Actually read an article the other day about republicans doing this to prove that primaries should be closed. https://www.postandcourier.com/poli...cle_f1e7abd2-4788-11ea-aa9f-33a1d262994c.html
Or you could wind up being this loser who, with a 5-year old child with cancer, was jailed for failing to appear in court over unpaid medical bills: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coffey...s-is-jailing-people-over-unpaid-medical-debt/
Im not looking for a dogmatic perspective. The question is whether its good for the electoral process
I have a question for Sanders supporters. I agree that Sanders has the most passionate supporters and I too also believe that he will get more votes than Clinton did. I think he will get votes that won't make a much of a difference in the electoral college though. I've laid out my geographic argument regarding that moderate Democrats are responsible for the House majority by flipping districts that had been Republican. I will admit that I don't know the ideological leanings of all of those Democrats but my understanding is that most of them are moderate. If Sanders is to have a chance to win he clearly has to win states that Clinton lost. Can anyone identify in the last two elections where self identified Socialist or at least very liberal candidates who have attached themselves to Sanders platform have flipped GOP held House districts or won statewide elections in red leaning or purple states?
I don't know if I count as a Sanders supporter. But I know we've discussed the myth of the moderate voter before and some interesting articles have been posted about that. Moderates are only moderate on some issues and those issues are different among the moderate and independent voters. So a more centrist candidate isn't going to appeal to a large portion of those moderates. The liberal Sanders wouldn't either. I will say that the people that helped bring in the blue wave in the mid-term election were at least as much trying to vote in people to oppose Trump as they were strong supporters of the new representatives. So those voters will surely still be actively anti-Trump. Also the one thing Sanders has going for him is bringing new voters to the election so candidates where Sanders wasn't on the ballot and whether or not that worked for Democrats or not doesn't really seem applicable. I will say that I have spoken to a number of people who used to support Trump and are ready to move away from them but they simply will not vote for a candidate that identifies as a socialist. The problem is that they are in Texas or California. Their votes wouldn't change the outcome anyway. States that Trump won and is in danger of winning in the rust belt, and Midwest are places where Sanders message can resonate. He has the same independence of party that Trump did that is appealing to them. His policies are definitely more friendly to workers the problems facing the working class. There is no telling if that appeal with the addition of the new voters and energized Sanders base will be enough, but I don't think it is less in those battleground states than Mayor Pete's support or Amy Klobuchar. In the end it won't be easy for any of the Democratic possibilities but it would be possible for all of them. The main thing they need to do on offense is pick 3 of the stupidest things that Trump has said and/or championed and hit those. Those can be things that appeal to moderates regardless of which candidate is issuing the attack. I would go with 1. Trump is taking away money from our veterans military hospitals and child care for military families to build a wall he promised Mexico would pay for. 2. Trump's socialism giving working people's tax money to corporate farming interests is far more extreme and textbook socialism than anything Sanders or Warren have proposed. 3. Trump's administration has tried to take away coverage for pre-existing conditions and has sued multiple times to remove that coverage. He has already cost people their healthcare and isn't satisfied with it. Your healthcare coverage isn't safe with Trump in the White House, especially if he appoints more judges. I think hitting those issues would appeal to moderates no matter which Democratic candidate puts out the attacks. Repeat them over and over. Don't get sidetracked with Trump's 5 lies of the day, and don't harp on any of the countless other things he's done wrong. Stick with those issues and those only. He will do outrageous things in the meantime. Let the news cover those but the campaign should stay disciplined and focused. Only by repeating and showing the budgets and tweets to back it up in commercials over and over will it eventually sink in with voters. Right now the problem is that Trump does so many horrible things that none of them stick for very long. Meanwhile Warren who flubbed the native ancestry thing is identified with that because she hasn't done a million things wrong to distract people. Better to make Trump known for three things with wide appeal to liberals and moderates alike. Never stop pushing them and push them often. That's on offense. On defense Bernie will need to give a brief sound-byte length explanations on how his seemingly radical policies will be a benefit to the working middle class. That will also possibly appeal to moderates or at least take off some of the edge from those that wouldn't want to vote for him. He will also be pushing his proposals about what can work so it isn't a purely negative campaign. The Sanders campaign needs to avoid talking about some of the issues he supports so they he can frame his campaign into the ones that play best working class voters and those who want independence from the typical political system. That will require discipline as well. The hardest part will be staying disciplined and not getting distracted. I think that's the strategy for any of the candidates. There may need to be some tweaking of which three issues use against Trump. Other possibilities could be the separation of families in cages, his weak foreign policy and the fact that he has been easily used and manipulated frequently by America's adversaries.
I’ll defend @Os Trigonum on this one. The article states that even if you give all of Warren’s votes to Bernie, he still comes up 50,000 votes shy of his 2016 numbers. This is significant imo and a valid talking point. Caution: I’m also a Klobuchar enthusiast, so naturally I look at fissures in Bernie’s electability.
That's a good detailed response and I apologize that I don't have time at the moment to make a more comprehensive response. My own experience with moderates (Democrats, Republicans, and independents) who don't like Trump is that they will consider voting for most of the Democrats running except for Sanders. This is from Minnesota and Wisconsin two states that were won and lost by less than 2% points. I've also heard that same argument from many around the world. For example listen to this interview from former Republican Senator of NH, a state that Trump narrowly lost in 2016, regarding who he would support I agree that much of the vote flipping the House is do to anti-Trump but it still took specific candidates who were able to attract people across the spectrum. As I said my test is MN 2nd. That wasn't won by Ilhan Omar it was won by Angie Craig a moderate who defeated a very Rightwing sitting Representative. One other issue is that if we want to defeat Trump in a way that will be more resounding we shouldn't be looking to a narrow ideological win based on turnout in deep blue areas. If Trump is defeated across the ideological spectrum that is far more of a statement and one that it will be harder for him to fight to try to stay in office. It will be harder for Republicans who survive the election to back him on any argument he has regarding a rigged election if there are districts that were Republican flipping against him.
Bro. If he loses he will not try to stay in the whitehouse. The guy is almost senile at this point but he isn’t going to do that. Everyone should stop wasting their breath and time talking about it.
He'll probably leave the Whitehouse. But unlike previous president's who leave the office and stay quiet after congratulating their opponent for winning so a peaceful transition occurs, Trump will use the new new found bootlicking media outlets and social media outlets that he obtained through his presidency and spam the airwaves and social media about how the election was illegitimate and rile up his base to not accept the transition of power. That's what I worry about.
Well of course. I could make a paragraph entirely of negative adjectives to describe his personality. But yes he will b**** and moan for eternity about losing.
And that is quite unprecedented for a president leaving office. Most presidents understand the gravitas of their words and how delicate the transition of power is. Trump doesn't.
Add the other socialist in Warren and moderate in Biden to those numbers .... the Moderate lane is definitely much larger than the socialist lane.
I did not know how widespread the anyone, but Bernie discussion was. I still don't think that means they would all follow through. But it is riskier if that sentiment is prevalent in battleground states as well. I believe part of the problem with those that are against Bernie is because of how others have defined him and some misunderstandings (in some cases) of the programs he suggests. Hopefully, his campaign would be able to define itself and by repeatedly hitting on Trump's socialism at the same time, neutralize the argument somewhat. Trump's disdain for the military personnel given the way he has downplayed brain trauma suffered by troops serving our nation, taking away money from hospitals and childcare for his wall will also help win over some moderates.
I'm pretty sure the definition of socialism has been completely lost or co-opted to mean an entirely different thing by the right wing's successful campaign over the past 4 decades.
