Lol, classic exclusion of Yang. Yang... and Bernie, have been subject to this type of stuff the whole campaign. Have you guys followed all of it? What about when they showed Yang's #s but a picture of some other guy named Yang... who happened to be a billionaire.
His campaign has been surging tremendously. Weird that it is coinciding with Bernie's rise since they fish from the same pool of support.
Usually 5th place or whatever is not reported on a lot. It is true that if it was KLobuchar or Pete i.e true status quo folks in all, the headline might be Pete or Klobu surge into 5th past past Gabbard and Steyer OMG .....!!
I will vote Dem no matter what againsi the Orange nutcase, However, let's say that so many Bernie supporters will not vote for just any Dem which is just another establishment attack on Sanders and his supporters, then if you really want to beat Trump you should vote for Sanders as the most electable. Of course this also gives credit to the idea that the supporters of all the mainstream Dems will vote Blue no matter who.
I think there are a lot of centrist Democrats who will just abstain from voting if Bernie is the nominee. Hell, multiple center left posters here have said they will not vote if Bernie is the nominee.
"This Is How Trump Would Destroy Bernie Sanders": https://thebulwark.com/this-is-how-trump-would-destroy-bernie-sanders/
@glynch question for you as it seems as though Bernie is really surging in the early primary states at the perfect time, and I feel like he's poised to be the nominee: What do you think is the strategy for Bernie's camp to break through in the transition states like AZ, NV, GA, TX, and even Florida? I've been pretty steady since the beginning that I feel Bernie will be really strong in the mid-west states but I see the low information suburban voters in the states mentioned with large suburban voting power as being a big problem for growing the electorate in the way the party really needs to in order to win back the Senate & keep the House. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/tx/texas_trump_vs_sanders-6819.html I have to admit that lately I have been feeling the Bern, and I'm more optimistic about his candidacy than I was earlier in the primary season. Not saying I'll vote for him in the Texas primary, and I am not a fan of the political knife fighting that his camp contributes to, but he's been a really strong force in building a really strong base that could carry him to the nomination. I think his strength that he's been so consistent over the years, and can really sell himself as a corruption fighter who isn't full of crap like Trump is really a plus. He just doesn't have the baggage that a Biden has even though I actually have a high amount of respect for Biden as well, and think the corruption smear campaign is garbage. I also worry about Bernie & his camp being able to not shun the folks in the party that I think are buyers for what Bernie is selling, but they don't know it yet. IE the so-called moderates who "think" Bernie is too far left, but only because of the disinformation about his platform, and the fact that he insists on using the term "Democratic Socialism" instead of just saying "I'm a Democrat".... even though he is. If you take out the "Socialist" tag-line, he's basically Sharrod Brown.
can't speak for glynch but I'm sure emphasizing his fondness for Castro should score Bernie some major points in FL
Why do you think the people who are not for Bernie are "low information voters"? So why would people not have a less than great opinion of a guy who admits that he is currently trying to hijack the Democratic party when he admits he is something else. The reason that he cannot do away with the socialist title is the reason I have no faith that he would get anything accomplished everybody has to play the game at some point that's just the way of life.
Jonathan Chait, "Running Bernie Sanders Against Trump Would Be an Act of Insanity." lol. tell us what you really think, Jonathan http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020...-trump-2020-nomination-popular-socialism.html excerpt: In the field of political forecasting, almost nothing is a matter of certainty, and almost everything is a matter of probability. If Democrats nominate Bernie Sanders — who currently leads the field in Iowa and New Hampshire, and appears to be consolidating support among the party’s progressive wing, while its moderates remain splintered — his prospects against Donald Trump in November would be far from hopeless. Polarization has given any major party nominee a high enough floor of support that the term “unelectable” has no real place in the discussion. What’s more, every candidate in the race brings a suite of their own liabilities Trump could exploit. That said, the totality of the evidence suggests Sanders is an extremely, perhaps uniquely, risky nominee. His vulnerabilities are enormous and untested. No party nomination, with the possible exception of Barry Goldwater in 1964, has put forth a presidential nominee with the level of downside risk exposure as a Sanders-led ticket would bring. To nominate Sanders would be insane. more at the link
Uhh... okay. I thought I was pretty clear about Bernie struggling more in states like Texas, GA, AZ, etc. (poling is pretty clear here) because of the larger amount of suburban voters. Those suburban voters we all know and love here in Texas in the suburbs...would you call those highly engaged policy wonks? The term low information voter isn't meant to be an insult. It's actually quite a healthy thing IMO in this country to focus your time & energy on things in your life more pleasant, fulfilling, & immediately productive although right now it's important to engage because of whats at stake in this election. I've also said it before that one of the issues I have with Bernie is his unwillingness to compromise on anything that could be a challenge in getting anything done as president, and could lead to alot of executive orders that again stretch the powers of the presidency. I like Bernie and feel he's genuine enough of a candidate to potentially be the best to go against Trump IF he can unify the party and also realize the potential to grow in the states I previously mentioned, but that would probably require him to grow, and change which is something I have a hard time believing he can do. I do feel like he's got the energy, the strong base, and the platform to take down Trump though. It's just a matter of how big a win to be meaningful.
Trump won off of fake populism, by lying to the American people about being a man for the working class. Bernie is a real populist, he's a real man of the working class, and for these reasons, I think he'd curb stomp Trump. Not only will Bernie bring in hoards of young voters, hoards of disenfranchised voters, bring in hoards of progressives, he'd also rightfully steal a number of Trump voters. All of the people that in America that were hurting and who voted for Trump are still hurting, they still hate the establishment, Trump has shown he's the establishment, he's a lying self-serving corrupt billionaire who's trying to **** the working class and poor just as hard as all the presidents before him. This is what people don't see, they see Bernie and see say that he's so far left that he'd never win over people on the right, but the appeal Bernie has goes beyond all of that, same appeal that Yang and Gabbard have had, the same appeal that Trump had last year, he's an outsider, anti-establishment, uncorrupt, for the working class and poor.
I'm talking about how their bases consist of both left and right people, populism on the right and left overlap a lot, therefore populist candidates get a unique mix of support, kind of like how Trump got a significant amount of Obama voters. But yes I agree neither have a large base nor shot a the presidency, same as Bloomberg, Pete, Klobuchar, Delaney, Steyer, Bennett, Deval.
