If we nominate a socialist... we will get 4 more years of what we saw tonight

[scheming daemons]

The ONLY priority is Trump's defeat.


Not M4A, not forgiving student loans, not ANY policy position.

Because none of them matter, none of them are achievable... if we lose the election.



Do NOT give Trump a candidate he craves. Give him a candidate he fears.


Make this election about Trump, not about socialism.


That's how we win.

[dware]

1. +1000.

We could also potentially lose the House also and the repigs would almost certainly retain the Senate.

[lapfog_1]

15. vote blue no matter who (that's for us)

but the indpendents will never vote socialist

[dware]

23. I 100% agree,

but you're right, we would lost the I's and any R's that are inclined to vote Dem this year.

[tiredtoo]

2. We all have our opinions don't we? EOM

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

68. Sure do... here's mine: nominate BERNIE and retire the corporate socialist tRump!!

Last edited Wed Feb 5, 2020, 10:16 AM - Edit history (2)

Bernie is the best candidate to take on that corporate elitist asshole and GUARAN-DAMN-TEE victory in November!!


Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[samnsara]

113. oh dear

[brooklynite]

126. IS that projection based on some actual analysis?

Emojis don't really tell the story.

[vlyons]

187. Socialism is merely a label that means different things to different people

Hitler's Nazi party labeled itself the National Socialist German Workers' Party. Thanks to Joe McCarthy and the Republicans, "Socialism" was defined as communism lite. You have to read Marx and Engels and the early founders of the labor movement to understand classic socialism. Suffice it to say that public services paid with citizen tax $$$ are socialism. The fire and police dept, interstate highway, city streets and street lights, public schools and colleges, public housing, county hospital are all socialism. But Republicans want to privatize everything. Is it any wonder that in Trump's SOTU, he called public schools "government schools?"

Yes Republicans are going to call us pinkos and socialists. So what? It's up to us to educate people with the truth.

[BlueIdaho]

3. In a race between a Socialist and a psychopath

The psychopath wins every time. I wish it weren’t true - but it sadly is.

[MontanaMama]

8. Rick Wilson said

exactly this.

[BlueIdaho]

9. Sad but true... damn it! nt.

[radical noodle]

34. And yesterday Steve Schmidt said

A sociopath beats a socialist every day and twice on Tuesday.

[BlueIdaho]

38. Nice!

[Autumn]

124. Steve Schmidt the Republican? Fuck him, I have no fucks to give about any Republicans opinion.

[radical noodle]

132. Of course you don't

If he was cheering for Sanders, you'd love him. And he's no longer a repub.

[Autumn]

138. No I wouldn't. Know why? Republicans hate Bernie and are against anything he wants to enact.

But I love that fact that people hate any person who likes Bernie that supported a third party candidate but hang onto the words of any Republican who actually got Republicans elected because those said Republicans don't like Bernie.

[radical noodle]

165. Who exactly supported a third party candidate?

Nina Turner? Susan Sarandon? Briahna Joy Gray? You can laugh all you want. The facts seem elusive to you, but we know them.

[Autumn]

169. One of our Dem candidates has endorsed, donated and supported some Republicans over Democrats.

Got a problem with that?

[radical noodle]

170. I try to judge everything on an individual basis

Without knowing the facts behind those decisions, I'd have to withhold judgment.

I know the circumstances of the ones I mentioned, and I imagine you do as well.

[Autumn]

171. As do I, and yes I know the circumstances of both. I'm sure you do also.

Get back to me when you feel the same about one as you do the other. Have a nice day.

[unitedwethrive]

43. Yup, and then the psychopath gets to appoint Supreme Court Justices.

Maybe several.

[Gothmog]

96. Steve Schmidt is correct

Link to tweet

[Historic NY]

157. +1

The man is writing on the wall.....he went into socialist mode last night. Most people believe it worse than being a commie, your not going to set them straight, Trump brands things and he will have Sanders branded and gift boxed in rubles.

[JoeOtterbein]

4. No. It's much easier, and faster, to just yell "PUTIN" instead. ntn

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

183. +1,000

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[krissey]

5. Yes.

[TheBlackAdder]

80. No matter who gets nominated in the Democratic Party, they'll be branded a socialist anyway!

[krissey]

81. Republicans always try, you are right. It isn't bought. This will be fact, in name itself.

Two different animals.

[redstateblues]

82. That's a false meme. Neither Biden, Pete or Klobuchar are socialist. Bernie is

[TheBlackAdder]

84. Just wait until after the primary is over. Socialism will be one of the top 10 GOP terms.

.

HRC was called a hardened socialist. Obama was called a socialist. Whomever is in 2020 will be called one.

.

[I_M_Blue_2]

83. Not Bloomberg, no one can say he is a socialist N/T

[TheBlackAdder]

85. Does it really matter? They'll use the term, since Bloomberg wants to add progressive issues.

.

Most of the populous are kind of stupid and will believe whatever messaging they hear the most.

One of the things Democrats need to do is stress that the US is a hybrid system of capitalism and socialism.


The Republicans are winning the branding of that term over decades of hammering it home.

.

[dchill]

105. Republicans can - and will - say it.

[I_M_Blue_2]

161. But with some candidates it is more believable than it is with others

[DanTex]

6. We thought that last time, when we went with the centrist. Guess what we got?

That was the conventional wisdom. Socialism bad. Moderate Dem with impeccable credentials beats crazy right-wing reality show host. It was a convincing argument, but it didn't work out.

Could it be that the conventional wisdom missed something?

[Mr.Bill]

11. We got three million more votes than Trump.

[DanTex]

21. And yet, Trump is president. That's the problem.

[dware]

27. Again, with Russian interference.

BS would get hammered in the GE against the Mango Menace.

[DanTex]

30. Which will happen again. If we have a plan that only works in a world without

Russian interference, we need to come up with a new plan.

[dware]

32. BS will get hammered with or without Russian interference.

That's just a plain and simple fact.

[Kentonio]

100. It's not a fact, its an opinion.

Which you're entitled to of course.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

184. Yes, people are entitled to their opinions... even if they are dead wrong!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[NurseJackie]

13. Oh, honey! Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!

[dware]

18. I love that NurseJackie.

[DanTex]

25. It's true though. Trump really is president.

[NurseJackie]

28. I think you're getting confused about cause-and-effect...

.. but that's okay. I'm only barely paying attention to this thread anyway.

[Cha]

88. lol..

same here.. but your post caught my eye.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

185. Unfortunately, yes, the last time I checked, tRumpty Dumbty indeed was the PEE-resident.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[dware]

14. Wrong.

What happened was the Russian interference in our elections.

HRC actually won the election, but it was stolen by the Mango Menace with Russian help.

So your theory is total bunk.

[DanTex]

22. You think there won't be Russian interference again?

[dware]

26. How does that change anything I just said? nt

[DanTex]

36. It doesn't change it, just makes it irrelevant.

We nominated a centrist and lost. The fact that there was Russian interference, and we would have won without it, doesn't vindicate the centrism strategy, because there will be Russian interference this time too.

Russian interference is a constant.

[dware]

41. The difference is that if BS is our candidate,

we stand a better than even chance of losing the House and the repigs will retain the Senate.

[DanTex]

48. Well, that's arguable.

It's also arguable that Sanders or Warren would excite the base and bring out new voters. My point is, we tried the centrist way, against exactly the same Trump. It didn't work. And all the columnists telling us we need to go with another centrist were totally wrong about what was going to happen in 2016.

[dware]

52. You keep leaving out the fact that the Centrist did win,

but because of Russian interference, she was denied the WH.

[DanTex]

56. OK, but that's not the kind of win I'm interested in.

I want the kind of win that results in a Democrat becoming president.

[dware]

57. Well then, that wouldn't mean BS as our candidate.

Unless you want to lose the Presidency, the House and no chance to take the Senate.

And, the Mango Menace would get to nominate 1-3 SCJ's which would be confirmed because the Senate would still be in the repigs hands.

[DanTex]

58. Or maybe it would.

Because maybe instead of trying the same thing that didn't work last time, we could go with a strategy based on bold progressive policies that excite the base and bring in new voters.

[dware]

63. But it did work the last time, but for Russian interference.

3 million more votes for HRC vs Trump proves that the centrist is much more viable than a far left socialist.

[DanTex]

64. But there will be Russian interference again this time.

And there will also be an Electoral College this time. Taking those two things into account, the strategy did not work last time. That's the point. We need a strategy that will overcome those things. The centrist strategy did not do that. The progressive strategy has the potential to.

[dware]

66. This country will not vote for a far left socialist for President,

that's just a plain simple fact.

Sorry, I've got to climb into my sleeper and crash out, got to get up early to make a delivery.

It's been a good debate.

Have a great night.

[ehrnst]

150. So why didn't the 'strategy" you propose win with Democrats who were doing the actual voting?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

182. Your makin perfect sense Dan, as usual... this time tho will be different, with Bernie at the helm!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[DanTex]

33. And yet, Trump is president.

I don't know if HRC is a better or worse campaigner than Biden. But it is bound to be a very similar kind of campaign. As candidates, they offer the same kinds of things: experience, qualifications, character, moderate policies, part of the Obama administration, etc. Also similar potential points of criticism, like past positions on IWR and NAFTA.

[BlueIdaho]

35. In a race between a socialist and a psychopath

The psychopath wins every time.

[radical noodle]

39. Why in heaven's name

do you discount the idea that the same thing will happen to Sanders? Or do you think Putin will help Sanders this time? Somehow I doubt that.

[DanTex]

46. It could. I'm just saying we already tried the path more traveled.

And all the pundits and conventional wisdom were completely wrong about that. The same ones warning us, again, not to take the path less traveled.

I don't think Putin will help Sanders. Russia will interfere no mater what. We need to win by enough to overcome that. And also to win in the right parts of the country to overcome the Electoral College. There's another electability argument, based on base turnout and bringing in new voters with bold progressive plans that excite people to vote for them, and the recognition that there are more "Joe Rogan independents" than there are independents who think like Washington Post columnists.

[radical noodle]

51. We have to beat trump

Would you agree that's our #1 priority?

[DanTex]

53. Yes I agree with that for sure.

[radical noodle]

65. We have that in common

Our disagreement is only how to accomplish that. I fear that Sanders would be massacred in the general if he got the nomination. I'm old enough to remember McGovern (and Goldwater in the other direction).

[samnsara]

114. because of russia!

[lambchopp59]

31. Exactly the danger, Will Robinson, history can and will repeat itself just as you warn

The voters want change. Only the die hard Fox Noise faithful fear the socialism shit, while they drive to their rallies on socialist streets, waiting for socialist stoplights, protected by socialist police forces, check their watches set by socialist National Time Clock, using the socialist GPS system to get there efficiently and wait for years to collect their socialist social security retirement.
We have at least 3 candidates well armed, fully loaded to take on Wall Street, tax the rich, fund education and students a dozen ways, reduce the insane wealth gap and wealth advantage. Come on democratic socialists, full guns blazing on those platforms and Trump will be history.

[krissey]

72. Clinton is not a centralist. She is just right of Sanders. Harris is more left than Sanders.

Hillary is not centralist.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

79. How dare you speak the truth?!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[mojowork_n]

93. An excellent question but the responses to it, mostly all echo chamber...

Conventional thought and very little honest reflection or questioning the outcome from outside the envelope.

[Kentonio]

99. Bingo!

[msongs]

7. after we lose the house and senate worse there will no need for SOTU speeches nt

[Zolorp]

10. Don't forget, he was on the ballot as a COMMUNIST in 1980.

[NurseJackie]

16. I haven't forgotten, and neither has the GOP... and they'll make sure everyone knows it.

[Zolorp]

37. I only wish it had been brought out in 2016

Had more people known this back then when he went negative after being mathematically eliminated several months before conceding, things might be different now.

[PatSeg]

136. Sanders wasn't thoroughly vetted in 2016

but if he becomes the nominee, he will be and it won't be pretty. There are too many people who just won't vote for someone with a history like his.

[OneMoreCupOfCoffee]

17. We can not afford political suicide.

We need to get rid of Trump.

No time to dick around.

[UniteFightBack]

60. Jesus Christ! nt

[tirebiter]

12. I'm hearing the tune I've been singing

Last edited Wed Feb 5, 2020, 04:33 AM - Edit history (1)

I may have to join in after the bridge
People don't seem to understand that the Socialist Worker's Party was created by Trotsky. Or that JFK stood in West Berlin shoulder to shoulder with Willy Brandt, a western socialist. I was living in West Germany when that happened. The wall was being built while I was there. There was daily news with pic of people getting shot trying to escape across the border to the West. Thing is I was equally distant in between East Germany and Dachau. I has first hand knowledge of the horrors of Communism and Fascism. NATO was a force of liberal democracy. Things got really crazy during the Cuban Missle Crisis. It was maneuver time. They called us dependents in and give us a lesson on fleeing Warsaw Pact invaders. We knew it was pretty much all over if things went nuclear.
It was clear that there was more than one kind of socialism but the ones connected to Russia were not good ones.

[HarlanPepper]

19. I agree

Problem is there are a lot of people who think it is a cure all and are deeply invested in the idea.

[Progressive2020]

20. Voting Democrat

We need to vote for whichever Democrat wins the nomination. If Sanders does not get the nomination, his supporters need to vote for whoever does get the nomination. Likewise, should Sanders win the nomination, we will need to get behind him and mobilize the vote for him, against Trump. There should be no double standard. Vote Blue, No Matter Who, 2020.

[BernieBabies]

47. Exactly

If Bugs Bunny pulls it out, great, he's our guy because he's 100x more human than that amoral, sub-human thing occupying the White House.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

29. I agree, give tRumpy the Clown the candidate he fears most... Bernie!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[lambchopp59]

45. Winning combo either way.

I'll vote blue no matter who, but better confidence we'll pick up far more independents, undecideds and potential frustrated third party voters and youth vote energy enough to topple the Electoral Map Repig advantage, send Trump and ilk packing, upset the historical incumbent win precedent with those unafraid to shake up Wall Street.
And repeat 2016 with those who think the safe, mild, sensible, middle of the road candidate will beat the rotten beast stinking up 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

131. Couldnt agree more, that wonderful combo would EASILY defeat that CORPORATE socialist tRump.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[HarlanPepper]

40. If we're lucky it would only be four

Go ask Labour Party members in the UK how they feel about hitching their wagon to Jeremy Corbyn. Labour will be out of power for 15-20 years at least.

[Gore1FL]

42. I see no evidence that this is true.

The electable argument would work better if the unelectable person wasn't being elected over the electable one.

How we win is supporting our nominee.

[scheming daemons]

44. How we win is by having a nominee to support who can beat Trump

Bernie will not.

His Soviet-friendly past will be driven home by the GOP until 60% of the country considers Bernie a bolshevik.

[dware]

49. And let us not forget his saying that the Iran hostages

deserved what they got.

[HarlanPepper]

50. He's also said he will raise taxes on the middle class

Remind me how many successful GE campaigns have been built on that pledge.

[Zolorp]

110. Mondale comes to mind.

He was honest, said he would raise taxes, and was not just trounced, he damn near let Reagan be the second president in history to win the EC unanimously!



Then there was 1972 when McGovern got 1 more electoral vote than Mandale would 12 years later and nearly gave Nixon the honor of being the second US president to win the EC unanimously:

[Gore1FL]

55. Nonsense

The red-scare shit is as laughable and unsupported bullshit as the "electable" claim.

We win by supporting our party's nominee. Period.

[BlueIdaho]

59. There aren't enough registered Democrats

To pull that off. We need a coalition of Dems and at least independents. A few fed up moderate former republicans won’t hurt either. I love your enthusiasm but the numbers don’t pencil out.

[Kentonio]

103. Bernie is exactly the person we need to bring back the disaffected working class vote

So many of those low income areas quietly dropped our party over the years since Bill, and we need them back. They need someone who speaks to them in a plain speaking language they understand and which addresses their own problems.

[UniteFightBack]

62. The evidence is common sense. nt

[Gore1FL]

163. Yeah. Sure.

Whatever you say, boss.

[Cicada]

54. Predictit thinks Bernie would beat Trump

Betting markets have proven validity. Not perfect of course but better than most pundits. Some say they are as accurate as polls. Predictit gave Trump much better odds in 2016 than any pundit, about one in three. They have the odds of Sanders being the nominee at 39%. They have the odds of him being President 25%. That means they think the odds he would beat Trump are 25 divided by 39. 64%. Seems weird but that is what the collective wisdom of the crowd is saying. I know the collective wisdom of the crowd is smarter than I am. So I am not certain Bernie would lose. I would feel better with someone other than Bernie but why should I rationally think I am smarter than Predictit?

[TexasTowelie]

90. As a math major and statistician

I can say that how you came up with the odds of Bernie beating Trump at 64% is completely flawed. The prediction markets gave Bernie a 25% chance of defeating Trump--period.

[Cicada]

92. I majored in math too

I got a little pin from the American Math Association for second highest score in my state on their little high school test. I guess if there is a chance Bernie would run third party then my logic might be off. Bernie has 39 tickets to the show. In 25 of the tickets he wins. If he is in the show his odds of winning are 25 out of 39.

[TexasTowelie]

94. In that case, you should be aware of "independent events" in statistics.

The numbers that are mentioned are the probabilities of two separate, independent events. An independent event is an event that has no connection to another event's chances of happening (or not happening). In other words, the event has no effect on the probability of another event occurring. Independent events in probability are no different from independent events in real life.

One of the events is for getting tickets to the nomination and the probability is 39% for Bernie. There is a separate group of tickets for the election and the probability of Bernie winning is 25%. The first event means that Bernie would have received 39 of the 100 tickets. Then there are another 100 tickets available to the second event (winning the election) of which Bernie supposedly gets 25. That is the error in your logic--there are 100 tickets to the second independent event rather than 39 (that is what a 25% chance of winning means). Of course, if Bernie does not get past the first event, then the probability of the second event occurring is zero.

[Cicada]

98. The events are not independent

[TexasTowelie]

111. But the odds are being made for each event being treated independently.

The odds on event A (receiving the nomination) at 39% for and 61% against. The odds for event B (winning the election) are 25% and 75% against winning.

Look at it from this perspective (and I haven't actually checked the odds for the GOP side):

Let's say that the odds are 95% for Trump to get the GOP nomination. Meanwhile, the odds of Trump winning the general election are at 50%. Does that mean that Trump has a [95/(95+50)] (66%) chance of winning? The answer would be no, because it contradicts the odds of Event B being 50%. And if we changed the odds of Trump winning the general election to 55%, then following your logic it would mean that Trump has a [95/(95+55)] (63%) chance of winning. This is another contradiction where even though there is an increase in the odds of winning (from 50% to 55%), he would end up with a lower chance of (from 66% to 63%) of winning.

The only dependency between Event A (the nomination) and Event B (winning the election) is that if event A isn't achieved, then Event B cannot occur (barring a third-party run).

[Cicada]

173. Example

Imagine a list with 100 rows, representing running 100 elections. In the first column enter a 1 if Bernie wins the nomination, 0 if he doesn’t. Order the rows from low to high. So the first 61 rows have zero, next 39 have 1. In the second column enter a 0 if Bernie loses the election and a 1 if he Wins. The 1s in the second column will be limited to the rows where there is a 1 in the first column, right? In other words the entries in column 2 which have a 1 are limited to the last 39 rows. In the last 39 rows how many have a 1 in column 2? 25. So in the 39 rows in which Bernie gets the nomination how many times did he win the election, getting a 1 in column 2? 25. Out of 39 times he got the nomination he won 25. So he won 25 of the 39 times he was on the ballot.

[TexasTowelie]

174. That is not the way that the people making the odds do it though.

The odds are evaluated independently of the other event. You are conditionally excluding the 61 times where he lost both the nomination and the election and those 61 events are included in the calculations to obtain the overall probability. When the odds makers are saying that Bernie has a 25% chance of winning the election, they mean exactly that--he will win 25 out of 100 times, not 25 out of 39 times. If you include the 61 times where Bernie does win the nomination and add the 14 times that he wins the nomination, but loses the election then you come up with 75 negative outcomes.

(probability of winning) = p = 0.25
(probability of not winning) = (1 - p) = 0.75

[Cicada]

175. Bernie is on the ballot only 39 times out of 100. He wins 25 times.

He runs 39 times. He wins 25 times. He only wins the presidency in the 39 times he is on the ballot. He is on the ballot 39 times. According to Predictit. He becomes President 25 times. According to predictit. His 25 presidency wins all happen in the 39 times he is on the ballot. Right? I am not saying Predictit is correct. I am just telling you what their numbers imply. You can believe me or not.

[TexasTowelie]

178. No, because Bernie is running to achieve one event which is to become president.

He is eliminated from contention in 61 instances by not getting the nomination. In another 14 instances he wins the nomination and loses the general election. The remaining 25 instances he is projected to win. There are 75 losing scenarios and 25 winning scenarios. That doesn't equate to having a 64% probability of winning the election, because if he doesn't get the nomination then the probability of him winning is zero (barring a third party run).

If Bernie does win the nomination, then the probabilities will be recalculated and the probabilities of him winning the election will likely increase to somewhere between 45%-55% since he will no longer face any Democratic competitors. However, he has to win the nomination first which is why his current probability of winning the general election is at 25%.

[Cicada]

179. He is on the ballot 39 times and wins 25 times

He runs against a Republican 39 times. Right? He defeats a Republican 25 times. Right?

I was a professional gambler for five years. I reported 100% of my income on my tax returns. I never had a losing month. I trust my instincts on this stuff.

[TexasTowelie]

181. No.

Bernie is still running against Trump even though he is in a Democratic primary.

If you look at polls that pit a specific Democratic candidate against Trump, they generally show the Democrat winning with percentages at 52%-48%, 53%-47%, etc. None of the GE polls are predicting that Bernie defeats Trump 64%-36%.

I've provided plenty of evidence upthread where following your logic shows that when the projected probability of winning increased, the calculated percentage of winning decreases. You haven't been able to explain those contradictions away in a successful manner. I had classes in descriptive statistics, inferential statistics, and a probability course that would have transferred into a post-grad level.

I'm not a gambler (mostly due to religious influence in my youth). I also congratulate you for being honest about reporting your income on your taxes, but I am not convinced that Bernie has a 64% chance of winning the general election when nearly every poll involving Bernie vs. Trump shows a race that is a fifty-something number vs. a forty-something number.

By the way, if Bernie's probability of winning the nomination remains at 39% and the probability of his winning the general election drops to 20%, then using your logic Bernie would have have a 39/59 (66%) chance of winning. Please explain to me that even though the probability of his winning increases from 64% to 66% even though the probability stated above dropped from 25% to 20%? Better yet, if Bernie's chance of winning the general election drops to 0%, does that mean that Bernie wins 100% (39/39 using your logic) of the time? The contradiction appears very evident.

[Gore1FL]

164. I recall in 2008 how Obama would lose and we needed someone electable like Clinton.

Conventional wisdom usually contains very little wisdom.

[colsohlibgal]

61. Bulletin

Medicare is Socialism. You can still get rich under Democratic Socialism. It just means a more fair sharing of the Pie. Eisenhower, a Republican, got it but now Democrats don’t? We’ve come a long way but not in the right direction for most Citizens.

[HarlanPepper]

87. Gotta sell that.

And there’s the rub. This is not a country that does well with nuance. Dump is exhibit A.

[AncientGeezer]

162. "Medicare is Socialism." How?

[jcmaine72]

67. Thanks for the Red Scare

Usually we hear this sort of thing from RWers. "If a Socialist gets elected this. If a Socialist gets elected that." Yes, the sky will fall and the earth will swallow us whole. All fear, fear, fear.

It's nice to look to the future with confidence. You should try it sometime. Oh wait! That sounds so....so...Socialist!

[scheming daemons]

70. I am not talking about a socialist getting elected..I am talking about one getting nominated

He has no chance to get elected.

[jcmaine72]

74. Yeah, just like Trump had "no path to victory".

If that imbecile found a path to victory, just think what a brilliant man like Bernie could accomplish on election night.

[Progressive2020]

76. National Polls

I thought that there were some National Polls indicating that Sanders led Trump in a head-to-head match-up. When you say that Sanders has no chance of getting elected, what do you base that on? Do you have poll numbers, or is it just a gut feeling? I do not think it is a good idea for any of us to say that any of our candidates are unelectable in the General Election. We could end up hamstringing ourselves by infighting. Anyway, I will support whoever gets the Democratic nomination, and will not call any candidate unelectable without some sort of strong evidence that this is the case.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

186. Given the choice between a DEMOCRATIC Socialist like Bernie or a CORPORATE Socialist like tRumpy...

the choice is easy... say "hello" to President Sanders and "good-fuckin-bye" to PEE-resident Dickhead!!


Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join The Revolution!!

[Progressive2020]

71. Yeah

The division between the moderates and the progressives in the Democratic Party needs to be healed. We need to unite both wings of the Party to beat Trump in November. We need to stop attacking each other. If a Moderate wins the nomination, maybe they could choose someone more popular with the Progressives to balance the ticket. I had thought maybe Biden/Warren, but Joe did not do so well last night in Iowa. We will see how things develop.

[jcmaine72]

75. Excellent post. I concur.

[SergeStorms]

69. Oh, I agree 100%.

The pendulum is ready to swing back in the Democrats' direction, IF we can resist the urge to elect B.S. Things went way too far to the right with Trump's selection to the presidency. What Democrats don't need is to scare independent and republican-turned Democratic voters by swerving too far in the opposite direction. That would guarantee Trump another unthinkable four years in office.

We can work on social programs while we enjoy a Democratic President and totally controlled Democratic Congress. We can even phase in MFA as Americans understand it better, but we cannot shove socialist programs down the throats of Americans. Right now they're prepared to give Democrats total control of the government, BUT ONLY if we don't insist upon swinging the pendulum too far in the other direction and scaring the crap out of them. In a situation like that they'll decide to re-elect the evil they know, as opposed to the perceived evil they don't know.

A centrist /left-centrist is what we need right now to steady the frightened herd. Get everyone calmed down, get the herd heading in one direction again, and then we can introduce and pass some decent social programs for Americans. Nominate a socialist, and I guarantee another four horrifying years of Donald Drumpf.

[Gothmog]

73. If the Democratic Party nominate a socialist, trump will win 45+ states

[doc03]

77. I agree nt

[democrattotheend]

78. Right now I'm feeling like that will be the case regardless

Between the failure of the impeachment effort to turn the tide of national opinion, Trump's rise in approval rating, the weakness of our field, the debacle in Iowa, and the fact that it's pretty darn hard to beat an incumbent, I'm feeling pessimistic at the moment.

I'm not so sure Bernie is inherently weaker than most of the other candidates - in 2016 he seemed to have surprising appeal to people I would not have expected him to appeal to. But I think the fact that he has alienated so much of the party establishment is a weakness, because I am concerned they will just go through the motions and not really go all out to get him elected if he wins the nomination. I wasn't alive in 1972 but I understand that's part of why McGovern lost so badly. If he wins the nomination he's got to find a way to make nice with the establishment or he won't have a chance.

[Jirel]

86. Toxically nearsighted.

The politics of fear loses every time. Kerry was safe. Oops. Gore was safe. Oops. Hillary was safe. Oops.

You do not win by playing “safe,” whatever that means. Per the partial caucus results, the “safe” candidates, Biden and Klobuchar, are last in the field of possibly viable candidates. That’s not a fluke.

Candidates that inspire are not “safe.” Despite the socialist tag, Bernie seems to have the strongest crossover to independents and even some conservatives. Why? Because he is NOT safe. Because he is not business as usual. Because ideas like M4A do resonate. Because getting kids into college, which is unaffordable for so many, resonates.

Forget your safe business as usual candidates, unless you want to repeat Gore, Kerry, and Clinton.

[Cha]

89. KR!!!!!

[MFM008]

91. Agreed

[Gothmog]

95. trump would love to run against socialism

Link to tweet

[helpisontheway]

97. Yup but the Sanders and Warren cheerleaders don't want to hear it.nt

[blm]

118. Warren is the smartest capitalist in this race. Why are

You and why would ANY American be against accountable capitalism?

[LonePirate]

151. Scare tactics are only the province of the right.

[Mike Niendorff]

101. #VoteBlueNoMatterWho

Cuts all ways.

If Bernie is the nominee, I expect **100%** support from every democrat, everywhere.

He will have mine. He damn well better have yours too.

And if that's too much to ask, then you are part of the problem.


MDN

[texasfiddler]

102. Independents will not vote blue no matter who

We need middle of the road voters to vote for the Democrat. We can’t afford for them to not vote for President because the two choices are too radical.

[Mike Niendorff]

106. I repeat:

If you are not willing to support the Democratic nominee AGAINST DONALD TRUMP then you are part of the problem.

Anyone who can still support Trump in the face of the OVERWHELMING evidence of his corruption and criminality was never going to do anything else, and is not worthy of further consideration at this point.

Know who your friends are, know who your enemies are, and step up and fight accordingly.


MDN

[gab13by13]

104. I could say,

If we nominate a centrist we lose, but I believe that our nominee should be the candidate with the most votes. Keep bashing Bernie, it's what Russia did to Hillary.
When do the posts start about Bernie having a hole in his tongue?

People make a big mistake by thinking that getting rid of Trump will cure everything, now that to me is dangerous thinking. Without radical institutional change we can't tweak our way back to normalcy.

I understand, many Democrats fear real change but Bernie will help them get through it.

[texasfiddler]

107. Trump is a result of 30 years of propaganda

A.M. radio created the ground work for Trump. Trump and and those crazy right wingers who will be elected after him owe their unwavering base to this. The left has not had such an effective propaganda machine and probably won’t. Therefore, we have to appeal to what is left. If the same number of working class people across the heartland listened to Thom Hartmann as opposed to Rush Limbaugh for the last twenty years, Bernie would have an excellent shot of winning. The electoral system really hurts candidates that are popular in the cities and A.M. radio propaganda across rural America has taken advantage of this. It sucks, but that is reality.

[samnsara]

108. thank you!! well said. defeating trump* is the ONLY thing we need to concentrate on..

...free college? ya aint gonna get it EVER with trump*

Medicare for all? FORGETTABOUTIT if trump* is elected. You will be damned lucky if you get any health care


Green New Deal? NEVER EVER if trump* is re elected. Every environmental protection will be stripped away..It will take us years just to get back to where we are now.


Choice? OH HELL NO..that will be gone too.....

so if you really want whats left of your rights, and the things we enjoy as Americans, to go down the ol toilet....then throw your vote away on a divisive candidate.

[Martin Eden]

109. Good thing no Socialists are running

None of our candidates -- not even Bernie Sanders, the self described "Democratic Socialist " -- advocates government taking over the means of production.

What the far left stands for is more like Western European capitalist economies which provide their citizens with universal healthcare and affordable education.

We need to stop accepting and repeating the false meme that Democrats are Socialists.

Having said all that, I tend to agree that a more moderate candidate might have a better chance to win in the key battleground states.

[Zolorp]

112. A former Communist is running

In 1980, Sanders' name was on the statewide Vermont ballot as a Communist.

So if he is a Democrat now, he was a Communist then.

[Martin Eden]

116. Democrat now means not a Socialist

Thanks for making my point.

[Zolorp]

117. He is still a former Communist

That fact alone means he would be crushed in national election.

[Martin Eden]

125. There are several reasons why I'm not voting for Sanders in this primary

And the first is his electability, largely for the reason you state.

What I totally reject is the RW talking point that the left of the Democratic Party represents "Socialism."

The other day Chuck Toad hosted a panel where he put forward the choice between Socialism and Capitalism in this election.

It is a false choice that only serves Trump and the Repukes.

None of our candidates are trying to eliminate private ownership of businesses.

[Zolorp]

128. But one candidate proudly proclaimed he was Socialist for years.

Qualifying it as Democratic Socialism is a more recent evolution.

And the years long affiliation with outright Communism is undeniable.

This one candidate would instantly become the physical embodiment of the charicature the Republicans have created about Democrats since McCarthy the moment he is nominated.

[Act_of_Reparation]

120. OH NOES A COMMUNIST

[Zolorp]

121. Yes, a Communist

And he was a Communist at the height of the cold war.

There is no way to overcome that baggage in a national election.

[Zolorp]

148. I take that as a personal insult for simply telling the truth

Just because it is 100% true that the name "Bernie Sanders" appeared on the 1980 Vermont Statewide ballot as a Communist is no reason to compare me to such an odious excuse for a man.

[Act_of_Reparation]

147. Yeah, this red-baiting sure is satisfying... in a nostalgic kind of way.

[Zolorp]

149. It is not "red-baiting" it is 100% truth

Bernie Sanders put his name on the 1980 Vermont Statewide Ballot as a Communist.

Look it up.

[Act_of_Reparation]

152. So what were you up to in 1980?

I was preparing to be born in three years.

[Zolorp]

153. I was a 17 year old out campaigning for Carter and had just enlisted in the US Army.

I would leave for Boot Camp prior to my 18th birthday.

Sanders was a 39 year old grown ass man who made a decision to be a Communist at the height of the Cold War.

[Act_of_Reparation]

155. Serious question:

Do you really, honestly think people who wouldn't vote Sanders because of some stupid stunt he pulled forty fucking years ago would support Biden instead?

[Zolorp]

156. ABSOLUTELY!

Actually, they would vote for ANY of our candidates, other than a former avowed Communist.

You will lose nearly every Democrat over 50 when that gets run on the air 24/7.

Sanders could lose D.C. over it as much of the voting population in D.C. that is older actually served in the US government during the Cold War.

[LongtimeAZDem]

119. "Bernie Sanders: Workers should control the means of production"

https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/bernie-sanders-workers-should-control-the-means-of-production/


Zolorp is right; you can argue whether Sanders is an actual socialist until you are blue in the face. The fact is that his own words and positions will be more than enough to convince the voters that he is.

[Martin Eden]

122. Workers are not the government

Also, I'd like to see what his official position is on that in his current platform.

[LongtimeAZDem]

123. It doesn't matter. I know the difference, you know the difference, and it doesn't matter

If you think a self-declared socialist has a chance of winning, you're fooling yourself.

[Martin Eden]

127. I never said I thought that

I'm saying it's a huge mistake to accept and spread the RW talking point about Socialism.

[LongtimeAZDem]

129. Bernie Sanders calls himself a socialist. That makes it a Bernie Sanders talking point

not a right-wing one.

[Martin Eden]

134. He calls himself a Democratic Socialist

Not the same thing.

Trump's strategy will be to smear the Democratic nominee with the Socialist label, even if he or she is a moderate.

Arguing against Sanders on the basis that label is more likely to stick is legitimate. It's one of the reasons he won't get my vote in this primary, but helping Trump spread the Socialist talking point is just plain stupid.

[LongtimeAZDem]

137. So what? You think anyone cares about that distinction?

This is going nowhere; I'm done

[Blues Heron]

115. The election is about the next 8 years not just Trump

Trump's just the beginning. Don't be blinded by the evil in the White House. Once he's gone, the work begins, not ends.

[mommymarine2003]

130. Republican friend would vote for Biden

I walk every morning with a woman who has been a Republican all her life. For a long time, we did not discuss politics, but over this past year we both agree that we detest Trump. She likes Biden and would vote for him. She believes Sanders is a socialist and would not vote for him.

We need to beat Trump. Nothing else matters to me. I do not think our country or our world could take another four years of this monster of a man. Sanders is not the right person to attract independents or non-Trump Republicans. I will vote for Sanders if he is on the Democratic ticket, but it would be with a heavy heart.

[colsohlibgal]

133. Reality

The Communism boogeyman scare tactics are off base. Think Scandinavia....they operate their countries in a democratic socialism manner.....they have fair and free elections and the people support this. Nobody struggles to afford College. Nobody goes bankrupt from medical bills. There are still rich folks there, just less filthy rich folks. So they could vote this system out but they don’t.

We operated somewhat that way from FDR till Reagan. Reagan vilified that system, cut the top marginal tax rate drastically. He also enabled Fox News and right wing talk radio. By axing he Fairness Doctrine. The old B Actor really caused a lot of damage.

[Anon-C]

135. Once they get Maduro out of Venezuela they can have the MSM...

...plaster the airways with the manifest ills of "socialism" in graphic detail.

[Gothmog]

139. trump would destroy a socialist candidate

Link to tweet

[tiredtoo]

140. Do you all remember?

When the Koch brothers called Eisenhower a communist? Just something to think about.

[tiredtoo]

142. You are doing no favors to the Democratic party.

Please refrain from such behavior.

[tiredtoo]

144. As you are doing now.

Please stop.

[LonePirate]

154. If we nominate an uninspiring centrist... we will get 4 more years of what we saw last night.

We nominated the more centrist of the two candidates last time and we lost. Why should we try it again? Did enough people not learn the lesson of 2016?

Give me a progressive candidate with a bold vision of the future who has proposed solutions to the complex problems facing society today.

[lsewpershad]

158. A bot?

[IronLionZion]

159. That's how we won in 2016

oh wait...

[thesquanderer]

160. Yet polls show Sanders beating Trump nationally and in the swing states...

...and in fact, also doing better against Trump than your preferred candidate.

[ProfessorPlum]

166. yes, the promises of having a government that actually does things for its citizens pales compared

to the electrifying personality of Amy "We will do nothing for you" Klobuchar.

to each their own election strategy, I suppose.

[emmaverybo]

180. Not "we will do nothing for you," but " I will not make promises I can not keep."

[ProfessorPlum]

188. uh huh. In other words "the rich won't agree to help people, therefore neither will I"

[emmaverybo]

190. She is for a number of policies that will help people from free two year college to affordable

housing, infrastructure investment, and paying down our record-high deficits.

Although Sanders and Warren’s multiple policies are far more lavish in cost and promise people much more assistance in a wider range of areas, it is highly doubtful their plans will get funded even with a Dem house and senate, that they will manage to attain the political and financial capital to launch a small percentage of them, or that in a two term presidency they would have the time. I hope they do anticipate the full range of presidential duties and responsibilities beyond spearheading sweeping domestic economic policies, chief of which will be repairing the damage Trump has done here and abroad.

As to how she proposes to pay for her many plans (including citizenship for dreamers, healthcare expansion, student debt relief expansion, paid family leave, teacher pay boost, raising minimum wage) :

She would increase capital gains tax rate, slash defense budget, raise corporate taxes, and increase taxes on upper income Americans.

More details at

https://politico.com/2020-election/candidates-views-on-the-issues/amy-klobuchar/

[ProfessorPlum]

191. thank you very much

good info

[Cuthbert Allgood]

167. We were told this last time, too.

And yet, here we are with Trump. Maybe we would have won the electoral vote had we run Sanders. Ever consider that?

[Gothmog]

172. A socialist will kill down ballot candidates

Link to tweet

[Mike Nelson]

176. It won't be "4 more years" of what we saw...

... it will be 40, or 400... Think of what they can do in those four years. They said they have Supreme Court Judges "in the pipeline." They will have the Law and simply outlaw the opposition. Voters will be controlled. Authoritarian state.

[duforsure]

177. trump and others are using Socialist, and branding it as really really bad

Anyone is better than a putin loyalist like trump is, and corrupt , ruthless, a career criminal , and trying to destroy Democracy. trump on the other hand has knowingly had russian spies working for him, married into Communist families, has russian mafia ties along with putin, and has repeatedly lied about his ties with putin, why , because he's compromised. I guess if people want to keep supporting a career criminal who works for putin,, not us, we'll become like russia is. Don;t be fooled, trump loves Socialism when he profits from it, but he will never say it. He'll try to use that word as a weapon now. Bernie wants to improve health care, Social Security, improve our environment , safeguard our elections, where trump doesn't, he wants them corrupted in his favor.

[Cha]

189. KICK

[Gothmog]

192. The grandson of GHW Bush is running this ad attacking socialism

TX CD 22 is an open seat with Pete Olson retiring. The DCCC has targeted this seat for flipping. There are 15 candidates in GOP primary including the grandson of GHW Bush. Another candidate, Kathleen Wall, is running in the GOP primary and she spent $6 million in 2018 running in GOP primary for TX CD 2 and did not make GOP primary runoff. I have had Wall block walkers come to my house twice (I live in a very GOP neighborhood) and I have found Wall doorhanger on my door twice now.

Pierce Bush is running against socialism

Link to tweet

Sri Preston Kulkarni is the leading Democrat for this seat (Sri has a GOP type and another person running against him in the Texas Democratic Primary) I texted this ad to Sri and he knew about it already. Sri Preston Kulkarni is a great guy and we need to flip this seat

If sanders is the nominee, we can forget about this seat and we will have Kevin McCarthy as speaker