The answer is: because Bernie threatens big corporate interests.

[DanTex]

That one fact explains many of the seeming paradoxes about this primary. For example

1) Bernie is an independent. Bloomberg is an independent. Bernie is treated like an intruder and Bloomberg like a savior. Why? ....

2) Some leftists will vote for Bernie in the GE and not other candidates. Some centrists will vote for Biden/Bloomberg/Pete in the GE but not others. The former are treated like scum and the latter like virtuous independent thinking “swing voters”. Why? ...

3) Online supporters of all candidates say rude things. The MSM ignores the rude supporters of other candidates but coins a term and writes multiple stories about how awful Bernie’s supporters are. Why? ...

4) When polls or primary results show Bernie ahead, pundits will add up the total support of all other candidates and compare it to Bernie’s number. They don’t do this when anyone else polls on top. Why? ...

And so on.

[Locrian]

1. great post ...

although I'm waiting for the vultures to descend and howl about how Bernie is destroying the party, isn't popular, caused HRC to lose the last election etc. You know, all that "party unity my ass" type stuff....

in
5
4
3
2
.......

[Renew Deal]

2. Bloomberg is a registered Democrat.

Bernie has refused to register despite his promises to do so. I guess he’s busy looking for the taxes and health records he also promised. It’s third on the list.

[Perseus]

17. Who cares if he stays an Independent? As long as his agenda is Democratic who cares?

We have other registered Democrats who vote a lot with republicans on issues where there is no question where the vote should go, are they any better because they are "registered Democrats"? I don't think so.

[boston bean]

36. Here is the thing.

He crusades against democrats. He is the true democrat even though he refuses to become one?

[KPN]

53. Crusades against Democrats? He critiques the record

of Democrats regarding economic inequality issues and campaigns against other Democrats running for the nomination. Crusades? Another good example of the dynamic described in the OP.

[boston bean]

68. He accuses them of being corrupt by taking donations from corporations.

Without one shred of evidence they have done what he claims. Ie being in their pocket.

[totodeinhere]

76. The point is that Bernie gets a lot of grief for being an independent but Bloomberg

gets a pass for also being an independent. He registered as a Democrat as a convenience so he could run for president.

[DanTex]

5. Yes, great point. Welcome to DU!

[Butterflylady]

56. 48 states to go

Just because some candidates are behind in some or any polls doesn't mean anything. 48 states to go. 48 states to go.

[zackymilly]

67. +1. nt

[Lonestarblue]

64. I'd be interested in seeing key state polls.

National polls are misleading. How do the candidates stack up in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida? Those would be far more informative. Hillary was ahead in the national polls, and that disguised weakness in key states.

[cannabis_flower]

89. It looks like

Bernie will likely win Texas.

[betsuni]

4. How does Bernie threaten big corporate interests?

[johnthewoodworker]

14. I think that any increase in social spending has to be funded by those with money.

Corporations, and the wealthy, are particularly sensitive to this point. Because no one has a greater need for money than the wealthy.

[Magoo48]

27. Greed is a social disease pandemic across the world's wealthy.

[betsuni]

32. There are wealthy people and corporations who are Democrats and want progressive legislation.

To say that all wealthy people and corporations are corrupt and only care about money ... no.

[Farmer-Rick]

49. The wealthy liberals play a delicate game

They say things like why are poor people's income taxes higher than mine. But they don't mention how most their wealth is taken from capital gains. They don't object when Trump gives them a $10 billion contract from our tax dollars...not theirs because they don't pay any taxes...as long as they got theirs.

They talk a slightly liberal game but they are all in with Trump, Putin and the GOP.

They are put off at the thought of having a dick tater yet ignore how most of the GOP bribes them with tax cuts to keep them quiet. And lets face it name a liberal 1% (who is not running for political office) that has anywhere near the amount of influence the Koch bros and Putin have in this country.

Even the filthy rich weak liberals who say anything about how the masses are abused for their profit, know that the GOP will make them richer and the rest of us poorer and they don't mind that. A filthy rich man from one of the Nordic economies was asked why don't you rise up and stop giving the masses so much and cut your tax burden? And they said they didn't want to be a rich man in a poor country.

But our filthy rich Americans don't care if the country that gives them so much is poor, falling apart and the majority are miserable. These pampered, corrupt, out of touch American filthy rich are perfectly happy to see everyone around them suffer while they are safely surrounded by their stolen loot.

[I_UndergroundPanther]

77. Kick and rec

[KPN]

55. Of course it's a generalization. The key metric isn't every vs some,

it’s the overall record. As far as overall economic well-being of America’s middle and working class people, the record has been negative and declining. What we are witnessing the past 10 years or so is a popular response to that on both the left and the right. Those who prefer status quo (those aligned more favorably with corporate, financial, wealthy interests in the party and the media — centrists) are striking back.

[ramen]

22. Health care, a liveable mininum wage, and a desire to reduce military spending

let alone reduced or free college tuition and-or reducing or cancelling student debt. Huge corporations lose profits via every one of these proposals.

[betsuni]

29. Those are Democratic Party issues.

[ramen]

31. Different candidates place different priorities on the order of importance of each.

Medicare for all or a $15/hr national minimum wage are not as enthusiastically endorsed by all potential nominees, and nobody is as out-in-the-open about it as Sanders. I think corporate interests perceive those things as more threatenig via him as a result.

But I am glad that our party is supporting these as issues worth fighting for, regardless of who is fighting for them.

[betsuni]

35. $15 minimum wage was the 2016 Democratic platform. Look it up.

Medicare for all is not the only path to universal health care. "Our" party has always supported these issues and fighted for them.

[ramen]

42. I recall that, yes, it seems like you're reading past me.

I remain glad that our party supports that living minimum wage, including Clinton. Way into it.

You mind clarifying your use of quotation marks around the word "our" in your reply above? I don't want to leap to conclusions about your implications.

[JudyM]

57. Look up how it became part of the platform. Sanders negotiated it.

[betsuni]

73. Then that makes him the establishment.

[floppyboo]

93. Wish they could have come to an agreement on Fracking! Who, besides Bernie, wants to end it?

[MontanaFarmer]

6. I fear the only way Bernie supporters will believe the

fact that he's unelectable is by proving it. If trump wasn't such an existential threat to the entire world, there's a part of me that would like to just get it over with, let him lose 40 states so we could go on trying to improve ther democratic party. I'm just afraid that if we do that in these circumstances there won't be enough country left to fight over in 4 years. He's an electoral Chernobyl waiting to happen. He's capped at 35-40 percent support in his own (nominally) party for goodness sake.

[CentralMass]

8. I think that these claims that Bernie is unelectable are essentially people like you saying that you

won't vote for him.

[MontanaFarmer]

9. Oh I'll vote for him. Happy to.

I agree with most of his agenda. I like his plan to foster sustainability in agriculture but believe he needs more flexibility to allow livestock to help with carbon sequestration. I'm not in favor of free college. I think Medicare for all is ultimately the best solution but needs an interim step (public option) politically. Obama was 65% popular with 60 senators and couldn't get it. Other than that Bernie's agenda is good with me. Real live seeing voters i know, conservative leaners that pay attention to policy and are looking for a trump alternative, will not vote for him. They'd vote for Biden, or Amy, or Bloomberg, or Pete. That's the issue i have.

[ramen]

24. I know things are divided here so I want to preface this question

by indicating that I am not baiting you or trying to argue with you. That said: what are the factors that lead to his unelectability for you?

[MontanaFarmer]

38. The embracing of the term socialist.

The too-easy connotation of "free stuff" for x,y,z group that "doesn't deserve it." Keep in mind I'm saying how he'll be portrayed my media and Republicans, not my opinions. The ease at which they'll portray him as a tax- raising career politician in love with the values of communism (video). You know as well as i that in the world we operate in narrative matters more than fact, and i see a completely devastating narrative for him and the entire party.

[mr_lebowski]

80. Could hardly have said it better ...

That nails exactly where I'm at in my calculations as well (as well as your prior post) ...

[Blues Heron]

41. Yup. +1 pretty obvious.

[gab13by13]

10. Yeah Ok,

Trump beat a moderate candidate in 2016. (with Russia's help) so maybe we try to beat Trump with another moderate candidate?
2nd time's the charm?

[MontanaFarmer]

12. Maybe so.

I'm willing to be proven wrong. I think he wins VT, CT, NY, RI, NJ, MA, WA, OR, CA, HI. There's 10. Hope I'm wrong but i can't find many more.

[Orrex]

15. I would say that's an optimistic estimate

Like you, I will absolutely vote for Sanders if he's on the ticket. And, like you, I admire much of what he says and most of his positions.

Nevertheless, I have no confidence in his ability to win in the general election.

[Turin_C3PO]

50. He'd probably

win Maryland, Delaware, and New Mexico also.

[MontanaFarmer]

52. Forgot Maryland and Delaware.

NM i left of purposefully, i think it'd be dicey.

[bucolic_frolic]

37. Republicans are skewing the polls to select the easiest prey

and there is no easier target in American than a socialist. Republicans will ratchet up the rhetoric ... Hillary was coming for our guns, remember? Now Bernie will be coming for our refrigerator and our food and our paychecks. You have to anticipate what the opposition will do and how it will play ... and it will play because the American public have been conditioned over 70 years by Republicans planning for the day when they can overturn that Democrat FDR. Republicans HATE Social Security ... they made this plain when they started IRAs, and they HATE taxes ... they made that plain when they allowed Roth IRAs which are untaxable permanently ... made many trust fund babies ... they HATE inheritance taxes, just like they HATE SNAP and disability benefits.

So if you want a society of Social Darwinism, nominate an easy target, and you'll get four more years of Trump to END the social safety net, make pollution permanent, end health care for those without the cash to pay for it ...

[MontanaFarmer]

39. 1000% agree.

[bucolic_frolic]

51. Sometimes I just feel a need to speak the truth and awaken the gullible

It's not that Bernie supporters are not patriotic or are stupid ... it's that they see his victory as inevitable BECAUSE they are not old enough and battle-tested to realize the magnitude of the evil and opposition they will confront. Entrenched GOP ideology goes back 6 generations at least, post-Civil War. They are honed and will not easily surrender. The speeches and policies of FDR, not just in social programs but in war and peace and in his attempts to institutionalize democratic ideals in policy and form, are MUCH understudied.
Historians are deep into the archives of history thanks to computerized research and archives of contemporaries now being released. They reconstruct decisions and history from many perspectives. We are learning what leaders from all sides thought, there are even diaries from some of Hitler's henchmen! Democracy is not power from the top, it is power from the people.

Thanks MontanaFarmer. It's a good start to the week.

[Farmer-Rick]

63. So Trump can win when he is heard saying grab women by the pusssy

But when someone calls a Democratic candidate a socialist it is the end of the line.

Trump proved that anyone is electable. He proved that people will vote for anyone even a pedophile sexual predator with mobster connections and Nazi support.

The word Socialist will not make anyone unelectable. But timidity, moving away from our values and vision, pushing the status quo. promoting RepubliCON light policies like "free" trade and pushing the filthy rich's agenda over the people's agenda will.

Trump talked like he would do something about manufacturing moving out of the US along with our good paying jobs. He talked as if he would do something different and address the unfair free trade agreements. And America is hungry for something different.

Socialism is something different with the added side affect of being good for all Americans not just bankers and the filthy rich.....of course they got Trump wrong. I don't think they have Bernie wrong. But he's different.

[mr_lebowski]

81. +2

[octoberlib]

7. Actually , they're not threatened at all because they understand civics and Sanders

will never be able to form coalitions to get anything passed through the Senate.

What they don't like is that Sanders doesn't have any coat tails because he's not a Democrat. We'll lose the Senate and possibl the House.

[oldsoftie]

13. But.... the YOUNG voters!!!!!

Seems to be all a lot of them care about mentioning. Not winning.

[ramen]

25. I think the reason he is so focused on young and other low-turnout voting blocs

is that voter turnout in the US is incredibly low. Changing turnout among any (let alone several) disenfranchised or suppressed voting demographics could change the political map significantly, and mostly in our favor.

[whathehell]

21. Republican Senators can be replaced..

with Democrats. It was done in the House, remember?

[LexVegas]

11. Except Ruger and Smith and Wesson. nt

[Just_Vote_Dem]

16. What was the question again?

I always sucked at Jeopardy

[evertonfc]

18. Bernie loses entire southeast

I know this region. I've worked it for 25 years. Bernie will lose it big time and likely take house seats with him. FL, GA, NC, TX- all will be off the table. Period. A Democratic Socialist, fair or unfair, is a non starter here. Sure, he draws crowds, has passion and polls competitively but this is against an impeached, unpopular President. Once 700 million in paid and earned advertising is unleashed from Aug to Nov, painting him as leftist fawning, socialst ( with his own words and video) he will be finished in this region. I supported Bernie in 2016. His movement then was larger than it is now. I agree with most of his positions and he will be effective on the coasts. The southeast and middle America isn't the coast. Moderates won House seats and Governorships in these areas, not far left progressives. The Democratic socialist label will cost Bernie the GE and, in my opinion, quite handily. It will also cost us gained House seats. We have a real shot at Florida. The passion is there to beat Trump whoever the nominee is but you can simply write the southeast off if Sanders is the nominee and some House seats to go with it.

[DanTex]

20. Bernie polls best against Trump in TX.

[flying_wahini]

43. I can assure you that Trump will take Texas.

I’m a lifelong Texan and can tell you we are so gerryrigged that the ONLY way Bernie will take Texas is to win by a huge margin and they aren’t gonna let that happen. Nope.

[Mariana]

60. How would gerryrigging affect a statewide election? nt.

[mr_lebowski]

82. Exactly ...

But he will lose in Texas regardless.

That just won't be the reason why.

[Mariana]

87. I agree, the majority of residents of Texas will vote for Trump. nt.

[ramen]

28. Do you have ideas about who could carry the southeast based on your experience there?

As a northeasterner I acknowledge that I do not have day-to-day life experience with that region and am definitely interested.

[Mariana]

61. Probably no Democratic candidate has much of a chance.

White Evangelical Christians are heavily concentrated in the Southeast, and the white Evangelical Christians overwhelmingly support Trump.

[ramen]

86. Their hypocrisy is stunning.

I can't believe evangelicals can stomach trump.

Thanks for sharing.

[Mariana]

88. It actually makes sense.

For starters, he's a Christian, so the Evangelicals believe his all sins are forgiven. They also say that God has often worked through highly flawed people. It's hard to argue with them on that point, when the Bible is stuffed with stories in which God favored and blessed absolutely terrible men, who did much worse things than Trump has ever done, and put them into positions of great power.

[whathehell]

19. YES.

as does Warren.

[ehrnst]

23. So why do you think that the GOP is chomping at the bit for him to be the Dem candidate?

[brutus smith]

69. I'll bite. Why don't you enlightened us, and why would it be different with Elizabeth?

[ehrnst]

70. I simply am pointing out that indeed, the GOP wants Bernie. And you came to DanTex's rescue.

How nice that he has people to jump in when he's overwhelmed by a question.

I can imagine that the GOPs clear preference for Sanders as the nominee is very uncomfortable for you and DanTex, which is why you tried to frantically change the subject to Warren...



But I'll humor you. I'm not seeing any promoting of Warren by the GOP, whereas Bernie....

The team that rigged the GOP primaries accuses Democrats of rigging Iowa against Sanders


Republicans claim Nancy Pelosi is intentionally helping Joe Biden and hurting Bernie Sanders by delaying the Senate impeachment trial

Trump and His Aides Focused for Now on 2 Rivals (Neither Is the Front-Runner)

Republican strategist Karl Rove says Bernie Sanders could beat Donald Trump in 2020

Republicans pray for Bernie as Democratic nominee


But by all means, please show your examples of where the GOP is treating Warren the same way.

[brutus smith]

71. I just asked a simple question. But if you don't want to answer, that's ok.

[ehrnst]

72. You try to frantically change the subject, and I don't play along.

Really uncomfortable topic, eh? I guess DanTex just gave up.

Wise move to fold when one has nothing in one's hand.





Should I be expecting Mikeysnot to come along to help out about now?

[brutus smith]

91. You don't have to get "grumpy" about it.

[ehrnst]

92. Just because I'm not frantic, and don't play along

doesn't mean I'm "grumpy," Hon.






You tell Dan I hope he's feeling better, bless his heart.

[James48]

26. You miss this point-

To say He’s “not a Democrat” - that’s only true to dyed-in-the-wool party member Democrats.

To those on the right, there is no difference between “Democrat” and “Democratic Socialist”. To the right-leaning votes, they mean the same. And yet legions of right leaning voters ARE attracted to Bernie’s populist message. It is the message of today, and he hits it out of the park.

I’m with Bernie.

[ramen]

30. This is a huge point that gets overlooked in this discussion.

Given the current polarization, we can bank on whoever our nominee ultimately ends up being having to endure smears and disinformation campaigns calling them socialists, communists, eaters of babies, lovers of terrorists, and staunch bestiality defenders. Because of that, I would rather run someone who most accurately represents my policy interests, since the attacks will be basically interchangeable anyhow.

[ehrnst]

97. False equivalence.

They are smearing Biden in much, much greater measure than any other candidate.

And the GOP is promoting and coddling Bernie in much, much greater measure than any other candidate.

The team that rigged the GOP primaries accuses Democrats of rigging Iowa against Sanders


Republicans claim Nancy Pelosi is intentionally helping Joe Biden and hurting Bernie Sanders by delaying the Senate impeachment trial

Trump and His Aides Focused for Now on 2 Rivals (Neither Is the Front-Runner)

Republican strategist Karl Rove says Bernie Sanders could beat Donald Trump in 2020

Republicans pray for Bernie as Democratic nominee

[Squinch]

33. In 30 years Bernie has never passed any legislation that does anything

to curb corporate abuses so I don't see why they would fear him. Liz, yea. But not Bernie.

[bucolic_frolic]

34. Why sew division into the Democratic primaries?

To try to benefit your own candidate instead of supporting the overarching American goal of defeating Trump.

A candidate will emerge and then we must all pull together. He or she may not be our preferred primary candidate, but they will be opposing Trump which is all that counts. The future is on the line. You can vote for change and patriotism and America, or you can stick your nose in the air and not vote at all which is a vote for MAGAzis and their anti-democratic ideals.

Which way do you choose?

[Fresh_Start]

40. Liz threatens corporate interests, she is the only one wall street is worried about

if there is an advantage to Bernie...he has no problems with going along with those interests.

[flying_wahini]

45. You are correct. Wall Street and big Business can't stand her.

Which is shy she has my vote.

[blm]

44. Who has DONE more to actually hold corporate execs accountable?

Warren.

But, hey, her DECADES of painstaking research on issues effecting working families were meaningless and she needed to copy Bernie to get anywhere . So we hear.

[flying_wahini]

46. Yes, Warren.

But I guess being a woman is even worse than being a Democratic Socialist.

[betsuni]

47. +1

[tavernier]

54. In my case I guess it's simply pure body language.

He just rubs me the wrong way. His message may be great, but there’s something about him that puts me off. And you must admit that instinct plays a large part in human interaction, despite all logic.

But make no mistake about my intentions... if he is our candidate, I will vote for him.

[beastie boy]

58. Ok, since you asked:

1. Bernie is trying to remake the Democratic Party in his own image. To this effect, he intends to build a "movement" and govern in the name of the "people" (he reserves the right to define "the people" to himself) rather than by the consensus of the majority. Bloomberg is not, on both counts.

2. There are a lot more leftists who will vote only for Bernie than there are centrists who will not vote for Bernie in the Generals. Besides, with the exception of Bernie supporters, I am not aware of any Democrat who expressed their preference to one candidate to the exception of all others. Perhaps you can provide some facts that will support your position.

3. Examples? Followed by the media responses for each? I don't believe there is evidence to suggest the media react differently to Bernie supporters than anyone else. Don't confuse or compare supporters with surrogates. Bernie's surrogates say rude things with the implicit approval of Bernie himself, and their rudeness is commonplace. Show me one Democratic candidate whose surrogates act in the same rude way.

4. Some pundits compare Bernie's numbers to those of all centrists combined. Some pundits used to compare Biden's numbers with those of Sanders' and Warren's combined. Most pundits don't. Some pundits say stupid shit, most don't

Hope this helps.

[DanTex]

66. If you're right about #2, then Bernie is clearly the most electable candidate.

And I tend to agree with you, that Bernie will bring more new voters to the polls to vote for him, than the small number of centrist swing voters that he would lose.

[beastie boy]

75. Not necessarily.

2. There are a lot more leftists who will vote only for Bernie than there are centrists who will not vote for Bernie in the Generals. Besides, with the exception of Bernie supporters, I am not aware of any Democrat who expressed their preference to one candidate to the exception of all others. Perhaps you can provide some facts that will support your position.

Let's assume, for kicks and giggles, that Bernie wins the Primaries. The calculus that you are proposing may apply if you are talking about Democrats to the exclusion of every other voter, but it flies out the window in the general election.
Even if your assumption is taken for granted and all Democrats stand behind Sanders in the Generals, it will galvanize the opposition from the independents and centrist republicans against the leftist candidate, to either not sit the election out because they don't otherwise want to vote for Trump, or to express their opposition to the Democratic candidate they consider more extreme than Trump. There are more of them than Bernie's supporters who will not vote for anyone but Bernie.

[DanTex]

78. I'm not talking about Democrats to the exclusion of every other voter.

I'm talking, generally, about anyone who would vote for one/some candidates against Trump but would sit home or vote for Trump if it were another candidate.

The point I was making in the OP is that, when it comes to Bernie, such voters are derided as "disloyal Bernie Bros" or whatever, whereas for other candidates like Bloomberg, this kind of voter is heralded as a "moderate swing voter." Which represents an obvious rhetorical bias against Bernie, since at the end of the day, both of those kinds of voters are in the same category of "might vote for the Dem nominee, depending on who it is."

You are correct, though, in saying that it also matters who would drive more opposition turnout from the GOP. So it's not automatically true that whoever can get the most votes in the GE is the most electable.

[beastie boy]

79. I wasn't to crazy to divert from your OP either, but you responded with what seemed to be important

to you. So I replied.

As far as the point you are referring to, I replied to it in my first response under #3. You can only claim rhetorical bias if your claim is more than just anecdotal. I, for example, feel the references to Hillary as "neo-liberal" by left-wing media personalities just as offensive as you find the "disloyal Bernie Bros" references. But this is no basis to claim that all of the left-wing media is biased against her.

Besides, in the context of just about all Democrats pledging support to whoever winds the nomination, the "Bernie or bust" sentiment is indeed disloyal. In the same way as declining to vote for Bernie in the general election is.

[DanTex]

85. Fair enough, that makes sense.

And I do agree with your point about "negative turnout" or whatever you want to call it.

It's true that all I have is anecdotal evidence, I haven't scraped the web doing word-counts or anything. Still, I don't think it's much of a stretch to say that "Bernie or Bust" types are accused of disloyalty far more than "suburban moderates" are. The point I'm making about "disloyal Bernie Bros" is not that it's offensive, but that it's a double standard. It implies that left-wing voters somehow have a duty to vote for the Democratic nominee, but centrist voters don't. I don't see many (any) left-wing commentators imply that the votes of moderates are owed to the Democratic nominee, in fact, the opposite, I see a lot of left-wing commentators talk about how important it is to reach moderate and independent voters with a progressive message.

For the record, I think "Bernie or Bust" people are idiots, and I think Jill Stein is horrible and the Green Party is damaging to progressive causes.

You're right that left-wing media called Hillary "neo-liberal" but that's not analogous to the disloyal charge. The analogy there would be something like centrist media talking about Bernie's "free stuff." Those are both derisive ways to characterize politics, and I'd say that these kinds of things occur with about the same frequency coming from the two camps. But, unlike the disloyalty thing, I don't see any double standard. It's just name-calling.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

59. Here's another paradox:

Bernie wants to pay for his social programs (free health care, free college, free free free free! like that ad says) by taxing the wealthy and the corporations. I'm fine with that. I agree 100% that tax rates on the wealthy should be higher and corporations should pay their fair share too. But Bernie doesn't think there should be any billionaires (he's ok with millionaires, apparently, now that he is one). We are also told big corporations are evil incarnate. None of that bloated wealth should be allowed to exist at all.

So if there are no big corporations and no very wealthy people left, where is all the money for those social programs going to come from?

[floppyboo]

94. I guess you missed his crusade to end wealth inequality

Given that perfect world everyone would be in a position to chip in equally.

Think of it as a see-saw with all the money bags on one end and families on food stamps on the other. The goal would be to level the see-saw, or, if not, toss the gold bars over the fulchrum.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

96. Would that mean that everybody has the same amount of money

and nobody would be allowed to have more or less than anyone else? How would that be arranged?

[floppyboo]

99. No!! That's crazy!!

It means you pay according to your ability and you can earn whatever you are able.
Some people would end up paying more in taxes based on earning more. Why? because its a % of wealth. Not a leveling of wealth. Your tax bracket would be more onerous the more money you make but you'd never pay as much as to make your net earnings equal to the lowest - or even the middle.
It could be that if everyone was given the same gifts at birth (never gonna happen) and equal playing field of opportunity (a very honorable and loving ideal) everybody might have closer to the same amount of money.

Some people aren't that turned on by wealth. But contribute in other ways. Like mothers.

[mountain grammy]

62. They're really afraid

Not so much of Bernie but of the people finally seeing and believing the truths he’s been telling for decades.

[LeftTurn3623]

65. excellent post!

Everyone of your points is so true!

The only thing I might disagree with is your answer "because Bernie threatens big corporate interests."


I think its because everyone is scared Bernie cannot win a general election against Trump and the people on TV/media also want Trump out desperately.

Heck, last night they had a Republican on who cannot stand Trump and what he is doing to the Republican party and wants him to lose. That person is saying the dems need to stop Bernie and get behind one "moderate type " of candidate or Trump will win reelection.


I'm not saying I agree with this and I actually think Bernie can win. Maybe it is wishful thinking to me also.

I do know I vote in PA and if its between Bernie & Bloomberg I will vote for Bernie without a doubt. My brother, my mom, and my wife feels that way. My brothers 3 kids will vote Bernie no matter what. My son, wife & mom all want Pete first but My son goes Bernie second after Pete ( Yang was his 1st choice) .

My mom & I haven't decided yet if Biden is a choice and Pete is out. I'm leaning Bernie but Biden seems to be doing better lately and Im having second thoughts. Biden has made a lot of good points on picking him and he is the most day one ready and I do trust Biden to do the right thing. My mom is leaning Biden over Bernie if its between them.

[LanternWaste]

74. Examples of Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies for $500, Alex.

And so on, part II.

[ancianita]

83. WARREN is the bigger corporate threat than is Bernie. SHE knows how to beat corporations. He doesn't

NO ONE admits to the inherent sexism in media or elsewhere re the funding, campaign strengths of EITHER Klobuchar or Warren.

Warren has the cleanest donor base. The cleanest campaign. Cleaner than Bernie's.

Warren can sell bipartisan work, because SHE'S DONE IT.

No one admits that WARREN IS THE BIGGEST CORPORATE THREAT IN THIS ELECTION.

Don't think that women are running the House as well as the men?

Can't deal with the interests of the 52% of the country? Why is that?

Don't count the economic power and political power of the 52% of the country? Why is that?

[BlueWI]

90. I am with you with a lot of this.

I believe both you and I were Inslee supporters too.

It is important for the US to elect its first female president and to improve a great deal on the gender balance in elected offices. It's unfortunate that 2016 and Trump have led to less emphasis on this goal.

The impact of sexism is clear when the big 3 candidates are men who are well past retirement age. That being said, Sanders deserves credit for success in creating an organization that gives him grassroots support, independent fundraising, and an enthusiastic core of younger and disenfranchised voters. These accomplishments deserve recognition and suggest how longer term relationships with a progressive base can be built.

I hope that Warren stays in the race - I believe she still has a chance for the nomination.

[krissey]

84. Sanders is literally a threat to no one national or world stage.

he is all bluster for five decades, 3 decades in congress. His plans are no can do, not even a start. He threatens no one.

[Skidmore]

95. Neither are saviors

except for Trump. One a little more than others.

One is a demagogue. Both have egos big as all outdoors. Neither can be trusted. My opinion.

[Gothmog]

98. trump really wants to run against a weak and unelectable candidate like sanders

Link to tweet

Link to tweet