Senior Fox News guy thinks Joe's got momentum Way more importantly, he thought this while checking his bank balance at SunTrust, presumably seeing if he had enough to buy some "Sexy Vixen Vinyl...", whatever that is.
Joe Biden is trying to win the Presidential election, not start a movement. No, you won't see him growing a beard and hiding out in the dense hills. So? So? All he needs is people to show up and vote. Yes, but he also wasn't the LAST choice for 2/3rds of democratic voters like Sanders. We will see how it plays out at the ballot box. I don't mean that to be snarky either.... I don't know what will happen any better than anyone else. Likely because Biden has said things like that for 40 years. Further, I have not seen a whole lot of coverage or concern over Sander's heart attack at nearly 80 years old......... and the HUGE gorilla in the room with Sanders hasn't really been touched upon much either........ how is he going to pay for 100 trillion dollars of programs when when his own proposals only pay for about 40% of it.
What does that mean? Be specific. Do I think that individual politicians involved in the DNC have the right to express their opinions and state who they believe has the best chance of winning? Absolutely. Someone could argue that Sanders is fortunate that he has been allowed to run by the DNC seeing that he isn't a democrat.
It being unethical or not is subjective obviously. But the mechanism is the clout the DNC party leaders have on mainstream news media especially CNN and MSNBC. My father watches MSNBC religiously. It's his background noise. He regurgitates the same exact talking points about Bernie not being a Democrat and the whole Bernie Bros narrative. DNC establishment leaders have immense clout in these two networks. The editors and pundits are a revolving door between DNC politics and working for these networks. They can spam about random angry tweets from unverified accounts as some type of news worthwhile to report. Just like with any bias in the media, it isn't about bald face lying. It's about choosing what stories to promote and which ones to ignore.
The actual party chairmen such as Tom Perez or Debbie are very open in their preferences of Clinton or anyone but Bernie. Now is it ethical or not is subjective and I don't think I'll ever convince you it's unethical given the monopoly stranglehold that two parties have in our electoral process. But the party leadership openly having a preference does put the thumb on the scale.
Bernie *isn't* a Democrat - that's just fact. It's his choice. He's never run a single general election as a Democrat. He hasn't contributed to supporting or building the party, etc, etc. Bernie Bros are complained about everywhere - the media running with it is a recent phenomenon. Candidates and other organizations have been complaining about them forever. But how is that different than the media covering the death and massive failures of Biden's campaign over the last month? Or Pete's struggles with black voters? Or Bloomberg's sexism? If the DNC was in control and wanted to prop up "their guy", one of those things wouldn't have happened depending on their candidate of choice. The last several weeks have been nonstop coverage about the unstoppable nature of Bernie's campaign. Was that the DNC? This is my fundamental problem with Bernie voters: they always look for an external excuse instead of internalizing the failures of their campaign. Every time something fails for Bernie, it's always someone else's fault. It's literally the exact same thing Trump does. Blame the media. Blame conspiracies. Blame the establishment. Every campaign has negative coverage. Only Bernie's blames the DNC for it.
DNC panicking, all hands on deck to take down Bernie. Be careful what you wish for because Bernie will expose mentally deteriorating, creepy uncle Joe. Dude can barely put together two sentences without bumbling and stumbling.
It's pretty obvious that MSNBC disproportionately criticizes Bernie compared to the other candidates. The problem with your entire paradigm of party purity is that our electoral process gives no room outside the two parties. To me it isn't morally right and in line with our Constitutional principles that we essentially have elite party members from two parties who are the sole arbiters of filtering out which candidates they desire to be our legislators, presidents and judges. Why are you so obsessed with defending this type of system? In my view, if Bernie gets the most delegates and votes from Democrat voters, he's a Democrat because it's Democrat voters who elected him. I couldn't give two ***** about the party leaders. Their "hard work" is fundraising money at 2000 dollars a plate fancy dinners. We need to move past "he's not a Democrat". It's a vapid petty reason. I just am not comfortable having a group of two elite party members filtering who is electable. At a certain point these people who hold these positions of clout long enough eventually only start caring about maintaining that clout rather than serving the party electorate.
You're not wrong but you are because Bernie is more democrat than the democratic party at the moment. The Left specifically has been out flanked by the Right in tapping in and syncing up with the base. Right is extreme and energized while Left is stale, uninspiring, waffling, same old same old. Well except for Bernie who is also extreme and exciting but viewed an outcast by the out flanked, out outmaneuvered, Left establishment. If I were Bernie I would take that as a compliment LOL!
Huh? Pretty sure the DNC is panicking a whole lot less than a week ago. It is simple. If Sanders can get to 51%, he will be the democratic nominee. Why is it that Sanders supporters cannot accept that they (at this point) do not speak for the majority of Americans and not even the majority of democrats. That can possibly change in the future; but at this point Sander's speaks for 1/3 of the democrats. That is the problem. Modify or temper the message to be inline with the majority of Americans. That will likely not happen though, because Sanders is a fundamentalist.
Biden speaks to about roughly the same percentage of Democrats. Biden most likely will not get above 50% of delegates either.
The reason it's relevant is that this isn't just an election for President. The Democratic Party is nominating people for federal, state, and local offices through their primaries. And the person at the top of the ticket affects every other race down ballot. So while Bernie supporters - often younger, less engaged, etc - don't care as much about who wins the Texas House, longtime Democrats *do*. Because it affects state and local policies, and this time around, it affects who controls redistricting for the next decade. So it's not just about the Presidency for the DNC and for people who've spent their lives building the party. If they see someone who could win the nomination with 35% of the vote, 40-45% of the delegates, and cause downballot carnage to all the things they are fighting for, they'll make that case that it's bad for the party and the ideals the party is espousing. There's nothing wrong that. Similarly, Bernie can make the argument that Obama caused downballot carnage all over the country in 2010-2014. That's nothing wrong with that argument either. But Bernie and his supporters are going to have to live with "unfair" arguments. Trump isn't going to be "fair" to him. The primaries are a testing ground for candidates. If he can't hold off Democrats attacking him, what does that say about how he'll handle a general election?
Perhaps, I do not watch MSNBC as it is just masterbation for liberals. This is really a separate issue. Are you talking about a plurality? What if he gets 33%......... but the other 67% view him as their least agreeable candidate? Do you believe that the delegates won from prior candidates have no say in who they support? Why should we move past "he isn't a democrat" if he is running as a democrat?
We will see what happens. the pie will be bigger with several candidates dropping out...... it should be down to 3 candidates soon and possibly 2...... one of them will start moving towards 50% of the vote and separate themselves from the other. Perhaps that is Sanders, and if that is the case, he will get the nomination........ perhaps it will be Biden and in that case he gets the nomination.
There is nothing that does or has prevented Sanders or anyone else from running as a third party candidate. Sanders made the decision to run as a democrat because he wants the benefits that come with being attached to the party. There is nothing in the constitution that says that there can only be two parties, nor is there anything that says parties should or should not exist. The party is nothing more than like minded people with the same goals coming together to build a platform and infrastructure to advanced those policies. The parties only survive if they win elections...... that is why they change with what the people want.
When I read this I keep hearing Liberty Biberty. Now it's back to the MSM plotting on Sanders. MSM=Deep State its why some compare you to Trump supporters.
