Can Sanders or O'Malley win? Yes. How? Basic math.

[MADem]

39. O'Malley winning VA? That's a tough one.

O'Malley hasn't started any wars, and everyone named Bush has--the military - industrial complex is big business in that state.

A few more people know who Sanders is because he's gone on TV a lot, but most Americans could not pick O'Malley out of a line up. They don't know his first name, don't know what state he's from, don't know what his last big job was, and don't know a thing about him. He's just not on the radar. He's got a lot of backstory to cover to get people invested in him. I get the sense he's running for a cabinet position.

I can't see Sanders taking CO (9 electoral votes). Bush will nab that if he's the candidate (and it will probably be Bush, unless he makes more mistakes and I think he's learned his lesson), unless, of course, Bush wants to shut down the pot game. And Iowa? No one lives in Iowa--they only have six lousy electoral votes. That's not going to make up for FL, which Bush would take in a walk. He'd also take NV, because I think the casino owners would regard Bush as a more reliable ally.

Also, a lot of those supposedly blue states are tricky. I wouldn't count on California if it came down to Sanders v. Bush. That state elected AHHHH-NULLLLLD. Jeb is not as clunky and stiff as his brother, and he knows how to be CHARMING. He also speaks flawless Spanish. He was on Fallon the other night, and he killed it--he was relaxed, able to take a joke, looked "tanned, rested and ready." He also drank a strong rum beverage on the air (demonstrating that one COULD have a beer--or a coquito, mojito, or whatever with him, if one was so inclined). Bush is dangerous-he will be a strong candidate, even with his missteps thus far. Sanders can't do that shit, he won't do jokey slow jams, he won't pal around and play the "regular guy" --he's all business and he comes off like a crabby old man, and many voters are stupid. They feel if a candidate can't be relaxed and have fun that they won't be effective on the world stage. And of course some don't care about issues, they care about who they want to have a BEEEER with....

As for spending, I can't see how Sanders can close the money gap. He can't run on an "anti corporatist" agenda, refuse corporate cash (not that they'd give him any), eschew super-PACS, and expect to win. He will be BURIED. A lot of people who would open their wallets for Hillary won't do that for him, not because they don't see him as a nice guy with some of the same ideas, but because they know it would be a waste of money--there's just no way that personal donations can overcome the Citizens United cash.

I don't buy "quite easily" at all, not unless both candidates raise their profiles enormously, and Sanders decided to take that filthy lucre that is corporate campaign cash. With Sanders as the nominee, you're going to see a lot fewer blue states. Lo siento mucho, but that's just the way it is.