Are you talking about the primaries in Texas or the general? If it’s the general, you’ve already made up your mind in February that you’ll vote for Trump if you don’t get your way with Khlobachar? I’d be interested to know why you’d go from Khloe to Trump? She’s much closer to Bernie than Trump. She’s just sold herself as more pragmatic but with the same overall values. I feel like people that go to this length just don’t really understand Bernie as president within the confines of normal democracy vs Trump who is literally trying to destroy the confines of democracy. Hence this weeks preview of his second term where he’s corrupting the justice department with his lackey AG. I’m just trying to understand how someone could be honest about being engaged in the Dem primary and then in the end, say my guy/woman lost so I won’t vote for a Dem in the general and will then actively or passively vote for Trump.
The Obama thing is what's hilarious to me. Some Democrats are afraid of Bernie being labeled a scary socialist like they were completely asleep while Republicans did that very thing to Mr. Moderate in Obama. It doesn't matter who Democrats nominate, they're going to be the socialist, hate America candidate to all the Trumpanzees out there.
Thank you for the answer and I find it reassuring the numbers your citing about independents. That said not all independents are the same and I've heard Trump supporters citing his success among independents. For Sanders as an independent / Socialist. If we're counting people who are also Socialists and Greens (who may be counted as independents if there isn't party affiliation on the ballot). For example for much of my adult life I've not been a Democrat. Even though I've lived in Minnesota for 20 years I've never voted for Amy Klobuchar and campaigned against her in her Senate elections. I've been a member of the Minnesota Independent Party (Jesse Ventura's party) but on national ballots my position is listed as "independent". Also has been noted even though Clinton failed she still got millions more votes than Sanders in the primaries and millions more than Trump in the general. She ran an awful campaign and was blindsided by Comey. I'm not sure those can just be ignored. As far as Sanders winning in Vermont I'm not sure Vermont's Republican party can be compared to the current GOP. The last statewide Republican was Jim Jeffords who famously changed parties in 2001 giving. Regarding the new voter numbers as said in the first two races we're not seeing an overwhelming number of new voters and if Sanders is the one that is bringing them in he hasn't been able to pull away from Pete Buttigieg. I would still feel more comfortable if a specific race where someone as liberal as Sanders as flipped a Republican held seat.
GOP rhetoric will label and any and all Democrat a Socialist but the difference was that Obama convinced many that he wasn't that extreme. Sanders makes no bones about that he is that extreme. His whole candidacy is based on extremism whereas Obama's was based on the vague message of "Hope and Change"
Totally. Not only was Obama a socialist, he had the scary Muslim name only a few years post 9/11. Look... here's my thing. I hear all the time from my Trumper friends & family that "oh if the Dems nominate Bernie or Warren... THEN I won't vote for them", and I just keep thinking to myself... Really... Are you REALLY going to vote for Amy Khlobachar, or Biden instead of Trump?? Really? Or are you just full of it trying to seem like you aren't a closet Trumper and just want to seem independent? I just want to know if us Dems really did rally around a Khlobachar or Biden just to keep Bernie from being nominated so we have a chance at courting these voters if that would really even work to court their vote or are all of these folks full of it, and would never not vote for Trump? I honestly don't know but my gut tells me they are just worried about not seeming independent because they deep down know Trump is toxic even though they love him.
It is interesting but I don't understand why this question is being asked because the primaries will tell the tell. Here is the full article. https://news.yahoo.com/new-yahoo-ne...als-181522968.html?.tsrc=notification-brknews
An Unsettling New Theory: There Is No Swing Voter. https://www.politico.com/news/magaz...rofile-election-forecasting-new-theory-108944
This poll makes what Warren is doing even more mystifying. Bernie killing everyone else in the head to head except Warren. Warren could have tag teamed everyone in the field with Bernie, and then when the 2 of them were left standing, made her move. Instead, Warren made deals with Biden and Klobuchar to attack Bernie and now she is struggling. smh. She could have been the chosen one.. smh..
Not sure if she has "made deals" per se, possible but until I see hard evidence it's all hearsay. I think it's just her staffing choices. Hiring a bunch of former Obama/Clinton campaign staffers to run a campaign in an environment where the politics have dramatically shifted in the last 5 years was foolish. She is no doubt a very intelligent policy wonk. But her political instincts time and again have proven to be horrible. She may be the best "progressive technocrat" we have, but she is not the disciplined political force that Bernie is.
I wont vote for Bernie in the primary and I wont vote for him in the general. That does NOT mean I will be voting for Trump either ... That's just you jumping off the cliff of assumption and you know what they say about assuming - Ass - U - Me. I'll vote for any of the moderate Dems in the general , if its Bernie , I'll either stay home , leave POTUS blank or write in someone who's palatable to me. And don't come preaching to me about wasting my vote - It's my vote to use how I see fit and no vote that's cast is wasted. Neither Bernie or Trump will get my vote under any circumstances.
All those people crying that Bernie supporters won't support the eventual democratic nominee come get your boy, lol. Only "democrat" I won't vote for is Bloomberg.
I'm sorry, but I very much disagree with the notion that Bernie didn't have an impact on the results of the 2016 election. You compared the 2008 election regarding Clinton primary voters to the actions of Sanders primary voters in 2016, a comparison I find a bit nonsensical, with all due respect. So why do you think 12% of Bernie's supporters voted for Mr trump? In my opinion, they were certainly influenced by his lackluster endorsement of Hillary Clinton. By waiting an entire month to give Hillary his lukewarm endorsement, he made clear that the "endorsement" was halfhearted. You said it took that long because Bernie was "negotiating" with Hillary over what she would include from Bernie's platform in her own, that he "wanted to do what he could for the American people." Has it occurred to you that the most important thing he could have done for the American people was to insure that trump didn't get elected? Talk about putting the cart before the horse! And think about this. Mr trump won the election by the slimmest of margins. Hillary received 3,000,000 more votes than the Liar in Chief, yet had less than 100,000 votes gone to her instead of trump, she would have won and the nightmare the American people and our collective nation have been undergoing very likely would have been avoided. 12%! Here are some numbers to think about. During the Democratic primaries of 2016, Bernies Sanders received 13,206,428 votes, compared to the 16,914,722 that voted for Hillary. That's a difference of 3,708,294 votes between the two. Now take 12% of 13,206,428. I'm not the best at math, but I come up with 1,584,771 votes. This is from the Washington Post. Read it and think about those 12%. Donald Trump will be president thanks to 80,000 people in three states By Philip Bump National correspondent Dec. 1, 2016 at 2:38 p.m. CST Three-weeks-plus after Election Day, there are still more votes to count in California than were cast in each of nine states and D.C. Most of the votes that have been (slowly, laboriously) counted in the state have been votes for Hillary Clinton, giving her a 4.1 million-vote lead in that state that's powering her 2.5 million-vote lead nationally. It takes Donald Trump's margins in the seven states where he saw the biggest vote advantages to make up Clinton's lead in California alone. (All of these figures thanks to Cook Political's Dave Wasserman.) But, of course, none of this matters. All that matters is that Trump got more electoral college votes, thanks to having won more states. In many cases, those wins were much more narrow than Clinton's, which also helps power the gap between the electoral vote and the popular one. Trump won 18 states by fewer than 250,000 votes; Clinton, 13. The most important states, though, were Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Trump won those states by 0.2, 0.7 and 0.8 percentage points, respectively — and by 10,704, 46,765 and 22,177 votes. Those three wins gave him 46 electoral votes; if Clinton had done one point better in each state, she'd have won the electoral vote, too. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ident-thanks-to-80000-people-in-three-states/ Twelve percent of Bernie's voters voted for trump, not because they liked him, I find that very hard to believe, but because they felt Bernie had been "wronged" somehow by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party and they were going to express their displeasure by voting for the madman we have in the White House today. In my humble opinion. Also in my humble opinion, that could have largely been avoided had Bernie done the traditional thing and given Hillary a strong endorsement shortly after he had lost the nomination. An endorsement similar to that given by Hillary to Barack Obama. But hey, he had more important things on his mind than insuring that Ms Clinton won that election. Mr Sanders had to do his negotiating for the American people. For a month. Look, I appreciate that you wish people like B-Bob and myself no ill will, and I am certainly not angry at you about your posts. I just wish those who support Bernie today could own up the the fact that he helped put trump in the White House. Did he make the difference between a Democratic victory and trump being defeated? I've been wondering just how many Bernie supporters voted for trump. Thanks for clearing that up. I'll point out that the 12 percent doesn't account for those who stayed home, or voted for the Green Party, or voted Libertarian. In my opinion, he could very well have made the difference. This is what Bernie helped bring about and this is bad enough by itself. From Wikipedia: As of February 12, 2020, the United States Senate has confirmed 192 Article III judges nominated by President Trump, including 2 Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, 51 judges for the United States Courts of Appeals, 137 judges for the United States District Courts, and 2 judges for the United States Court of International Trade.[2] There are currently 33 nominations to Article III courts awaiting Senate action, including 32 for the District Courts and 1 for the Court of International Trade.[3] There are currently 1 vacancy on the U.S. Courts of Appeals, 70 vacancies on the U.S. District Courts, 2 vacancies on the U.S. Court of International Trade,[3] and 5 announced federal judicial vacancies that will occur before the end of Trump's first term (all for District Courts).[4] Trump has not made any recess appointments to the federal courts. A large number of those judges, not "just" the two critical Supreme Court judges, are lifetime appointments. I like you a lot, @ThatBoyNick. I just wish folks like you would face reality when it comes to Bernie Sanders and the 2016 election. In my humble opinion, he helped elect Mr trump. It is one of the reasons that I'm not a fan of the fellow. What concerns me the most, however, is that I have strong doubts that he can win the 2020 election.
Just curious, how would you rank the following reason as to why Hillary lost? I just compiled a list of many oft-talked about theories about why Trump won, an interesting experiment to see the difference in our thought processes. a) Anti-establishment/Populist sentiment on both sides during the entirety of the 2016 primaries and general election b) Poorly run campaign/messaging by the Hillary Clinton Campaign c) Hillary's baggage (2nd most unpopular candidate to ever run) d) Sexism/Racism/Xenophobia/White-Nationalism stoked by Trump e) Voter suppression (voter id laws in states like Wisconsin, voter purging, less polling locations/weird-times) f) Bernie Sanders waiting too long to nominate In my opinion, I would rank them like this: a) Anti-establishment/Populist sentiment on both sides during the entirety of the 2016 primaries and general election e) Voter suppression (voter id laws in states like Wisconsin, voter purging, less polling locations/weird-times) c) Hillary's baggage (2nd most unpopular candidate to ever run) d) Sexism/Racism/Xenophobia/White-Nationalism stoked by Trump b) Poorly run campaign/messaging by the Hillary Clinton Campaign f) Bernie Sanders waiting too long to nominate Btw, there is no need to defend/explain your rankings, just trying to gauge your perception on the issue. If you want add more things I left out, please do, this was a pretty hastily put together list. Lastly, I find the idea that Sanders had so much control over his own followers that endorsing sooner would have had any significant effect on their electoral choice laughable. Like what, if he endorsed 3 weeks sooner then 100% of his voters would have gone to Hillary? Gimme a break. I knew well before he endorsed that I would vote against Trump. However, seeing Hillary's ability to respect and work with Bernie on some policy positions made it easier to vote for her. But ideologically, it was still a tough vote to cast.
