Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gothmog

(143,999 posts)
4. Your comment would have more meaning if someone explains how Sanders is a viable candidate
Sat Sep 12, 2015, 03:18 PM
Sep 2015

Now when people talk about the importance of traditional politics and things like ground games, we are attacked that we do not understand the new politics and the Sanders revolution. I have repeatedly asked for an explanation as to how Sanders will be viable in a general election campaign where the Kochs will be spending $887 million and the RNC candidate will be spending another billion dollars and have been told that traditional political wisdom does not matter.

The premise of the article cited in this thread is that traditional campaign infrastructure mattets and money matters. The Clinton campaign has build a great ground game operation and will be relying on tested and traditional methods to turn out voters. The experts cited in the article in the OP put a value on these concepts.

I am glad that Sanders is attempting to build a ground game in some states. The experts cited in the above article are doubting that Sanders will be able to match the Clinton campaign operation. Time will tell.

I am basing my support now in large part based of the concept of viability in the general election. I keep asking about this issue and the answers that I are not satisfactory and it appears that sources cited in the article share this view.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Politico--Insiders: Clint...»Reply #4