If Bernie Sanders Wins the Nomination, but Loses in November,

[MineralMan]

that will be OK, see, because it will send a strong message out there and we'll see that Trump is working to destroy our nation. Then, see, in 2024, we'll be ready to elect a truly revolutionary candidate to that office and everything will change. See? That's the ticket we need to ride through the 21st century. Right?

Well, that's just ridiculous, and it's the same crap we were being fed before the last election. We lost and Trump IS ruining the nation, and four years from now, the nation will be well-ruined, indeed. 2024 will be too damned late to turn things around, based on the destruction that has already taken place.

We don't need a "strong message." We need to get rid of Trump and undo the damage he has already caused. We need to begin rebuilding by correcting the wrongs Trump has caused. That is the imperative we face this year. Trump should never have taken office, and the voters said just that - at least a majority of voters, except in three crucial states.

In those three states, enough voters stayed home or cast a protest vote for one of two third-party candidates. That was enough to cost us the election in the Electoral College, and we ended up with Trump. People were miffed that a good, solid Democratic nominee wasn't exactly the one they wanted, and so they thought they'd send a "strong message."

Well, that message was received, and we won't make the same stupid mistake this year. At least I hope we won't.

We don't need a "message." We need a Democrat in the White House and a Democratic majority in the Senate. Frankly, nothing else matters in 2020. Any of our Democratic candidates could handle the job just fine, but not all of our candidates can win. So support the primary candidate you prefer, but get ready to fight to the end for whoever the nominee turns out to be. Forget about "sending a message."

We already got that message. Loud and clear.

[thesquanderer]

1. I doubt anyone on this board thinks "that will be OK."

The people supporting Sanders believe he can beat Trump.

[MineralMan]

2. I don't doubt it for a moment.

[musicman65]

24. Who now

stands to be the biggest treat to Joe,,,is it Joe Himself or the bernie factor ??

[MineralMan]

25. Treat to Joe?

I suppose you meant "threat." That isn't how I think actually. It's not about threats. It's all about support. If Biden falters in upcoming primaries, it will because voters are moving away from him and to others.

That is why we hold primary elections in the first place - to decide who the voters want to represent them.

After all 50 states have weighed in, we hold a convention to choose our party's nominee. It's a process.

What will the primary voters decide? That is the only question, really. If there is no candidate who amasses a majority of delegates, then those delegates will decide for themselves who the nominee will be. Most are pledged to a candidate, but that pledge is moot after the first ballot, if their candidate doesn't get at least 15% of the vote. There are also almost 800 delegates who are not pledged to any candidate. This year, they don't vote on the first ballot, at least according to the current rules. Those delegates, sometimes called "superdelegates" are mosly elected Democrats in Congress or state Governors. Other are Democratic Party officials who are part of the DNC, and who are elected by their state parties at that state's convention. They will vote as they choose, based on whatever criteria they choose, starting with the second ballot.

If the second ballot doesn't result in a nominee who has a majority of the delegate's vote, additional ballots will take place, with anyone having less than 15% of the delegates' votes dropping out.

In the meantime, candidates who feel that they are not likely to become the nominee can suggest that their pledged delegates vote for a different candidate.

We will probably have two ballots held this year at the convention. Most likely, there will be nobody with a majority after the first ballot. Most likely, there will be after the second ballot. It's very unlikely that there will be any need for additional ballots.

I hope you'll watch the convention this year. I hope everyone does. It should be very interesting.

[musicman65]

76. Appreciate

your insight,just a bit worried on our end that His truth is not getting attention as it should

[DownriverDem]

52. trump's plan

to bring down Biden has worked. trump will support the weakest Dem for November. I fear we are already screwed.

[MineralMan]

61. Not necessarily.

It's really up to us, isn't it?

[bluewater]

90. The OP is positing a STRAWMAN ARGUEMENT.

An argument no serious person is actually making.

It's supposed to make people disinclined to vote for Sanders.

I think they call that type of gamesmanship "neural-marketing" these days. It's suppose to play on your subconscious.

[Peacetrain]

125. There you are wrong! It is not a straw-man argument

I do not always agree with MM...but the one thing he does not do, are facetious arguments. His points of view are well thought out.. He does not shoot from the hip, or drool from the lip..

[I_UndergroundPanther]

127. I half agree here

[Demsrule86]

130. And I hope it does...If Sanders is the the nominee that Trump/GOP wants, then we should not

vote for him. Trump is sending out GOP voters to vote for Sanders in open primaries...that should give all of us pause. Personally I won't ever vote for Sanders in a primary. And if my candidate falters, I will throw my support to a candidate who can beat Trump...likely to be Bloomberg. I will vote blue not matter who in the General of course.

[DanTex]

3. Not sure what this has to do with Bernie. Losing to Trump would be horrible, no matter who it is.

[MineralMan]

4. You're not?

Oh, well...

[Magoo48]

51. Easy Dude,

your crystal ball has no more clarity the rest of ours. Let it play out.

[Perseus]

57. I repeat myself with the article that is someone else's opinion, please read it.

[link:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/04/joe-biden-electable-trump-2020-election|

Some people think Biden would be a disaster, does that make it true? Like the poster before me, none of us has a crystal ball, your post is your opinion and nothing else, and I understand the nervousness of Biden supporters seeing that their chosen candidate is not doing well, but that is no reason to bash other candidates.

My feeling is that if Sanders wins the nomination then the majority of Democrats have spoken, all the rest of us need to join them and help Bernie win the presidency, how bad would that be? I mean, is the alternative any better?

I also believe that Sanders' quick mind will keep the idiot in check, the idiot cannot match any of our candidates intelligence and knowledge. One more thing, the idiot will most probably not debate, he knows he is no match for any Democrat, and we should call him for what he is, a coward.

So please, lets stop eating our own, nothing to gain from that.

[oasis]

5. 100% that!

wake up Democrats

[WhereAmerica]

6. Yes, Bernie will lose

There should be no question that Bernie will lose, and probably in a tidal wave. It will be the end of democracy and our legal system.

If you don't think it can happen, you haven't been following American politics or history. It's already happening.

There is a lot of video, audio and news stories where Bernie talks about his admiration for dictatorships in the Soviet Union and Cuba. A massive campaign from Trump will brand him as a socialist/communist, and that he wants to make everyone work for the state.

Only a handful of people will recognize he's talking about Finnish socialism. B/c he and Warren totally screwed up the rollout of M4A, that's dead in the water now, and most people are against it. A recent poll from Gallup showed that 55% of all voters will not vote for a socialist. That's the kiss of death right there.

There has not been a rush of young voters in Iowa or New Hampshire, so forget that dream. And most people 40 and over will buy the communist thing. We will lose the House, lose seats in the Senate, and probably get swamped in the presidential race.

And that's goodbye democracy, and the Democratic Party will be branded as socialist/communist for years.

[Celerity]

16. Finland is not socialist, none of the EU is. Social democracy is not socialism, and has a vibrant

capitalistic component, albeit highly regulated and taxed.

Finland Is a Capitalist Paradise

Can high taxes be good for business? You bet.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/07/opinion/sunday/finland-socialism-capitalism.html

HELSINKI, Finland — Two years ago we were living in a pleasant neighborhood in Brooklyn. We were experienced professionals, enjoying a privileged life. We’d just had a baby. She was our first, and much wanted. We were United States citizens and our future as a family should have seemed bright. But we felt deeply insecure and anxious.

Our income was trickling in unreliably from temporary gigs as independent contractors. Our access to health insurance was a constant source of anxiety, as we scrambled year after year among private employer plans, exorbitant plans for freelancers, and complicated and expensive Obamacare plans. With a child, we’d soon face overwhelming day-care costs. Never mind the bankruptcy-sized bills for education ahead, whether for housing in a good public-school district or for private-school tuition. And then there’d be college. In other words, we suffered from the same stressors that are swamping more and more of Americans, even the relatively privileged.

As we contemplated all this, one of us, Anu, was offered a job back in her hometown: Helsinki, Finland.

Finland, of course, is one of those Nordic countries that we hear some Americans, including President Trump, describe as unsustainable and oppressive — “socialist nanny states.” As we considered settling there, we canvassed Trevor’s family — he was raised in Arlington, Va. — and our American friends. They didn’t seem to think we’d be moving to a Soviet-style autocracy. In fact, many of them encouraged us to go. Even a venture capitalist we knew in Silicon Valley who has three children sounded envious: “I’d move to Finland in a heartbeat.”

So we went.

We’ve now been living in Finland for more than a year. The difference between our lives here and in the States has been tremendous, but perhaps not in the way many Americans might imagine. What we’ve experienced is an increase in personal freedom. Our lives are just much more manageable. To be sure, our days are still full of challenges — raising a child, helping elderly parents, juggling the demands of daily logistics and work.

But in Finland, we are automatically covered, no matter what, by taxpayer-funded universal health care that equals the United States’ in quality (despite the misleading claims you hear to the contrary), all without piles of confusing paperwork or haggling over huge bills. Our child attends a fabulous, highly professional and ethnically diverse public day-care center that amazes us with its enrichment activities and professionalism. The price? About $300 a month — the maximum for public day care, because in Finland day-care fees are subsidized for all families.

snip

[joost5]

48. Plus we need to flip the Senate to get anything done...

and that's not happening without a moderate leading the ticket (like Amy).

[PatSeg]

53. Welcome to DU!

[Perseus]

66. Not sure where you get your "facts", but here is a link on young people turning out for Bernie in NH

and Iowa.

Your statement: "There has not been a rush of young voters in Iowa or New Hampshire"

"Bernie Sanders got more young voters in New Hampshire than everyone else combined"
[link:https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/2/12/21134454/new-hampshire-primary-results-sanders-young-voters|

And here is another article about young people showing up for Sanders in Iowa:
"The final results are still unclear, but it seems certain that Sanders won the most caucus votes. He has young voters to thank for his victory."
[link:https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/02/in-iowa-bernies-youth-movement-showed-up-while-generation-x-flaked-out/|

Bernie has constantly talked about the European "Social Democratic" governments (Scandinavian countries anyone?), and he has never professed admiration for Putin, or Maduro or any of those criminals.

[stopdiggin]

74. NH had a strong turnout. IA mediocre at best.

So that certainly wouldn't qualify as a rush. And (with the deeper field) .. Sanders got LESS voters, young and old, in both contests than he did in 16.

Sanders has some support with the young .. but let's not try to gloss over the fact that the young are ALSO supporting other candidates in this race.

[MineralMan]

8. You do have to consider history sometimes, when it comes

to elections, particularly presidential elections.

[Locrian]

44. thank you - a refreshing post of sanity here - n/t

[cilla4progress]

9. So far

Bernie's winning.

Biden's not.

Not gonna pretend I'm not afraid of this, but, also afraid Biden could suffer same fate, for different reasons, obviously.

I think it hinges on VP choice. I know when Bill Clinton ran I was inspired by his choice of Gore. I was heartened by newcomer Obama's choice of Biden.

I think Bernie should pick Klobuchar as his VP.

[MineralMan]

10. So far, we have nothing but results from two uncharateristic

states and some polling. We don't know how things will go in the future. However, Super Tuesday is just over two weeks away. We'll know more on March 4. We can discuss that then.

[cilla4progress]

27. This is absolutely

TRUE!

We are so impatient here!

[progressoid]

28. So then this whole thread is pointless.

[MineralMan]

34. Well, pretty much all threads in this forum are pointless, then.

I wouldn't argue with anyone who said that.

So, why do we come here? I come here because I like to write about politics. It's a break from my work, which is what I should be doing right now. But politics are far more interesting to me than writing about wholesale fence supplies, which is what I'm writing about to earn money this week. But, my deadline is soft, so here I am, wasting time and doing something I enjoy rather than working.

The point is the discussion, obviously. We like to discuss politics here. We like to predict outcomes, even if we have too little information. We like to talk about candidates we support and about candidates we don't support.

What did you think the point of these discussions was? Did you think they have any influence on any outcome at all? They don't

We're all just killing time here, writing about stuff that interests us. If you think what we're writing her has any effect at all, you're mistaken.

[Maru Kitteh]

120. Sanders has already stated his only "must" for VP is that they be "of like mind"

So no Klobuchar. Despite the choices of two of the whitest states in the country, I don't think he'll have to trouble himself too very much about selecting a VP candidate.

[jimfields33]

126. Candidates don't always get to pick vp

McCain wanted joe Lieberman but Sarah was forced on him by Rnc. DNC will have a say.

[Sloumeau]

11. I suspect that MineralMan was not thinking of Bernie supporters who are also...

"Vote Blue No Matter Who" voters. I suspect he was thinking specifically of Bernie supporters, or, in fact, any supporters who are "My guy or I won't vote Democratic" people. For example, the people who were, "Bernie wins the nomination or I'll vote Jill Stein because it will send a strong message" people from the 2016 election. And yes, any "Biden wins the nomination or I won't vote Democratic" people would be just as bad.

If you aren't "Vote Blue No Matter Who" you probably really do not understand how truly terrible Trump would be when, in a second term, he would feel completely unbound to break whatever laws he likes.

[murielm99]

12. There are not enough Bernie supporters who

are vote blue no matter who. There are far more of them who are disruptive and sore losers.

[MineralMan]

14. Some Sanders supporters are not Democrats.

I don't expect non-Democrats to be "Blue No Matter Who." It would be a mistake to have that expectation.

[progressoid]

30. Bullshit.

Prove it.

[murielm99]

38. All you have to do is look in the

"Democratic Primaries Forum" to see the shenanigans of the bernie supporters. These are not bot or internet trolls, either. They are real people, causing as much havoc as possible.

Also, Google is your friend.

The last time I checked, I was allowed to post opinions here, as well as point out facts. IMO, Bernie is a poor choice for our nominee.

[progressoid]

40. I suppose I should have been more speciifc. How about prove it with facts.

The "shenanigans" of a couple people within a sub-forum of this site is hardly proof that the Sanders' supporters at large are disruptive and sore losers.

Anecdotes do not equal evidence.

[murielm99]

45. There is plenty of evidence.

I am done with you.

[MineralMan]

13. True. I was thinking more of the 10% of Sanders supporters

who voted for Donald Trump in some states, and the others who chose Jill Stein or Gary Johnson as their "protest vote."

We're not seeing any input from those groups here on DU's Democratic Primaries forum - at least not openly. Those people are either no longer here or are taking a less rigid position in public.

Personally, I think that Bernie Sanders has peaked in Iowa and New Hampshire. I believe his numbers will go down in upcoming primaries, especially on Super Tuesday. I think Elizabeth Warren's numbers will begin to rise again, if she can stick it out. I believe that the new candidate, Mike Bloomberg, is going to have some surprises for us to examine on March 4 and beyond.

I believe, at this point, that Bernie Sanders will not be a huge factor this summer at the Democratic Convention. A very recent poll from Florida shows Sanders dropping to just 10% in that crucial state, with Bloomberg and Biden leading the pack.

I think the entire primary picture is about to turn upside down to some degree. Perhaps we had hung it upside down on the wall, earlier and we're now noticing that.

Two weeks and a few days from now, we will have the Super Tuesday results. We'll know more then. There's something changing, though. It seems clear to me that Iowa and New Hampshire will be seen as outliers on March 4.

I could be wrong, though. I mean, I thought Hillary would win in the Electoral College in 2016. She didn't. So, take my predictions with a grain of salt.

[murielm99]

15. Even if he gets a smaller percentage,

bernie's supporters will try to disrupt the convention. All you have to do is look at some of the threads in "Democratic Primaries." They are doing that right now to other candidates.

I don't see Biden, Pete, Warren, or any other campaigns doing this.

[MineralMan]

17. I sure hope not. I remember seeing John Lewis being booed

at the 2016 convention by some Sanders supporters. Why? Because he was speaking in support of the nomination of Hillary Clinton. It was a shocking display of crude internal political spite.

I'd like to thing something was learned from that, but I don't know whether it was or not.

I hope never to witness a spectacle like that again.

It's one thing for primary candidates to point out deficiencies in other candidates. That's all part of campaigning. It's entirely another to go on the attack and throw GOP talking points at each other. That's not going to be acceptable this year, and the voters will make that abundantly clear, I think in the remaining primary states.

We've had enough of such nonsense.

[tiredtoo]

18. This reply is not pointed at the OP, MineralMan

No question in my mind as to his loyalty to the Democratic party. But in reading the various posts in this Forum for the last few weeks, I came to a question. How many here are paid supporters of one or more candidates? Just think about it for a minute.

[MineralMan]

26. How many here are paid supporters of a candidate?

I hope that number is zero. There's no way to know, of course, but there would be very little point in paying someone to post on DU. There are, perhaps, 2500 people who read DU threads. You can look at the number of views any thread has in the forum thread list. That number just reflects the number of times people have clicked to read the thread. Each time you click on a thread, no matter how many times you return to it, your click is counted as a visit.

So, the number you see is not the number of people who have seen the thread. It is the number of times anyone has clicked on that thread. I don't know about you, but I've clicked on this thread at least two dozen times. Each time that click has been added to the number of visits.

So, what influence would a paid supporter of a candidate really have on DU? Not very much, really. Because of that, I can't imagine a candidate paying anyone to post on DU.

More likely, posters who support a particular candidate are just strong supporters of that candidate. I doubt anyone is being paid. DU is just not that influential in primary elections.

[tiredtoo]

33. Well I would like to think you are right

About the number being zero but, i see a lot of posts supporting a republican candidate here. Who has spent a lot of money on ads but has yet to come under examination in a debate or even hard questioning by the media. I have no idea how influential DU is in primary elections. But suspect it does have some influence on those here who are still undecided.

[MineralMan]

37. I doubt that anyone in the Democratic Primary forum is really undecided.

Some indicate that they are, and some may actually not have decided, but it doesn't really matter.

Nobody in their right mind would pay anyone to post here. It would be a waste of money, to be quite frank.

On the other hand, some social media venues have far, far larger audiences. Money is definitely being spent on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and some other venues.

Here, a couple of thousand people might read a thread. On those other social media venues, those numbers can be in the six or even seven figures. So, sure, spend $150 for someone to post what you want on one of those venues. That money would be relatively well spent, compared, say, to buying TV ad time. Cheap even.

But DU doesn't have anything like that reach, so nobody's buying posts here. At least, I can't imagine anyone doing so.

[NurseJackie]

19. I remember how GIDDY and EXCITED Susan Sarandon was at Trump's win.

I remember how GIDDY and EXCITED Susan Sarandon was at Trump's win. She was like a fundamentalist End-Times believer... and Armageddonist who was cheering-on (and doing everything possible to encourage and make-happen) the worst possible outcome so that a great savior could descend upon the face of the earth and save us all. She called it a "revolution" or something.

God, I fucking hate that woman. Susan Sarandon is so dumb. She may have an Academy award, but she's just dumb as dirt. Jill Stein? Ralph Nader? Ugh. She's also fickle and an inconsistent hypocrite. Remember when she supported John Edwards? At that time he had ALREADY VOTED FOR THE IWR, but it was a-okay with her then. No problem, eh? I guess it's only an issue "sometimes" but not "all the time".

[MineralMan]

31. Indeed. I have never paid any attention to celebrity supporters of a candidate.

I doubt that most people do, frankly. Why would anyone care what a B-level actress thinks about a presidential election?

There is much silliness surrounding primary politics. I try to ignore that silliness altogether.

Another form of silliness is people coming to places like DU and posting what are obviously campaign talking points from some candidate. It's so obvious when that happens, because multiple people will post almost identical things.

Ignoring all the noise is the first step in gaining some clarity. It's difficult for some people to do, though.

[Iamaartist]

20. This could be a worry...

In the south. they have a open primary they are telling Republican voters to vote for Bernie on the dem ballot If true ..could be a big concern.


I already voted for Joe...

[MineralMan]

23. I am waiting to see the results from Nevada and South Carolina

If Biden continues to fade, I may have to switch my Super Tuesday vote. For now, though, I still plan to vote for him in Minnesota.

[beachbumbob]

21. when sanders loses in November, we will also be crushed in House and Senate races as well

America will be forever changed for the worse with impacts lasting generations

[MineralMan]

22. Yes, that, too.

The history of success of "Our Revolution" congressional candidates has been poor. We managed in 2018 to elect enough moderate Democrats in districts held by Republicans that the House was able to impeach Trump. That was a major victory. The 2018 Blue Wave was not due to "Our Revolution" in any way. It was due to moderate Democrats winning in places where they replaced a Republican.

Sanders has no coattails to speak of, particularly in states where Republican Senators have a strong hold. Moderate candidates might have a chance in some of those states, if the coattails of the Democratic presidential nominee are long enough. Sanders would have no such coattails at all. That seem clear to me.

[KayF]

29. maybe the "same stupid mistake" would be to vote for Biden

maybe Bernie supporters think he's the best to beat Trump.

[MineralMan]

32. OK. We'll see how the primaries go, won't we?

We all have our opinions. When all the primaries are over, and all the delegates are allocated, we can talk again, maybe.

[stopdiggin]

80. but THAT was not what the OP addressed

the message was about voters that would be OK with a losing candidate (Sanders in this case) .. because, you know .. "sending a strong message" .. "people will see" .. "the Movement .."

To which the OP responded "NO" .. 2020 is not about sending a message .. it's about defeating Trump.
Period. No exceptions.

[Peacetrain]

35. Amen to that!!!

And the notion of a brokered convention.. just lay the red carpet out for Trump for another four years

[people]

36. If Bernie Wins but Loses in November . . .

If Bernie becomes the nominee and loses to Trump it would be awful, but remember these good strong democrats ran against republicans and lost: Dukakis, Kerry, Gore (with more than a little help from the S. Ct.) and Clinton We can't assume that Bernie's a winner or a loser, no more than we can assume any of the rest of them were. None of us really knows.

[volstork]

39. Wish I could rec

X 1,000,000!

[ouija]

43. If anyone

Votes for Trump over Sanders, then we have a lot bigger problems than democratic socialists

[CanonRay]

41. If that happens, the nation will effectively been destroyed

It will be too late.

[Thirties Child]

42. I voted for Bernie in the 2016 primary, voted for Hillary in the election.

I think Bernie is too old -- if elected he'd be 79 at inauguration. And I'm not agist -- I'm 85. I haven't made up my mind who I'll vote for this time, though there probably won't be much choice by the time Georgia votes on March 24. At various times I've toyed with Mayor Pete, Biden and Bloomberg. I tThink most of all we need to nominate someone who is Don the Con's opposite -- empathetic, stable, honorable. I think Carter was elected because he was Nixon's opposite and because he promised never to lie.

I don't think Biden is slipping because of Hunter but because he didn't step up to the plate to defend/refute. He ended up looking weak.

[JudyM]

110. Directly to your point, here's fresh data on public views of how empathic the candidates are.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287519823

[usaf-vet]

46. Bloomberg has the $$$ to match Trump toe to toe, dollar for dollar, ad for ad .

I don't see how any of the programs the other Democratic candidates propose would stand any chance of getting passed with McTurtle in the Senate and Trump in the White House.

FIRST, BEAT Trump !!!

Then work to cleaning out Congress and state legislators in years between 2020 and 2024.

Keep the House and TAKE the Senate. And reelect a Democratic President in 2024.

[kentuck]

47. In my opinion, it is more probable that Bernie supporters will not support Democratic nominee...

....if it is someone other than Bernie, than other Democratic voters will not support Bernie if he is the Democratic nominee. I believe that is part of the political equation.

[jalan48]

49. And if we nominate a Centrist and that Centrist loses we can blame it on Bernie, his followers,

Jill Stein, Susan Sarandon, fill-in-the-blank. That's how it works with Centrist politics.

[MarcA]

56. +1,000 n/t

[stopdiggin]

83. well, except for the fact that the NUMBERS in 16

PROVE that third party voters cost us the electoral college.

Because that's how it works with centrists politics ...

[jalan48]

97. No. Over 90 million eligible voters didn't bother to vote.

That’s the Centrist problem.

[stopdiggin]

115. numbers that voted 3rd party would have delivered

the three states that decided the election. Period.

And there have always been non-voters .. it's just the way it works. Voter turn out was actually higher in 16 than it was in 2012. Unfortunately, too many of them were voting for the WRONG people.

[jalan48]

116. There have always been third parties. Blaming the one and half million voters who didn't like

Clinton is absurd. How about we run a candidate that will motivate the non-voters to vote?

[stopdiggin]

118. voting third party is absurd

as a general rule .. and goes up a notch to brain dead under current circumstances.
-- --

[Voltaire2]

113. Only if you ignore 3rd party voters on the right. We

They generally got 2-3x the Green Party vote in the critical states we lost.

[Voltaire2]

112. And then the next election cycle, without even a hint of embarrassment,

they will lecture us how we have to repeat the same mistake all over again.

And when they pick their chosen candidate and it turns out that candidate can't get elected dog catcher, after lecturing us for months about this candidates electability, they will shift to an even worse candidate, and do so with all the same arrogant confidence and condescending attitude toward the rabble who just don't understand how wise they are.

[stopdiggin]

114. well, I wasn't going to rip them QUITE that much

but, yeah .. pretty much!

[yaesu]

50. What does this have to do with Bernie? He has the best chance at beating the orange nazi. nt

[Perseus]

54. That is your opinion, read below someone else's opinion

[link:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/04/joe-biden-electable-trump-2020-election|

[Cuthbert Allgood]

55. If Joe Biden Wins the Nomination, but Loses in November,

Biden supporters will blame Bernie Sanders. And we'll have Trump.

[JudyM]

111. Truth.

[lutherj]

58. I'm sure Biden will save us. He'll show up in his shining armor mounted on his steed 'cause the

4th time is a charm. And John Kerry will show up with his army of lawyers, remember them? And Dukakis will be there riding around the parking lot with his head sticking out of a tank, and Hillary will be there brushing dandruff from her shoulder and talking about attacking Iran, and Al Gore will come with his premature presidential concession speech. Then we’ll show ‘em!

[samnsara]

106. if trump* wins we wont ever have another chance to find out

[aeromanKC]

59. America as we know it is over for the rest of most of our lives.

7-2 SCOTUS for next 30 years. (That is the rest of most of our lives)

RBG deserves a Dem candidate that can win in November!!

[BlueWI]

60. More perfectly innocent bandwidth bites the dust

for no purpose.

Democrats who support Sanders, and all of us, deserve better than the same talking points recycled daily.

[KPN]

78. +1000!

It is exhausting.

[the_sly_pig]

62. We didn't lose the last election.

We won the popular vote. If we lose again it won’t be because of our candidate. Whichever one it is. At that point we’ll have to decide just how much we value democracy.

[heckles65]

63. Just wrote my nephew on this point

I am not interested in any "this will be a rebuilding year blah blah" election rhetoric. Pittsburgh Pirates fans have had to endure this line for decades. ☹️

[ecstatic]

64. A friend just switched away from Bernie after

witnessing Nina Turner's dust up with Jason Johnson the other day. She doesn't follow politics and had never seen Nina prior to that night.

I told her that Nina was yet another person who started off cool but turned batshit cray after joining Bernie's camp (alongside Rosario Dawson, Shaun King, Killer Mike, etc).

She said there's no way in hell Bernie can win with Nina as a surrogate; and now, she's done a complete 180 and supports Bloomberg! Mind you, I had been trying to get her off the Bernie train for the past year. Unfortunately, she hates EW for some reason.

[MineralMan]

65. I would have no trouble supporting Warren at all.

However, she doesn't seem to be gathering momentum sufficient to carry her to the nomination.

We'll see if she can mount a comeback in the upcoming primaries.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

67. Every candidate should point to path of victory. Meaning matchups in NV, PA, WI

MI, NC, FL, AZ, IA, MN, OH, VA

Winning huge in CA and NY CT MA, etc. Won't cut it. Read dip could lose pop vote by 6m this time and still take EC

[MineralMan]

68. Absolutely. We need to think very strategically in 2020.

The only way we win is through the Electoral College. If we forget that, we could easily lose.

[Act_of_Reparation]

69. What if any other candidate wins the nomination, but loses in November?

We know how this movie ends. It's been playing on repeat since 2016.

[MineralMan]

70. The key is to focus on which of our candidates has the best

chance of beating Trump. Opinions vary on that.

[Act_of_Reparation]

73. With all due respect, you're hedging your bets here.

You're saying, "Vote for X, or Y will happen", knowing there is a good chance scenario Y might actually come to pass no matter who gets the nomination. If your candidate loses the nomination and Trump wins, you will be able to blame everyone else because they didn't listen to you. If your candidate wins the nomination and Trump still wins, you will blame everyone else for "bashing" your candidate in the primary.

I'll tell you what I'm going to do:

Since there is no truly reliable means to predict who will win a general election, I will vote my conscience in the primary. Come November, I will cross my fingers and vote for whoever the nominee might be. If they are victorious, great. If not, I'm not going to blame anyone but the candidate.

[Perseus]

71. You are correct about "We need to get rid of trump", and we do that by not bashing our own

We do that by talking about their strengths, and what is it that we can do to help them through while we let the majority of Democrats decide, because at the end of the day, it is the majority who will decide and all we can do is, vote for our chosen candidate, but if he/she does not win then lets help out to elect our Democratic nominee, lets put him in the White House and kick the crooks out.

I am not sure how good your predicting something that I have to think comes more from your heart than actual data and analysis, but eating our own will not help anyone. Maybe I am wrong and you have studied the possible outcomes so well that we should act on your recommendation, and if that is so please share it because words alone will not do.

[MineralMan]

82. I have been posting what I see happening in many threads.

I can't repeat it all in each thread. Of course we have to see what the majority of primary voters do. Always.

What I'm suggesting is that we look at our candidate not for what they stand for, but for how their chances of defeating Trump in November and in the Electoral College look like. That means looking at what their deficits might be in the General Election, where far more people vote than do in the primary elections.

I'll be voting for our nominee, whoever it is. My opinion about each of the current candidates' chances are, however is not the same for all of the likely nominees. That opinion is based on 50+ years of elections, starting in 1968, or even earlier, since I began working for campaigns in 1960. I follow this stuff closely every four years. I remember watching the Republican convention in 1956 on television, so my interest goes back into my childhood.

I don't base my opinions on my heart or on my gut. Neither does any thinking at all. Instead, I consult my experience and use my brain to form my opinions.

[Still In Wisconsin]

72. Right, I hope Sanders gets the nomination and loses all 50 states! Because then Trump can

literally destroy everything. Burn this corporatist nation to the ground! Because, BERNIE 2024. Hell Bernie/ Jill Stein 2024! This will usher in a true socialist utopia!


BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE! BER-NIE!

[gollygee]

75. I know, right?

I'm so tired of that argument. The only people willing to burn down the house are those who know they'll survive the fire. People need to vote thinking of the people who won't survive.

(I hope everyone recognizes your sarcasm and nobody votes to hide this.)

[Still In Wisconsin]

92. Oh hell I'm one hidden post away from getting suspended anyway. What's the difference?

There's a significant pack of Berniebots/online BernieBros trolling through these groups and alerting on every anti-Bernie, anti BernieBro and anti Berner post.

[KPN]

77. Anyone here sending that message?

Just asking.

[MineralMan]

85. What is happening here is irrelevant.

DU doesn't decide anything. We just talk about it.

[KPN]

89. So your OP must be irrelevant?

Come on man. That’s almost like “it depends on what the definition of is is”.

Geesh.

[MineralMan]

91. Yes, of course my OP is irrelevant.

We're just chatting here about politics. What we think makes no difference. However, we sort of represent the general population to some degree, so what we write here can be looked at in that way.

But, does DU make a difference? No. Not on your life. There are too few of us here for that.

[KPN]

94. So we must be wasting our time?

Lol. Transparency here: I know I have!

[denem]

79. If nominee Sanders loses in November, he will be hated and reviled

in a way that would make Ralph Nader look like a saint.

[Doremus]

81. I watched this kind of knee-jerk fear in the run-up to the Iraq war

Propagandists were successful in convincing us we needed to have more security to keep ourselves safe from the boogey man. End result was the mass giveaway of many of our civil rights vis-a-vis the Homeland Security Act.

The truth is that every one of our candidates will beat Trump in the GE. That is a given. It's time to calm down and stop the panic.

[stopdiggin]

86. Not even CLOSE to a given

"every one of our candidates will beat Trump in the GE. That is a given."

I commend you on your optimism .. but that simply isn't so.

[Doremus]

96. Then I take it you don't believe in polling. nt

[stopdiggin]

99. you're joking? (nt)

[MineralMan]

87. Defeating Trump is NOT a given at all.

It simply is not. We don't know what shenanigans will take place in the November election, but we know there will be shenanigans. It's going to require an extra large turnout on our side to overcome them, I believe.

[Doremus]

95. Those same shenanigans will happen no matter who our nominee is. Do you think one of our candidates

is immune? If so, tell us who it is and I'll post a lengthy list of the reasons they aren't.

But agreed, we do need an extra large turnout. To do that we need enthusiasm and energy. Status quo doesn't do that. It only guarantees a result like last time.

We need transformational. Somebody who will generate excitement and enthusiasm in the process again. Someone who will come in and start to negotiate from the top down, not the bottom up. Someone whose main goal isn't to "go along to get along." Somebody who will stop the hand wringing and get tough in the fight for the people again. Sanders and Warren both fit that description. Both of them want to reform the whole process that spawned the evil one. I don't hear the others talking about that.

[slumcamper]

84. I'm in it to win it.

[randr]

88. Aint gonna happen

We are in this to win. We need to realize that Bloomberg is the best bet so far. He will free up funds from the DNC to support Senate runs which are almost as important.
This is war. First you win the fight then you count the loses.

[PufPuf23]

93. Electing Sanders as POTUS in Fall 2020 probably would have the impact

of resuming FDR's popular mandate and put the USA on track to repair damage caused by the GOP, neoliberal economic policies, and neoconservative foreign policies from Nixon on.

We need to get Citizen's United overturned as a start.

Sanders will not get what he professes to want because of Congress but Congress would have the best opportunity to improve the common lot in the last 50 years.

That said, I would rather not have Sanders as POTUS albeit Sanders has engaged the younger generations in politics and broached subjects that need to be in play.

[Scotch-Irish]

98. If Bernie gets the nomination, he's not going to lose, unless every democrat would have lost due to

GOP, russian and chinese cheating.

[Demsrule86]

131. No he will lose and we can win this election with a different candidate. I doubt he will ever be

forgiven...the reality is Sanders should not have even joined the race...none of the 16 candidate should have...and now we see the same divisive crap... I would never support him in a primary and will vote only in a general for him...but I say we lose and possibly the house as well.

[mchill]

101. Too late in this planet's cycle to "send a message"

Bernie will lose.
He cannot be the nominee.
Idealism be damned.
Be pragmatic Bernie Bro’s

[evertonfc]

102. He will lose

they will claim Russia, voter suppression and not Democratic socialism. It will also stamp our party for decades. The Trump campaign will lay close to a billion on a socialist smear. It will work.

[pandr32]

103. Important post.

You are right.

[Newest Reality]

104. Am I over reacting?

Am I over reacting, then?

My personal extrapolation of another term with Trump in office will be utterly devastating and not OK at all.

In all my years, I have not seen a General Election that has this much significance in regards to our country remaining a democracy. In the past is was this vs. that for other reasons and, Damn, we lost this time, but that will change. This is not like that at all. I wish it was just politics as usual and the partisan shifts of power.

Maybe i don't get it, but I have been paying much more attention this time around, to the point where I have studied what is going on and more of the history of this extremely toxic usurper. I don't feel like Chicken Little when I express a very strong, gut-level concern for what another term would mean and OK does not even factor in after that. It is more like a death knell for democracy and I can't come up with any good reasons as to why not.

Give this joker one national emergency and what do you think he would do?

[samnsara]

105. if trump* wins there will never be a message again..

[Gothmog]

107. I fear that sanders would kill down ballot candidates and we could lost the house

I would hate to see Speaker Kevin McCarthy

[MFM008]

108. Thats the

Susan Sarandon formula for elections...

[robbedvoter]

109. It would not just be the end of Democracy, but of the Democratic Party. As planned.

It’s what Corbyn accomplished in UK.

[Gothmog]

117. 'We'd be f--ed': Texas Dems sweat a Bernie Sanders ticket

We have made a great deal of progress that will go down the drain if a weak and unelectable candidate like sanders is on the top of the ticket. After the 2010 elections, there were 101 republicans members of the Texas state House compared to 49 Democrats. We flipped 12 state house seats in 2018 and need 9 more to take control of the Texas House. We flipped two Congressional seats (Lizzie Fletcher and Colin Allred). The DCCC is targeting 7 congressional seats. I have hopes that HJ Hegar could beat Cornyn. Texas would be a battleground state if Biden is the nominee

If sanders is the nominee, we can kiss Lizzie's and Colin's seats goodbye. sanders would be poison.

Link to tweet

“Sanders is a complete disaster and Warren is a complete-disaster-lite,” said Texas-based campaign consultant Jeff Hewitt, who has been working in Democratic politics since he served on Clinton-Gore’s campaign team in the 1990s. “At the end of the day, most of us want to win.”....

Hewitt said O’Rourke’s loss reveals that far-left ideas don’t bring out enough people to flip seats. “The idea that more people will come out to vote if a progressive is on the ballot, that’s fools gold,” he said....

Polls have offered little guidance. Biden is still a favorite among establishment figures and led a poll of Texas voters before Iowa but Sanders surged after the caucuses and Michael Bloomberg is on the rise.

Texas will eventually turn blue due to demographic trends but having sanders at the top of the ticket would set these efforts back

[greytdemocrat]

119. So

You want me to vote for someone that will tax the
living shit out of me, and not even really know how
much, and will send us Energy wise back into the
stone age??

Is that what you're saying???

[MineralMan]

121. Nope. I said nothing of the sort.

[LongtimeAZDem]

129. I've seen smaller strawmen at Burning Man

[Gothmog]

122. Sanders would kill down ballot candidates

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

123. Texas Democrats are worried about sanders killing down ballot candidates

Link to tweet

[Mike 03]

124. So are Arizona Democrats. nt

[LongtimeAZDem]

128. Yep