Why do people keep trying to pretend Bernie is only popular with a plurality of Dems?

[DanTex]

Bernie has the best favorability numbers in the field among Dems voters.
Bernie beats every other Dem candidate in head-to-head polling.
Bernie comes out on top as to who the most Dem voters would be either "satisfied" or "enthusiastic" with as nominee.

Also, needless to say, Bernie currently has received the most votes, has the most pledged delegates, is leading in all the national polls, has the most donors and the best fundraising operation outside of self-funding billionaires, and also is the top choice for who Dems think would beat Trump. And all of the policies Bernie is campaigning on have large majority support among Dems. Pick your metric. Bernie comes out on top.

Conversely, there is zero evidence that any other candidate is as popular as Bernie with the Democratic electorate. And we know this, because if there were any tiny piece of data anywhere that could be spun to make any other candidate look like the preferred choice, no matter how obscure or cherry-picked, then all of the media and all of the anti-Bernie people on twitter would be blasting it.

But there isn't. All the data points to Bernie. So, please, let's stop with the nonsense that Bernie is only popular with small but vocal segment of the Dem electorate. It just isn't true.

[snowybirdie]

1. Perhaps

were concerned about his actual ability to govern and heal the wounds caused by the tRump Administration?

[DanTex]

2. That's fine. Then why pretend that Bernie isn't the most popular candidate?

Why not just admit that, yes, Bernie is the candidate who is most popular with the Democratic electorate, but we still have concerns about _______.

Why is it necessary for so many people to also pretend that Bernie isn't the top choice among Dem voters?

[Fontaines D.C.]

25. Heal the wounds?

By helping those most hurt?

[sweetloukillbot]

3. Because he hasn't won a majority yet? Nt

[DanTex]

4. That doesn't imply that a majority don't like him.

He doesn't have a majority because it's a crowded field. The vote is split six or seven ways.

[Lucid Dreamer]

58. What is your question about?

You say:
Why do people keep trying to pretend Bernie is only popular with a plurality of Dems?

People don't pretend anything; his performance is the very definition of plurality.

[DanTex]

59. Popularity doesn't just mean being top choice. Obviously.

It's a crowded field, so just because Bernie is only the top choice among a plurality of Dems doesn't imply that he's not highly popular with a majority. It's just that a lot of people really like Bernie, but like one of the other five or six candidates even more.

[ehrnst]

57. He was a very good marxist socialist when he was an elector for the Workers Socialist Party

So there's that.

[flying_wahini]

6. Depends what polls you choose to believe.

[thesquanderer]

46. Can you point to any polls that run counter to the three the OP posted?

i.e. any polls that show any of our candidates with higher favorability than Bernie?

Or any polls that show any of our candidates with a greater percentage of Dems comfortable with any other candidate being our nominee, compared to how many would be comfortable with Bernie?

Or any polls that show more Dems would pick some Dem other than Bernie in a one-on-one contest with him?

[brooklynite]

7. Um, because it's true?

It doesn't matter if he has the MOST votes; he's appealing to only about 1/3 of Democratic voters.

It doesn't matter if other candidates aren't popular with a majority of Democrats. The ultimate question is whether the nominee can actually win the election, which calls for drawing votes from the center in the critical rust belt States.

It doesn't matter if he has high popularity ratings; people don't vote exclusively on that basis (see: Donald Trump).

[DanTex]

9. How can you possibly think he's only appealing to 1/3 of Dem voters when he has 70+% favorability?

Higher than any other candidate. When 75+% of Dems say they would be satisfied or enthusiastic about him as nominee. Again higher than any other candidate.

He's obviously appealing to a huge majority of Dem voters, larger than any other candidate, by any possible measure. 1/3 is the fraction of Dems who pick him as their top choice in a crowded field. It's flagrantly misleading to say that he's not "appealing" to voters for whom he's the number two of three choice, especially when those voters have a favorable view of Bernie and would be happy with Bernie as nominee.

[TwilightZone]

13. Favorability doesn't matter. Votes matter.

So far, he's getting 29% of the popular vote.

If the majority prefer him over all the other candidates, as you claim, why is he at 29%?

Simple, because 71%, a clear majority, have supported other candidates thus far.

You're making this way more complicated - intentionally, I might add - than it really is.

[DanTex]

16. And by votes, he's also ahead of all the other candidates.

In a crowded field, the vote is split many ways. Obviously. More people have voted against Biden, or Pete, or any other candidate than have voted against Bernie. By any possible measure, votes, delegates, polls of various kinds, Bernie comes out on top.

Sorry, but Bernie is hugely popular among Democrats, that's simply a fact.

[thesquanderer]

50. re: "If the majority prefer him over all the other candidates, as you claim"

There has been no claim that the majority prefer him over all other candidates.

Many people like more than one candidate. The majority of Dems would be comfortable or enthusiastic about his nomination (more than feel that way about any other candidate). That doesn't mean the majority have him as their first choice.

[Squinch]

14. PS: Where are you getting that 75% number?

[DanTex]

15. From the poll I linked to in the OP.

[Squinch]

20. My. How very squishy! That's more of a measure of name recognition than anything else.

It isn't a measure of who would vote for him.

And the number that have a NEGATIVE view of him are exactly the same as the number that have a negative view of Biden, Bloomberg and Warren. So, if we are taking this as a measure of who WOULDN'T vote for him, he scores exactly the same as Biden, Bloomberg and Warren.

I know there would be no way to convince you that this is not saying what you think it is saying, but it isn't saying what you think it is saying.

[DanTex]

23. Yes, there are always excuses when (all of) the poll numbers don't go your way.

But like I said, there is zero data to support any claim that Bernie is not the most popular candidate in the field. This is why you aren't posting any data to support your claims, you are just calling the data "squishy".

[Squinch]

29. Yeah, like I said, I knew you wouldn't see it.

The 2018 election is enough data to prove to me that Bernie and his positions are woefully unpopular.

Sorry I can't give you all the data on the 2018 election. There were a lot of races. Lots of moderates flipped House seats. I had thought Our Revolution and Bernie-backed candidates lost 23 races to the 3 they won. But I read here somewhere, though, that it was 40 races to 3! Imagine! That's a lot of data.

I'm sure the google machine will help if you need proof that Bernie's folks were clobbered that day.

[DanTex]

33. A midterm election with Bernie not even on the ballot.

Obviously, that's the best way to determine which presidential candidate is most popular with the Democratic electorate.

[Squinch]

35. Oh, he was on the ballot all right! 43 times! And he lost 40 of them.

[DanTex]

37. Weird that he cloned himself and ran 43 different times in 2018 presidential primaries.

[Squinch]

41. Hey, it's his revolution. If you find it weird, I can't speak to that.

[Watchfoxheadexplodes]

11. They don't hear you and never will

I have stopped trying to understand it as it is simply mind boggling they think Sander's would win the presidency.

I expect a lot of "I told you so" responses should he face trump.

[thesquanderer]

47. re:"whether the nominee can actually win the election, which calls for drawing votes from the center

That's not the only way to win. That's not how Trump won. (Though it is arguably how Hillary lost.) Sometimes an enthusiastic farther-from-center voting bloc can outweigh a less enthusiastic centrist voting bloc.

re: "

It doesn't matter if he has high popularity ratings; people don't vote exclusively on that basis (see: Donald Trump)"

It's true, popularity ratings aren't everything... especially since the electoral college means it also matters WHERE all that popularity is located. But all else being equal, higher favorables are better than lower ones.

re:

"It doesn't matter if he has the MOST votes; he's appealing to only about 1/3 of Democratic voters."

No, according to the polling in the OP, he actually appeals to about 2/3 of the Dem voters (more, in fact, than any other candidate does). The reason he doesn't have 2/3 the votes is that many people like more than one candidate, but can only vote for one. (Though he still has more votes than anyone else does.) My point is, you can't assume that, just because someone didn't vote for a candidate, that that candidate doesn't appeal to them (or that they wouldn't be very happy to vote for that candidate against Trump in November).

[showblue22]

94. About Trump.

Republicans from one end of the spectrum to the other voted for Trump. They stuck together and voted for him whether they liked him or not. Hillary was the devil to republicans and they were voting against her.

[thesquanderer]

96. Trump is similarly the devil to Democrats. This isn't so much about how Dems or Repubs will vote...

...but at least as much about how about everyone else will vote.

[showblue22]

97. Democrats don't fall inline like republicans do

They never have.

[JudyM]

8. Favorability excerpt from your source

Seventy-four percent of Democratic voters say they have a favorable opinion of Sanders, while 67% say that of former Vice President Joe Biden, 64% for Warren, and 58% for former South Bend, Indiana Mayor Pete Buttigieg. About half of Democrats express favorable opinions of billionaire Mike Bloomberg and Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, while nearly 4 in 10 say they have a positive opinion of billionaire Tom Steyer.

[LanternWaste]

10. Could be for the same reason people pretend concern is 'fear...'

Or for the same reason people pretend logical fallacies are a valid means of rational thought.

Or for the same reason people pretend an inaccurate and unsupported premise is a given and an absolute.

Or for the same reason that people who claim 'zero evidence' never provide any of their own.

A whole host of reasons exist I would imagine.

Take your pick, and rationalize away those which don't fit your narrative.

[DanTex]

17. LOL. I did provide evidence. See the links in the OP.

[Squinch]

12. He hasn't received anything like a plurality of votes in any of the races he has faced so far

in this election.

And in 2018, the most recent election where we got to see the wishes of the entire electorate, Bernie and his choices got demolished.

[DanTex]

18. That's because it's a crowded field. Obviously, when the vote is split six

or seven ways, then each slice of the pie is smaller.

[Squinch]

22. Yeah, and he STILL hasn't received anything like a plurality in any of the races.

You are so sure we should nominate him on the basis of 7% of the responders so far?

[DanTex]

24. He's got a plurality of votes in every contest so far, and he's leading all the polls.

Like I said, there is zero evidence to support the claim that anyone other than Bernie is the most popular candidate in the race. Yes, it's still early, let's see what happens.

But it's looking pretty damn good for Bernie, I gotta say.

[awesomerwb1]

31. He's leading all the polls huh?

Wow. Ok.

[Squinch]

32. And there is equally zero evidence to support the claim that HE is the most popular.

Only time will tell.

[DanTex]

36. Actually there is tons of evidence. All the polls point to it, and he is leading in

delegates.

[Squinch]

38. How many delegates? Is it up to 50 yet? Out of a total of 1991. In mostly caucus states.

OK. You hang on that. We'll see how it shakes out.

[DanTex]

40. Also the polling data. But I understand why you'd want to ignore that.

[thesquanderer]

44. re:"He hasn't received anything like a plurality of votes in any of the races so far this election"

Say what? There have been three races this election, and he received a plurality of votes all three times, including in both the first AND final alignments of the caucuses.

[Jersey Devil]

19. We should consider polls more important than votes?

Bernie does not have a majority of the votes/delegates.

[Squinch]

21. It seems that depends on who is benefitted by each method.

[thesquanderer]

53. There is no contradiction between the voting so far and the polling. So it doesn't "depend."

People can like more than one candidate, but they can only vote for one.
In actual voting so far, Sanders gets more votes than anyone else.
In polling, no one polls with higher favorability.
In polling, more people are comfortable with the idea of him as our nominee than feel that way about anyone else.
Even if he isn't necessarily their first choice.


There is no contradiction between these things.

[Tom Rinaldo]

39. There is a hierarchy. Actual votes outweigh solid polling. And solid polling

is a hell of a lot more informative than personal opinions morphed into talking points morphed into supposed facts. Utmost conviction that Bernie is absolutely unelectable falls firmly into the latter category.

And the nonsense that, in a field consisting of seven candidates, the vote total of Sanders who leads with a plurality should be looked at as his near "ceiling", always seems disingenuous to me. (I'm just making a relevant point here, I don't know if you have that view personally). A presumption that all other votes cast for any other candidate can be lumped together as being "anti-Sanders" is preposterous on the face of it.

[thesquanderer]

54. No one is saying polls are more important than votes.

But there is also no contradiction between the votes and the OP's polls.

Please also see my post #53.

[randr]

26. Maybe because more people don't vote for him than do vote for him

[thesquanderer]

60. But people can like more than one candidate.

In actual voting so far, he still gets more votes than anyone else.
In polling, more people are comfortable with the idea of him as our nominee than feel that way about anyone else.
Even if he isn't necessarily their first choice.

[Loki Liesmith]

27. Lol

[awesomerwb1]

28. LOL

Why do you take this so personally? For the longest time you wouldn't pick Sanders, perhaps to seem somewhat "impartial" on here?

Amazing.

[honest.abe]

30. I dont trust polls anymore given all the poll failures and manipulations we have seen in the past.

All we know for sure at the moment is that Bernie has a few more delegates than the other candidates based on 3 states that should be favorable to him.

Lets see how he does in SC and then we can discuss again.

[totodeinhere]

63. That's a two-way street. If you don't trust the polls then the polls could just as

easily be understating Bernie's support. The polls plus the results from three states are all we have to go by so far.

[Rene]

34. Bernie ludicrous ideas are to be ignored as they have for 30 yrs

[AGeddy]

43. Bernie's vote totals first three states: 25%, 26%, and 34%

The very definition of being only popular with a plurality of Dems.

[DanTex]

45. Yes, more than anyone else.

Being the majority number one choice in a crowded field, and being popular with voters, are different things. The polls clearly show that Bernie is not just popular with the majority of Dems, but in fact more popular than any other candidate. It's just that a lot of people who really like Bernie happen to like one of the other five or six candidates better. It's not complicated.

[Demsrule86]

49. It is a crowded field but only one Warren kind of shares his ideology...the others are more moderate

That is where our ticket needs to be period...not with a left (socialist?) candidate in a center left at best country...maybe even center right after Trump.

[DanTex]

51. The data doesn't support your theory of the Democratic electorate.

Bernie defeats everyone single one of the moderates in head-to-head polling. Among Biden supporters, the top second-choice candidate is Bernie.

Splitting the Dem voters into "Bernie supporters versus anti-Bernie moderates" is a fiction that the media and anti-Sanders pundits have invented.

[Demsrule86]

72. Really Dan? Oh I was unaware we had a majority in the Senate... weren't fighting for what three seat

to eke out a win as the Senate trends towards the GOP...nothing progressive about the Senate...oh and the house is still gerrymandered in plenty of states and it was moderates not progressives who won the house...so tell me how they electorate has moved left and I will have to politely giggle because it hasn't clearly...you all may have move left but the country didn't join you...and we still need an electoral college win...and that my friend won't happen with Sanders. If we elected presidents directly or had a senate based on population it would be different...but it isn't. A big tent , 50 state plan is our only chance at a Senate majority... and we need a presidential nominee who can appeal to moderates.

[Squinch]

55. A plurality of the tiny, tiny sliver of people who showed up for two caucuses

and a regular primary.

[zackymilly]

48. Why won't Bernie release his medical records? n/t

[beachbumbob]

52. i am chuckling, as polls mean little as we know.

[spooky3]

56. Because oppo research has not been unleashed to the public and his Dem opponents

have been gentle on him in part because they do not want to alienate his base for the general election, in the event that they are nominated.

The vast majority of people polled know him only from snippets of his speeches.

[OliverQ]

62. This forum skews much older than the general Democratic base.

I don't think they realize how popular Bernie is with most Democrats.

[Demsrule86]

73. And that is where you are wrong... it doesn't; we are the base...reliable voters who turn out.

Black women helped us win every special election and the midterms as well...and suburban women too in Trump states...so who is this base you refer to? Folks who agree with you? Looking at Sander's numbers, I don't see it.

[OliverQ]

74. It does. Someone took a poll of DU users a couple days ago.

The overwhelming majority of people on this forum are 55+. That is not the Democratic base. Bernie is winning more with African Americans overall than Biden is. Bernie is winning massively among Latinos and the Youth. Bernie is winning with independents by far.

Biden only has 2 demographics - the centrists and older African Americans.

[Gothmog]

64. Because we live in the real world

Link to tweet

[DanTex]

65. South Carolina, sure. The rest of the country outside the south? Not so much.

[Gothmog]

66. LOL-Here is another diverse state where sanders may not get any delegates

Link to tweet

[Gothmog]

67. sanders has support of only 30% of the party which means that 70% do not support sanders

Link to tweet

[DanTex]

68. That's obviously not true, but it's no surprise that Joe Lockhart of all people is trying to push it

[Gothmog]

69. I believe in math

Math is a good thing

[DanTex]

70. Math...

[Gothmog]

71. LOL, trump will easily destroy a weak and unelectable candidate like sanders with negative ads

I am very worried about down ballot races. sanders is a very weak candidate and would be easy for trump to destroy. In addition to the well written 101 page memorandum with oppo on sanders with a 1000 pages of backup from the Clinton campaign trump has his own oppo file on sanders that would destroy such a weak and divisive candidate like sanders.

Link to tweet

trump had a two foot thick book of oppo research on Sanders http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

They ignored the fact that Sanders had not yet faced a real campaign against him. Clinton was in the delicate position of dealing with a large portion of voters who treated Sanders more like the Messiah than just another candidate. She was playing the long game—attacking Sanders strongly enough to win, but gently enough to avoid alienating his supporters. Given her overwhelming support from communities of color—for example, about 70 percent of African-American voters cast their ballot for her—Clinton had a firewall that would be difficult for Sanders to breach....

So what would have happened when Sanders hit a real opponent, someone who did not care about alienating the young college voters in his base? I have seen the opposition book assembled by Republicans for Sanders, and it was brutal. The Republicans would have torn him apart. And while Sanders supporters might delude themselves into believing that they could have defended him against all of this, there is a name for politicians who play defense all the time: losers....

The Republicans had at least four other damning Sanders videos (I don’t know what they showed), and the opposition research folder was almost 2-feet thick. (The section calling him a communist with connections to Castro alone would have cost him Florida.) In other words, the belief that Sanders would have walked into the White House based on polls taken before anyone really attacked him is a delusion built on a scaffolding of political ignorance.

sanders was such a weak primary candidate that the Clinton campaign did not use its oppo but trump would have fun destroying such a weak candidate like sanders

I will vote for the nominee of the party but I fear that the nomination of sanders will lead to a Speaker Kevin McCarthy

[Gothmog]

82. The moment Bernie Sanders becomes the nominee 24 / 7 news & ads like this thread with video about ra

Link to tweet

[DanTex]

83. Same will happen to any candidate. The GOP will smear whoever it is.

[Gothmog]

84. The material that trump has on sanders will be very very effective

Link to tweet

Republicans are downright giddy about all this. What’s a scarier term to the American public than “socialist”? And with one of the leaders in the Democratic Party embracing it, their pitch to voters that Democrats want to radically change the country to something unrecognizable just got a lot easier.

“You add up things like packing the Supreme Court, getting rid of the electoral college, the Green New Deal and Medicare for none and you have a prescription of turning America into something it never has been and never should be,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said recently. “So we intend to be on the offense in running our races."

“We’re going into the war with some socialists,” Trump told a fundraiser in April.

This could be the defining debate of the 2020 election. Trump is so happy with that. Sanders is fine with that. The rest of the candidates aren’t so sure. But given the way this debate is shaping up, they may have no choice but to pick a side.

[Gothmog]

86. LOL. trump took his best shot at Joe and it flopped

Link to tweet

[ehrnst]

89. So why aren't they? Why are they trashing Biden and promoting Bernie?

Last edited Sun Mar 1, 2020, 12:05 AM - Edit history (1)

President Donald Trump called on Republicans to take part in South Carolina’s Democratic primary and vote for the candidate who would be easiest to beat but still has a real shot at the nomination. After polling the audience via cheers and clapping, Trump determined that the one who fit the bill was Sen. Bernie Sanders.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/02/trump-calls-supporters-south-carolina-vote-bernie-sanders-in-primary.html

And Sanders still loses by double digits.

[TexasTowelie]

75. Because he hasn't won the majority in any presidential caucus or primary thus far.

You can link to plenty of other statistics, but that does not counter the fact that Bernie has not won a majority in any presidential contest in 2020. QED

[DanTex]

76. Umm, by that logic none of the candidates are popular with Dem voters...

[TexasTowelie]

77. You asked a question.

Too bad that you don't like the answer.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

78. Most people know Bernie's inevitable to win the Democratic nomination.

Glad to see most of Bernie's fellow Democrats are now sayin they'll support Bernie's nomination.


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

[Gothmog]

79. Sanders has the support of only 25% of party

Link to tweet

[moriah]

80. I don't think a majority of Dems *dislike* Sanders.

I believe that if he wins, the base will turn out for him. But there are those who might not see him as their first choice. And so far, yes, only a plurality see him as their first choice.

For the record -- that's how it is with ANY primary. It's why, as you're aware, DU tradition is to allow primary debate and a mourning period, then mandates rallying around the nominee or keeping silent on the subject if you just can't do that (DU has a Lounge, it's a fun place).

No, Bernie isn't my first choice. You can see who is in my signature, and I will give her my vote for what it's worth in my Super Tuesday open-primary red state... even if she doesn't get 15% here in any congressional district. For the hope that even if she isn't named on the ticket, that she is given some input into the platform based on the support people gave her. It might not be the best idea to rip a ton of blue Senators out of office to fill cabinet positions -- we need the Senate flipped -- but if we have to take from any state MA is better than others insofar as the likelihood of keeping the seat blue.

And that 15% threshold thing may be the winnowing-out that does end up benefiting Bernie clearly, and help whoever is going to be our winner get a first-vote majority of pledged delegates (or at least closer than any other candidate by a clear margin) even in a wide field like this.

I avoided posting much at all in 2016 in this forum, mainly because of the panic that sets in before we get to see returns from a significant number of states and how that translates into pledged delegates. The fact that Bernie is likely to get pledged delegates in every state, even if he doesn't outright win that state, and with other candidates depending on the state they may get 0 delegates even if they got 10% of the vote...

I seriously advise people to wait until mid-March before worrying about the potential of not getting a first-vote outright winner.

[Gothmog]

81. Nate-sanders is at 27% in. On southern states and 20% in southern states

Link to tweet

[dawg]

85. If only there were some sort of process where this could all be sorted out ...

some kind of "election" or "convention" or something.

[Gothmog]

87. How much of sanders support is due to trump voters and operation chaos?

Link to tweet

[DanTex]

88. Well, there's zero evidence of any significant "chaos" affecting totals.

Then again, zero is the amount of evidence that supports any of the other anti-Bernie smears.

[ehrnst]

90. Well if one is turning a blind eye to anything that could possibly

cast any doubt whatsoever on one's fiercely held fealty, then one wouldn't be very open to seeing evidence, would one?

[brooklynite]

91. Well, there's zero evidence of any significant pro-Sanders youth vote...

...guess we'll need to rely on the voters who won the House for us.

[jmowreader]

92. Let's be nice and say Bernie is an acquired taste

We have two kinds of candidate in this election: moderates and progressives.

Most of the candidates, except for Sanders and Warren (and, to some extent, Gabbard), are moderates. Sanders and Warren are the progressives.

I believe it to be a significant stretch that if, say, Buttigieg were to drop out of the race tomorrow morning, all his supporters would decide to shift their support to someone as radical as Sanders is. Instead, they would most likely move to Biden or Klobuchar.

Okay, let's look at polls vs primary results. I have RCP's latest polls page (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/democratic_nomination_polls/) up. On Friday, two SC polls dropped: Trafalgar Group and Data for Progress. Neither may be reliable, but they're the two latest SC polls RCP is showing.

Data for Progress (marked "Democratic&quot :
Biden 34%
Sanders 25%
Steyer 13%
Buttigieg 13%
Warren 7%
Klobuchar 5%
Gabbard 3%

Trafalgar Group (marked "Republican&quot :
Biden 44%
Sanders 23%
Steyer 11%
Buttigieg 10%
Warren 6%
Klobuchar 6%
Gabbard 2%

Neither poll reports Bloomberg numbers.

With 99 percent reporting, Google is showing these results for the actual primary:
Biden 48.6% (14.6 gain over DfP)
Sanders 19.9% (5.1 loss over DfP)
Steyer 11.4% (1.6 loss over DfP)
Buttigieg 8.1% (4.9 loss over DfP)
Warren 7% (no change from DfP)
Klobuchar 3.1% (1.9 loss over DfP)
Gabbard 1.3% (1.7 loss over DfP)

Everyone except Biden lost ground over the DfP poll...and if you subtract the vote totals of the five people who had dropped out before the primary but remained on the ballot (Yang received 0.2 percent, Bennett, Booker, Delaney and Patrick all received 0.1 percent) everyone who switched their allegiance at the last minute switched to Joe Biden.

Sanders is the candidate Trump wants to run against because he's the one he's guaranteed to beat.

[Garrett78]

93. I just posted the following in another thread:

No matter how many times DUers say otherwise, the Sanders/non-Sanders binary is a fiction (the data simply doesn't support the belief). DU is not representative of the electorate at large (no more than any one of the states that's voted so far is, by itself, reflective of the electorate at large). Not even close. Inside the DU bubble, it's unfathomable that Sanders could be the 1st or 2nd choice for a "moderate." But, again, there's a big, bright (and complex) world outside of DU.

The following points to one of many examples of truth that runs completely counter to the dominant narrative inside the DU bubble: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-moderate-middle-is-a-myth/.

As the political scientists Donald Kinder and Nathan Kalmoe put it, after looking at five decades of public opinion research, “the moderate category seems less an ideological destination than a refuge for the innocent and the confused.” Similarly, political scientist David Broockman has also written about the meaninglessness of the “moderate” label, particularly as a predictor of centrism.

The takeaway is simple: As they must with independents, any pundit who talks about “moderates” as a key voting bloc begs that second follow-up question: Which moderates?

The upshot of all this is that if you’re a campaign trying to appeal to independents, moderates or undecided voters — or a concerned citizen trying to make sense of these groups in the context of an election — policy and ideology aren’t good frames of reference. There just isn’t much in terms of policy or ideology that unites these groups.

Anybody who claims to have the winning formula for winning moderate, independent or undecided voters is making things up. Perhaps more centrist policies will appeal to some voters in each of these categories — but so will more extreme policies....And come election day, these potential swing voters may not ultimately care all that much about policy. They don’t tend to identify themselves based on ideology, and they don’t follow politics all that closely.

[NCProgressive]

95. blah blah blah blah blah blah

[Generic Brad]

98. Because.....South Carolina

He is far from the most popular candidate there and significantly underperformed there today. Just a few days ago there were folks here claiming he was leading in some polls there. Today proved to me he is not nearly the juggernaut his campaign is claiming he is.

[NYMinute]

99. Another strawman ... no thanks