Vulnerable Democrats fret over surging Sanders

[RandySF]

House Democrats who know a thing or two about winning in the most competitive parts of the country are sounding the alarm about Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) potentially becoming the party’s presidential nominee.

Vulnerable House Democrats are not only pessimistic about the Vermont senator’s chances against President Trump, they worry he could also cost Democrats the House majority in November.

Freshman Rep. Anthony Brindisi (D-N.Y.), co-chair of the centrist Blue Dogs, said he won’t back Sanders or Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) for president, telling The Post-Standard editorial board in Syracuse that their policies “don’t necessarily align with my beliefs” and it would be “exceedingly difficult” for either candidate to win on Election Day.

Another centrist, freshman Rep. Dean Phillips (D-Minn.), said he has significant doubts that Sanders or Warren could beat Trump in swing states like Wisconsin and Michigan that will play a decisive role in the 2020 election.

And Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.) warned that having Sanders at the top of the ticket would be an electoral disaster that could put the “House majority at risk.”

The dire warnings from moderate Democrats have become more urgent and aggressive as Sanders fought to a virtual tie with former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg in Iowa and appeared poised to win the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday.

Democrats are particularly uneasy about a party standard-bearer who labels himself a “democratic socialist,” as Sanders does.

“Sanders is about the worst candidate we can put up. He not only won’t likely win the presidency; he puts the House majority at risk,” Peters, who has endorsed former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (D) and represents a district that’s become bluer in recent years......

One vulnerable Democrat put it this way: “There is a fear in the caucus that if it’s not a ‘B’ or a ‘K’ at the top of the ticket — Biden, Buttigieg, Bloomberg or Klobuchar — we’re in real trouble.”





https://thehill.com/homenews/house/482648-vulnerable-democrats-fret-over-surging-sanders

[Cha]

1. Thank you for speaking out, House Democrats!

[Perseus]

2. Please read this post from DU

[link:https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287500437|

[RandySF]

5. It's not about voting in November, it's about exercising good judgement during the primaries.

[still_one]

3. You have 75% who want someone other than Sanders, I don't call that a surge.

[fallout87]

8. Use that same logic

and apply it to the rest of the candidates... Bernie still has the most support.

[still_one]

9. Nope. Take Amy, Biden, and Pete together, and they have over 50% compared to Warren

and Sanders

Put Bloomberg in there, it is even worse for Bernie

[fallout87]

10. You are assuming the same people would vote in that block

Proof plz, and thank you.

[still_one]

11. There is a reason for that, because they share similar views on the issues, just as Elizabeth and

Bernie share similar views on the issues

Also, of note, Bernie lost over 50% of the support he had in 2016

and while some of that is because of more candidates, both Joe and Elizabeth did not contribute to either block

and the dominant ones were Bernie, Pete, and Amy, and the dominant ones with similar views were Pete and Amy without Biden, which exceeded Bernie and Elizabeth together

[George II]

4. The thing is he's NOT "surging" - tied in Iowa with less delegates (as he did last time)....

....and is MUCH closer to two other candidates in New Hampshire.

Comparing the two he's doing a lot worse this time around. I thing "surging" is a misnomer or wishful thinking.

[evertonfc]

6. agree

Sanders will cost us the House. Mike will be our alternative

[Steelrolled]

7. Virtually exactly what Republicans were saying about

Trump in 2014. I'm not sure what that means, but it is interesting.