as much as they hate stagnation and "status quo"... the very fact that NOTHING GETS DONE because of a refusal to accept incremental change and a refusal to compromise and a refusal to seek common ground... that very philosophy is one that the "status quo" will feed upon. They end up feeding and supporting that which they purport to hate so much. How ironic.

[emmaverybo]

53. Brilliant.

[Gothmog]

45. Is this how sanders' silly voter revolution is going to work?

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

46. How does giving meaningless speeches get a program adopted in the real world

Link to tweet

[Scurrilous]

48. Biden feels my pain.

[Scurrilous]

47. I'd say the latter.

'But he’s not mobilizing public support to convince Republicans to impeach.' His army was busy trending 'release the poll' and yelling 'mom buy bagel bites.'

Never laid a finger on a billionaire, millionaire, oligarch, war criminal, fascist, banker, wall street trader, fossil fuel terrorist, or centrist neo lib reactionary running dog in his life. Everyone he has railed against in his time on earth lived out their lives untouched by him. Doesn't stop him though.

(spoiler alert) This will never happen, and as always, it's only the beginning.

Link to tweet

,

[ripcord]

49. The new Democratic Party motto

We can't try that, it's hard.

[Historic NY]

52. He can't convince anyone Republicans won't work with him...

very few now work with him even in the Senate.

[Gothmog]

56. How is wagging his finger at Mitch going to work in the real world?

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

55. This makes me smile-where is the magical voter revolution?

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

57. FactCheck Posts-- Sanders Spins Young Voter Turnout in Iowa

sanders is trying to preserve the myth of his magical voter revolution and is claiming that there was increased turnout. This claim was fact checked and found to be false

Link to tweet

Sen. Bernie Sanders claimed there was a “huge voter turnout” among young caucusgoers in Iowa this year, saying the turnout was “even higher than Obama’s extraordinary victory in 2008.” In fact, about 10,300 fewer young voters turned out this year than in 2008.....

It’s true that an estimated 24% of this year’s Democratic caucusgoers in Iowa were 29 years old or younger — a higher percentage than in 2008 (22%) and 2016 (18%), according to Edison Research, which conducts entrance polls at the Iowa caucus sites for major news organizations. But far more people participated overall in 2008, including more young people.

“In 2016, participation in the Iowa caucuses was around 170,000 voters,” Edison Research said in a blog post prior to the Iowa caucus.

“But in 2008, turnout for the Democratic caucuses in Iowa reached record levels; 239,000 voters came out to participate in the caucuses that year.”

That means about 52,580 people ages 17 to 29 participated in the Iowa caucus in 2008 — which is far more than came out this year.
As the Washington Post reported, 176,000 people participated in the Democratic caucuses in Iowa, which means about 42,240 of the Democratic caucusgoers were 29 years old or younger. That’s about 11,640 more than participated in 2016 — when Sanders was also a presidential candidate — but it’s about 10,300 fewer younger voters than in 2008.

So, Sanders’ claim that young voter turnout among Iowa Democrats “was even higher than Obama’s extraordinary victory in 2008” is pure spin.

[Gothmog]

59. No, radical policies won't drive election-winning turnout

The concept of a magical voter revolution is debunked

Link to tweet

Sanders’s explanation of why this is not a problem is simple, and he has repeated it endlessly. When a member of the Los Angeles Times editorial board asked him whether “a candidate as far to the left as you” would “alienate swing voters and moderates and independents,” the senator replied: “The only way that you beat Trump is by having an unprecedented campaign, an unprecedentedly large voter turnout.” Faiz Shakir, Sanders’s campaign manager, adds: “Bernie Sanders has very unique appeal amongst [the younger] generation and can inspire, I think, a bunch of them to vote in percentages that they have never voted before.”

This has remarkably little empirical support. Take the 2018 midterm elections, in which the Democrats took back the House (a net 40-seat gain), carried the House popular vote by almost nine points and flipped seven Republican-held governorships. Turnout in that election was outstanding, topping 49 percent — the highest midterm turnout since 1914 and up 13 points over the previous midterm, in 2014 — and the demographic composition of the electorate came remarkably close to that of a presidential election year. (Typically, midterm voters tend to be much older and much whiter than those in presidential elections.) This was due both to fewer presidential “drop-off” voters (people who voted in 2016 but not 2018) and to more midterm “surge” voters (those who voted in 2018 but not 2016)…..

This analysis shreds an implicit assumption of Sanders and other members of the turnout-will-solve-everything crowd: that if they polarize the election by highlighting progressive issues, “their” nonvoters will show up at the polls, but none of the nonvoters from the other side will. That view is also contradicted by many political science studies. Stanford political scientists Andrew Hall and Daniel Thompson, for example, studied House races between 2006 and 2014 and found that highly ideological candidates who beat moderates for a party nomination indeed increased turnout in their own party in the general election — but they increased the opposition turnout even more. (The difference was between three and eight percentage points.) Apparently, their extreme political stances did more to turn out the other side to vote against them than to turn out their own side to vote for them.

The turnout equation does not necessarily return positive results for a candidate like Sanders. The reverse is more likely. It is truly magical thinking to believe that, in a highly polarized situation, only your side gets to increase turnout. And if the other side turns out in droves, you might not like the results — a warning Democrats would be wise to heed.

[Gothmog]

60. There will be no magical voter revolution

Link to tweet