NY Mag: Running Bernie Sanders Against Trump Would Be an Act of Insanity

[wyldwolf]

“In the field of political forecasting, almost nothing is a matter of certainty, and almost everything is a matter of probability. If Democrats nominate Bernie Sanders — who currently leads the field in Iowa and New Hampshire, and appears to be consolidating support among the party’s progressive wing, while its moderates remain splintered — his prospects against Donald Trump in November would be far from hopeless. Polarization has given any major party nominee a high enough floor of support that the term ‘unelectable’ has no real place in the discussion. What’s more, every candidate in the race brings a suite of their own liabilities Trump could exploit.”

“That said, the totality of the evidence suggests Sanders is an extremely, perhaps uniquely, risky nominee. His vulnerabilities are enormous and untested. No party nomination, with the possible exception of Barry Goldwater in 1964, has put forth a presidential nominee with the level of downside risk exposure as a Sanders-led ticket would bring. To nominate Sanders would be insane.”

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/01/bernie-sanders-electable-trump-2020-nomination-popular-socialism.html

[Thekaspervote]

1. Thank you for posting! This is a very informative read. Every dem regardless of candidate choice

Should read it.

[left-of-center2012]

2. I fear a lot of voters would stay home

[wyldwolf]

3. if he is or isn't?

[left-of-center2012]

11. If Sanders is the nominee n/t

[Devil Child]

4. I love these freak-out reactions and opinions from the media talking heads and opinion makers

Proof positive that Sen. Sanders has a real shot at clinching this nomination and becoming the President of the United States of America.

[LanternWaste]

17. The pretense that a sentiment is equivalent to a proof is beyond irrational.

But I get it... we often require pretense like yours when our candidates are trailing by double digits.

[Devil Child]

19. There you go! Let it out LanternWaste

Rep. Gabbard is trailing and has little chance I know but I'll be more than pleased and proud to cast my vote for Sen. Sanders in the general election. His victory will be even sweeter considering all these doom and gloom threads for the entirety of the primary season.

[pandr32]

23. What if Sanders is not our nominee?

Who will you vote for then?

[Devil Child]

27. If by some freak occurrence he isn't then I will vote for...

...whomever is the Democratic nominee. Pretty easy decision for me.

[pandr32]

30. Thank you for your response

[Devil Child]

31. Anytime pandr32!

Defeating Trump is all that matters to me even if there are passionate and wildly differing beliefs on how to get achieve this goal. Take care!

[defacto7]

44. That's really what matters.

[Devil Child]

48. Yes! GOTV and combating voter suppression while delivering unconditional support for the Dem nominee

Hell, I'll happily vote for Bloomberg if he emerges victorious.

[defacto7]

43. Doom and gloom threads are on both ends of the spectrum.

[Devil Child]

45. I can't deny that defacto7, no one is "innocent" in this behavior

Despite the doom and gloom from the pundits who predict this or that if their candidate doesn't win I firmly believe that ANY of our candidates will destroy Trump in the general. 2020 will signal the end of the Trump era.

[brush]

22. This from a Gabbard supporter? Talk about questionable judgement.

[Devil Child]

28. I have no problem declaring my support for Rep. Gabbard

Or any candidate which I'm comfortable winning the nomination. I wish you the best in finding a candidate to declare a preference for within the safety of this community of ours.

[Cha]

63. I have a Big Problem with gabbard.. she's my Rep and I'm glad she's

quitting.

Link to tweet

[Devil Child]

64. I'm OK with you and the Twitter-er's opinions of Rep. Gabbard

I'll sleep soundly tonight. Just think Cha, the days of Rep. Gabbard as your rep are limited so silver lining on your dark cloud perhaps?

[Cha]

65. No.. it's not just me. The people in my

Districting were rejecting her, too.

The donations were going to Kai Kahele, who was her opponent, when gabbard quit.

you have no idea about any "dark clouds".

[David__77]

67. She's right about so much!

...

[Devil Child]

70. I agree David__77!

Thanks for your reply!

[emmaverybo]

35. The second proposition is not true. Better he bow out and pass the torch to the healthier and

far more likable Warren who is actually a Democrat and not a self-described socialist. She also has
a record of accomplishment he does not match.

[DanTex]

5. Chait, a day before the 2016 election, wrote "Donald Trump is not going to win Michigan"?

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/11/donald-trump-is-not-going-to-win-michigan.html

So maybe take him with a grain of salt.

[unblock]

10. we're gonna need an awful lot of salt if we're going to judge people on that basis....

[thesquanderer]

25. NY Mag? Anti-Sanders? I knew it was Chait before I clicked the link.

Maybe he has good points, I don't know. But I can't be bothered to read him on the topic, because he hasn't had a kind word to say about Sanders ever. It would be like taking your wolf warnings from the boy who cried wolf. When it comes to commentary about Sanders, I just can't take him seriously.

[JoeOtterbein]

6. Insane was electing...

...Trump!

[Hassin Bin Sober]

7. Also from Jonathan Chait:

Why Liberals Should Support a Trump Republican Nomination

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/02/why-liberals-should-support-a-trump-nomination.html

The initial stupefaction and dismay with which liberals greeted Donald Trump’s candidacy have slowly given way to feelings of Schadenfreude— reveling in the suffering of others, in this case the apoplectic members of the Republican Establishment. Are such feelings morally wrong? Or can liberals enjoy the spectacle unleavened by guilt? As Republican voters start actually voting, is it okay to be sad — alarmed, even — by the prospect that the Trump hostile takeover of the GOP may fail?

There are three reasons, in descending order of obviousness, for a liberal to earnestly and patriotically support a Trump Republican nomination. The first, of course, is that he would almost certainly lose. Trump’s ability to stay atop the polls for months, even as critics predicted his demise, has given him an aura of voodoo magic that frightens some Democrats. But whatever wizardry Trump has used to defy the laws of political gravity has worked only within his party. Among the electorate as a whole, he is massively — indeed, historically — unpopular, with unfavorable ratings now hovering around 60 percent and a public persona almost perfectly designed to repel the Obama coalition: racial minorities, single women, and college-educated whites. It would take a landscape-altering event like a recession for him to win; even that might not be enough

Second, a Trump nomination might upend his party. The GOP is a machine that harnesses ethno-nationalistic fear — of communists, criminals, matrimonial gays, terrorists, snooty cultural elites — to win elections and then, once in office, caters to its wealthy donor base. (This is why even a social firebrand like Ted Cruz would privately assure the billionaire investor Paul Singer that he wasn’t particularly concerned about gay-marriage laws.) As its voting base has lost college-­educated voters and gained blue-collar whites, the fissure between the means by which Republicans attain power and the ends they pursue once they have it has widened.

The third reason to prefer a Trump nomination: If he does win, a Trump presidency would probably wind up doing less harm to the country than a Marco Rubio or a Cruz presidency. It might even, possibly, do some good.

[Grampa.Shark]

8. From the article: Jane's University gave half a million dollars to Bernie's step daughter

For "woodworking".
Not a good look.

[Farmer-Rick]

9. The corporations and banksters are scared to death of Bernie

And Warren.

They seem to be happier with the other candidates....mostly.

Of course we all know they much prefer Dumpy Trumpy to anyone.

[onetexan]

12. not to mention BS's weak ticker

just that alone is highly risky, nevermind all the baggage and nonsense BS is full of. I'm not buying the report that he's in good health. A man at 78 years of age with a weak ticker does not invite good assurances.

[oasis]

69. It is one of my concerns also. nt

[Mike 03]

13. Definitely worth the read.

I almost never recommend articles in this forum that are negative towards one of our candidates, but this one is worth reading.

It’s impossible to measure the weight all these liabilities would bear upon a Sanders candidacy. The quality of a candidate is not the only, or even the main, determinate of election outcomes, and having popular views is only one factor in the quality of a candidate. Still, political science has generally found that, all things being equal, the electorate tends to punish ideologically extreme candidates. You can peruse studies finding such a conclusion here, here, and here. Again, none of this says the more extreme candidate always loses, merely that extremism creates a handicap.

For obvious reasons, the Democratic Party’s left wing has always resisted this conclusion (as has the Republican Party’s right wing.) But Hillary Clinton’s surprising defeat created an opportunity for the party’s left to promote an alternative theory for how the party could and should compete. It deemed Donald Trump’s win a sign that capitalism had created such distress that voters were now rejecting conventional politicians altogether and open to radical alternatives who might promise to smash the failing system. Indeed, by this reasoning, Democrats would do better, not worse, by nominating more left-wing candidates, who could distance themselves more credibly from the discredited Establishment.

Yet this theory has had two clear tests, and failed both of them spectacularly...

This is so important: Many academics who studied that election don't believe we lost in 2016 because we didn't move far left enough. For a long time I thought this was possibly the case. Now I no longer believe that.

The revolt of the Rust Belt: place and politics in the age of anger

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/1468-4446.12328

[Politicub]

14. It certainly would be bizarre. Unlike anything the country has seen. However,

I want to see Biden or Warren rip into Trump. I don't see how Sanders is agile enough in his messaging to relate to an audience outside of his base.

[Recursion]

15. Oh snap

Our Revolution went 0–22, Justice Democrats went 0–16, and Brand New Congress went 0–6.* The failed technocratic 26-year-old bourgeoise shills who were doing it wrong somehow accounted for 100 percent of the party’s House gains.

[Mike 03]

18. That's it, exactly.

Let that sink in.

[TwilightZone]

20. Yeah, that doesn't get enough attention around here.

2018 was a repudiation of Sanders-style politics and pretty much destroyed the "everyone wants a revolution" argument. If that's the direction we go in 2020, we're likely in serious trouble.

[jmowreader]

52. Ro Khanna and AOC are both Justice Democrats

But other than them, you’re right: the three big progressive organizations got thoroughly stomped in 2018. And that happened up and down the ticket.

[Recursion]

59. They didn't unseat Republicans

They unseated Democrats

[ritapria]

16. Thanks Jonathan Chait

We knew this Chait was coming - and here it is ….. Thank you Mr Chait … Keep up the door knocking for Bernie in Iowa … Ignore this Chait ..

[highplainsdem]

21. See reply 15.

[jalan48]

24. And Bloomberg is waiting in the wings to take the Centrist mantle when Biden falters.

[redstatebluegirl]

26. No doubt, the ads write themselves.

[samnsara]

29. thats what I said! :)

[KPN]

32. This again?

The boo bears are out in force the last few days.

[Quixote1818]

60. Ever since Sanders pulled ahead in Iowa and NH nt

[KPN]

61. Yup. People are scared he may win, so they

have to resort to creating fear he can’t win the GE ... and in so doing bringing why out all the guns, making up controversy by twisting facts and ignoring facts/context, ; doing the GOPs job for them.

And then they wonder why some Sanders supporters might be alienated by internal party politics, the existing power base within the party; and proceed to claim they are being threatened with “threats” of withholding votes.

It’s pretty clear what’s going on. It’s disappointing. But they of course blame Sanders, his supporters and those who defend him.

[tinrobot]

33. The guy who honeymooned in Russia really can't attack the GOP for being in bed with Russia.

[totodeinhere]

38. Oh come on. I have been to Russia too. Am I also Putin's stooge?

it's a beautiful country and its people are amazing. There is absolutely nothing wrong with visiting Russia.

[tinrobot]

41. Exactly. You just had to explain yourself.

Why select a candidate who will be constantly on the defensive and explaining himself about Russia?

Particularly when Russian interference is such a big issue?

We really don't need to go down that road.

[totodeinhere]

47. Bernie owes nobody any explanations.

If all they have got is that Bernie has been to Russia then that's pretty pathetic.

[tinrobot]

51. Right. Good luck with that.

He will be hounded on this issue.

[jmowreader]

54. He didn't honeymoon in "Russia."

He honeymooned in the Soviet Union - who, at the time, was America’s Number One Enemy.

[BirdandSquirrel]

34. That Opinion

reflects the position of conservative Democrats who are satisfied with a right-leaning country. Real Democrats, on the other hand, are pushing for Bernie Sanders because we are sick and tired of voting Democratic, and getting stuck with a conservative hiding behind the big "D" on the ballot.

This country will only prosper and grow with some extremely liberal policies on key issues. Otherwise, this country will continue it's slow demise into a religiously driven Oligarchy, 100% driven by religious zealots with money to burn. Our basic essential needs like Healthcare, Energy, and Commerce, have to be either taken control of by our government, or reigned in from the extremists who are bankrupting this nation.

[murielm99]

55. Real Democrats?

Bernie is only a Democrat when he wants to use our infrastructure. The rest of the time, he says terrible things about us. So do you.

[pecosbob]

36. I don't follow polls and I believe pundit opinions are at best worth doodly-squat

I expect Bernie has a slightly higher chance than Tulsi to win a general election...in other words virtually none. I voted for Sanders in the 2016 primary in a small personal attempt to move the discussion to the left. I then voted for Clinton in the general. I did not expect that Sanders could win the nomination then and do not expect that he can win it now. Just my two cents.

[Skya Rhen]

37. I honestly don't see how Bernie can win the nomination. I feel very confident that this won't happen

so him going up against Trump is highly improbable.

[BannonsLiver]

39. He's said he's going to raise taxes on the middle class to pay for his ideas.

That’ll be an easy sell in November.

If Bernie is the nominee I will vote for him but I will also move to a defensive footing with my retirement funds because Trump is likely to win and crash the economy sometime over the next 4 years.

[Cosmocat]

40. He is surging

Chait is a nimrod, but this is not incorrect about him in the general, SUPER risky, and honesty republicans have been anxious to face him going back to 2016 to unleash SOCIALISM!!!

But, he IS surging right now ... He is a real threat to win the nomination.

[tinrobot]

53. They said that about another candidate in 2016...

Because of that, I'm not so sure about your prediction.

[NY06DemSoc]

42. From the same idiot author who gave us

This article on why liberals should support a Trump nomination?

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/02/why-liberals-should-support-a-trump-nomination.html

I'd thank him to keep his opinions to himself.

[Autumn]

50. Great catch! I had never seen this before. Thanks for posting it.

NY06DemSoc

42. From the same idiot author who gave us

This article on why liberals should support a Trump nomination?

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/02/why-liberals-should-support-a-trump-nomination.html

I'd thank him to keep his opinions to himself.

[Democrats_win]

46. Love Bernie and Elizabeth but It's up to us to make the changes.

Many progressives desperately want economic changes to make our dying system fairer and better. Nominating either of these candidates would get us closer but it would be a matter of inches (centimeters for you lovely socialists) closer when we have hundreds of miles (kilometers) to go. This is because of the U.S. Senate--our house of lords.

How do we get there? The best most reasonable idea involves the economist Richard Wolff. He suggests we democratize the workplace by making our businesses into coops. Check him out, he's really smart on most economic issues.

Anyway, Go Bernie, Go Elizabeth. Oh, and Go Biden, Go Yang, and the rest of the gang too. Our Colorado primary is in March and maybe I'll have a better idea after the first primaries.

[Autumn]

49. Nah, that would be a sure win.

[Tiggeroshii]

56. This guys was wrong about everything. Particularly

2016. Why trust him on this?

[Scurrilous]

57. ...

[DanieRains]

58. Half Of America Doesn't Vote - Maybe If We Nominated Someone Who Never Sold Out

Cashed in, or did political favors for $$$ (legal with today's rules) they might turn out for them.

Bernie has spent his life working for regular people and not billionaires who run the country / planet as one big cash machine.

I know nominating someone who doesn't want the 1% to get 90% of everything, and pay next to nothing in taxes might seem crazy, but maybe not.

Too many seek office to cash in. Nothing wrong with trying to make money, but sometimes some people have other goals.

I am tired of oligarch rule.

Bernie, Elizabeth, or anyone else could not change this alone.

We need to band together and take power back from the 1%

And by the way Trump should have been arrested for multiple crimes multiple times. His contractor screwing was fraud, not contract disputes. Our system of justice is a joke. Maybe our nominee can change that too.

Remember not one single banker (from the 7 largest banks) went to prison for the 2008 meltdown.

We have problems folks.

[David__77]

68. I appreciate your comments.

...

[Gothmog]

62. I agree

Link to tweet

?s=20

[Cha]

66. KR