The New Hampshire Primary |Feb 9|: Live Free or Die

Status
Not open for further replies.
The current Democratic party is not going to change it. They will just gerrymander it in a different and equally exciting way, continue collecting paychecks from big business, and go along their merry way. The idea that a Democratic supermajority is going to fix the problems with this country is wishful thinking.

One or both of the parties needs to be upended, and ideally both of them.

then we're agreed this is just rhetoric then, since Bernie being elected wouldn't upend anything failing legislation being passed.
 
You talk like Bernie needs to have his supporters on a leash. He isn't just representing his own voice, he is acting as a guiding force for a larger movement. You even concede their are some valid similarities with MLK's socialist ideals. It's no different than when they bring up the socialist ideals of FDR. Stop acting like MLK is the trump card, he is a perfectly valid historical figure that is used to frame socialism as being inline with American values and isn't some scary or foreign. It's perfectly fine to go their, and quite frankly I think you're kind of cynicism doesn't do any good. Once again holding concern and patronizing people who are perfectly capable of following through to hear justifications of comparison.

I would say that Dr. King means more to black people as a historical figure than FDR means to the general American. But, by all means, they can go ahead and keep making the comparison. I'll wait for his approval with black people to start shooting up any day now...
 
Now, if Bernie is smart he'll avoid this argument like the plague as he moves into states with larger black populations, because there are a lot of black people who ARE following this primary season and are aware of Bernie Sanders, and are getting increasingly pissed off by this patronizing line of thinking. And these are the black folk that are informing the ones who may not be paying attention.

Also, might get some flack for this, but the single biggest thing Bernie could do to turn a few black heads, is more directly come out against his more rabid supporters. Bernie Twitter is really killing it for campaign right now with black voters.


I admire your passion, but I just want you to know that you do not inherently represent the majority or even a significant amount of Democratic African Americans just because you're black. That [inferred] line of reasoning is just as patronizing and insulting as the line of reasoning that asserts that the only reason that black democratic voters support Hillary is because they don't know who Bernie is, and as a fellow gay African American who is politically engaged, it's starting to irritate me a bit.

Now, I'm not saying that you're arguing that you definitively speak for all democratic African American voters, but I've been paying attention to your posts for quite some time and it is clear that you have no qualms about speaking for black democratic voters, which is a problem, imo.

Presumably, you're not a reputable pollster, and outside of anecdotes, you would have no earthly idea on how many black democrats are being pragmatic in their decision to vote in the primaries or how informed they are, and even if you had scientific polling data to support your 'theories', you wouldn't necessarily be right.

Not long ago, nearly all politically scientific polls suggested that Hillary Clinton favored black democratic voters across the board, yet ACTUAL RESULTS in New Hampshire have shown that Bernie Sanders won over nearly every single demographic in the state. In light of that data, we need a better explanation for how this was possible, and it ain't gonna come from the notion that New Hampshire is 'too liberal' and 'too white'.

I suspect that Bernie having a stronger ground game in New Hampshire than Iowa had something to do with his sweep of demographics, and the impact that it had is not something that the polls could accurately forecast (there was a significant amount of voters who decided on their candidate only within the last few days after all). If Bernie can continue to spread his message at the street level in states where he's perceived to have a huge disadvantage, then I think he may have a fighting chance, regardless of how informed the voters are.

So what am I saying? Are most black democrats simply low information voters and need to see the light so that they, too, may feel the bern? Absolutely not. But that doesn't mean that there aren't a significant portion of minorities that are low information voters simply due to their minority status inherently putting them at a priority disadvantage when it comes to politics. Maybe there are a significant amount of low information minority voters out there, but it isn't necessarily because they're stupid, rather, they may just have more pressing matters to contend with.
 
Here's a stealth attack: It's highly questionable that you won't show your support for a candidate because his supporters are sizeable, young and passionate. No shit there will be bad eggs and people whose passion yields anger. You find the same of all large groups of people. Saw the same shit with 'obama boys' in 08.

Question it all you like. I tend to look at all sides of a candidate, including the types of people they draw to their side. Trump draws lots racist assholes. Bernie seems to be drawing lots of smug loudmouths.

I don't expect a candidate to have perfect followers. But when there are so many who are so hostile and pushy (especially when they're being pushy on shit they know nothing about. Like how Sanders can just push thru so much change as President...because Congress isn't a thing and a gerrymandered House isn't a thing), it turns me off to the man himself.

At this point, the candidates are products. They're trying to sell themselves to the American people. Their supporters are sales representatives. I don't buy anything from anyone who shouts in my face, calls me names, and can't help but mention their product every minute of every day no matter the topic of conversation. It drives me away. And I know for a fact I'm not the only one.

I literally went from undecided on both of them to leaning Hillary to actively hoping Sanders loses. And it's honestly more about his supporters than about him. I mean, they line up on 93% of their records and they're both Washington insiders (sorry Berniebros, but you can't work in Washington for 30 years and call yourself an outsider). And they're both a damn far sight better than what the GOP is tossing out there.

I've felt the Bern and I'm not interested.

Wait. Strike that. I think I'd enjoy watching him win the general election, if only to watch the salt in a couple years when those eager millennials realize that the political system in America is literally built to keep sweeping change--like what Sanders is promising--from happening. The Founders didn't want the passions of a moment or the fury of a movement to be able to destroy what they'd risked everything to create.

Change comes in steps. It's going to be a painful lesson for the people believing everything Sanders is saying, but it's true. Has been for a couple hundred years now. And it's not like Sanders is unique. People have won elections in the past by promising just as big and then delivered almost nothing. Because they couldn't. Because Presidents don't write laws.

So yeah. Sanders supporters can scream themselves hoarse if that's how they want to get a point across. As long as their voices return in time to start crying out loud when they realize that "politics as usual" is exactly how politics in America was designed to be. And unless Sanders plans on literally shredding the Constitution, it'll be that way long after he's gone.
 
The powder keg will not blow unless the system is fundamentally changed. Part of the issue is the landscape and the way American politics works has altered hugely since even the 1930s. It's much harder today to have such a powder keg blow. Look at Obama - after the disastrous Bush years, a collapsing economy, endless scandals... and still, the man came into office and expended virtually all his political capital on passing the neutered Affordable Care Act and disillusioned millions of progressive voters faced with the harsh reality of what a Dem president can reasonably due faced with a congress resolutely opposed to anything he wants to do.

And we can quantify how much has changed too. No president in history has been filibustered as much as Obama. It's literally unprecedented. So, one may say "nah", but you have to come up with a scenario in which "nah" actually serves as an honest response to the harsh realities of politics I'm stating here.

Watching the shit Obama had to go through was a pretty big wakeup call to me about how quick younger voters are to quit when things don't go their way (some Democrats running away from Obama's accomplishments also pissed me the fuck off too). How the power of personality can only go so far. What tools are available to the President to get anything done and the powers he actually has as President. It feels like a lot of other people weren't paying attention :(
 
I love the people saying Sanders couldnt do anything in office, as opposed to Hillary. like jesus christ how delusional is that lmao. i cant think of anyone republicans hate more, if anything there would be more gridlock under clinton then sanders
 
Question it all you like. I tend to look at all sides of a candidate, including the types of people they draw to their side. Trump draws lots racist assholes. Bernie seems to be drawing lots of smug loudmouths.

I don't expect a candidate to have perfect followers. But when there are so many who are so hostile and pushy (especially when they're being pushy on shit they know nothing about. Like how Sanders can just push thru so much change as President...because Congress isn't a thing and a gerrymandered House isn't a thing), it turns me off to the man himself.

At this point, the candidates are products. They're trying to sell themselves to the American people. Their supporters are sales representatives. I don't buy anything from anyone who shouts in my face, calls me names, and can't help but mention their product every minute of every day no matter the topic of conversation. It drives me away. And I know for a fact I'm not the only one.

I literally went from undecided on both of them to leaning Hillary to actively hoping Sanders loses. And it's honestly more about his supporters than about him. I mean, they line up on 93% of their records and they're both Washington insiders (sorry Berniebros, but you can't work in Washington for 30 years and call yourself an outsider). And they're both a damn far sight better than what the GOP is tossing out there.

I've felt the Bern and I'm not interested.

Wait. Strike that. I think I'd enjoy watching him win the general election, if only to watch the salt in a couple years when those eager millennials realize that the political system in America is literally built to keep sweeping change--like what Sanders is promising--from happening. The Founders didn't want the passions of a moment or the fury of a movement to be able to destroy what they'd risked everything to create.

Change comes in steps. It's going to be a painful lesson for the people believing everything Sanders is saying, but it's true. Has been for a couple hundred years now. And it's not like Sanders is unique. People have won elections in the past by promising just as big and then delivered almost nothing. Because they couldn't. Because Presidents don't write laws.

So yeah. Sanders supporters can scream themselves hoarse if that's how they want to get a point across. As long as their voices return in time to start crying out loud when they realize that "politics as usual" is exactly how politics in America was designed to be. And unless Sanders plans on literally shredding the Constitution, it'll be that way long after he's gone.

smug loudmouths? ok. what is with this forum
 
Someone please explain to me what Hillary will be able to accomplish with a Republican congress that Bernie wouldnt be able too?

Neither is going to get anything meaningful accomplished outside of SCOTUS appointments. The only difference is that with Hillary we will have ground troops in Syria.
 
then we're agreed this is just rhetoric then, since Bernie being elected wouldn't upend anything failing legislation being passed.
He could do quite a bit to mass surveillance, the drone program, the war on drugs, the way the Fed manages interest rates wrt unemployment, etc ...

... without any legislation. As for the rest...
You'd see real stagnation with a Sanders presidency. I'd love for everything he's campaigning on to come to fruition but he's not going to pass anything through congress without serious compromises. Four years later after Dems are disillusioned and Republicans are riled up after having a Socialist hold the presidency, the GOP will hold the executive branch again. Then instead of stagnation you'll get regression.
"elect Bernie" is not the end goal, since it doesn't change much on its own. It's merely a step. You still need public pressure to tighten the screws on the system. But again, this has happened before. It will happen again. It needs to happen soon.
 
OH! Benghazi now? OK, so at least we all know to ignore you going forward.

The cognitive dissonance. It is stifling. Is this how it always is around here? I usually steer clear of political threads. Apparently with good reason.

"Anything that reflects poorly on my candidate(s) of choice doesn't matter because reasons!"

Okay, guy. But no, you're right. Colin Powell shoplifting a can of soda is totally the same thing as Hillary looting a bank vault. So the reports that hundreds of emails contained information that was classified AT THE TIME are just bullshit? I guess so. See above. "Anything that reflects poorly on my candidate(s) of choice doesn't matter because reasons!"

Did you care when the Bush administration was ordered to hand over emails at the height of a scandal and deleted literally 22 million?

Yes. I did as a matter of fact. Not excited about getting another corrupt as fuck president into office. Bush fooled me in 2000 in some ways. But as a wise man once said. Fool me once, shame on... shame on you. Fool me twice... you can't get fooled again.
 
Because every candidate has zealots. Its not only Bernies campaign who has magically created them.

It is a problem, but not a problem that Sanders can control; that speaks of him as a person or that signifies a big margin of his supporters base. The average Sanders supporter looks more like a young women than a proto-Ron Paul supporter.

It's a problem he can help control, by focusing on the issues and quitting the Clinton is corrupt attacks.

Clinton has not, to my knowledge, used any attacks other then "How the fuck are you going to get this stuff passed?".

Meanwhile Sanders is indirectly creating this Clinton is a secret corrupt politician conspiracy.

You don't see Clinton pointing out Sanders links to the USSR, such as his honeymoon, as something questionable.
 
you think bernie is gonna get street fighter v?

Exclusivity deal is a symptom of the corrupting influence of the millionaire and billionaire class in video games, of the continuing inequality and assault against the fair distribution of software amongst all platforms. No Bernie is not going to get Street Fighter V.

/s
 
I would say that Dr. King means more to black people as a historical figure than FDR means to the general American. But, by all means, they can go ahead and keep making the comparison. I'll wait for his approval with black people to start shooting up any day now...

You use the ratings to prove Sanders is doing something wrong, not that black voters are more aligned with Clinton politically from the start. You can't change everyone's mind. But please continue to turn the narrative entirely, in every single thread, about how Sanders is snubbing racial issues and is tone deaf. All while acting like the black vote has always been a few consolations away and Bernie has simply been egregiously ignoring it.
 
It's a problem he can help control, by focusing on the issues and quitting the Clinton is corrupt attacks.

Clinton has not, to my knowledge, used any attacks other then "How the fuck are you going to get this stuff passed?".

Meanwhile Sanders is indirectly creating this Clinton is a secret corrupt politician conspiracy.

You don't see Clinton pointing out Sanders links to the USSR, such as his honeymoon, as something questionable.
The only part that would be a conspiracy is if it were somehow a secret.
 
I would say that Dr. King means more to black people as a historical figure than FDR means to the general American. But, by all means, they can go ahead and keep making the comparison. I'll wait for his approval with black people to start shooting up any day now...

I'm not sure that's a fair argument. You are assuming that these people on twitter are convincing a wide group of voters, and you are assuming they are influencing them negatively. If both of these were true, wouldn't you expect Sander's support to be decreasing?
 
Now, I'm not saying that you're arguing that you definitively speak for all democratic African American voters, but I've been paying attention to your posts for quite some time and it is clear that you have no qualms about speaking for black democratic voters, which is a problem, imo.

I speak for "black voters" inasmuch as I'm a black voter, and I know lots of black voters. But I make no argument that I'm the voice of black voters here. Hell, there are black voters on this site that I engage with. You're one of them.

I know a lot of informed black voters who are turned off by his "they don't know me yet" rhetoric. I think he stands to gain more by turning it way down and potentially getting those voters to reconsider him than he does by simply staying the course which, considering the polling data we DO have, doesn't seem like it'll pan out for him in the end.
 
Or if Sanders was actually the one creating it. She didn't need any help doing that herself.

Sanders has Republicans helping with that. When supporters started using Republican talking points, that was the moment I started getting worried.
 
I love the people saying Sanders couldnt do anything in office, as opposed to Hillary. like jesus christ how delusional is that lmao. i cant think of anyone republicans hate more, if anything there would be more gridlock under clinton then sanders

there will be an equal amount of gridlock. almost every Hillary supporter who makes this argument simultaneously admits that. We're voting for who we think is more likely to win the GE, so we can nominate Supreme Court justices. We're not willing to risk making millions of Americans lives worse with a destroyed Supreme Court (this is for real the biggest threat of the next presidency) by nominating a guy for a "conversation" when he has no chance of passing legislation and, for most of these same supporters minds, a much smaller chance of winning the GE. Having followed American politics for ages now, Bernie has no idea how lucky he has been to avoid the spotlight glare Hillary has got from Republican attackers. Bernie has shit in his closest that would destroy candidates five times as charismatic as he is. This is a country that swiftboated John Kerry on some bullshit. For merely looking like an arugula eating wind surfer, not for actually going to the USSR on honeymoon and admitting to being a socialist. He's gonna get savaged, is the idea.

But neither Bernie nor Hillary are getting legislation through of any significant scale. That's why Hillary has been emphasizing executive orders so much.
 
I love the people saying Sanders couldnt do anything in office, as opposed to Hillary. like jesus christ how delusional is that lmao. i cant think of anyone republicans hate more, if anything there would be more gridlock under clinton then sanders
This same argument applies to Clinton then. Why does she have a better chance at passing legislation without massive compromise? She doesn't. Bernie would have to compromise in the same way she would.

This may not be exactly related to this issue, but doesn't Bernie poll better with people outside of the Democratic party? Like... what? Lol.

Yeah, but at least with Clinton you know what you're getting into and you know Clinton will work to get more Democrats to get elected down ballot.

With Sanders there is no guarantee his revolution will die off once it is abundantly clear he will not get his lofty promises passed. There is also no guarantee he will be loyal enough to the Democratic party to help House and Senate members get elected. Or even that people would want his help in any case.
 
Seems like a lot of people are putting Marco Robot out of the picture. What are his odds of getting the nomination with his lackluster performance now?
 
I would say its wrong to do that because the supporters aren't the ones in office, and it seems a bit petty to alter your choice in such a large stake situation due to some people on twitter acting childish.

That being said, first impressions do matter, and rabid supporters for any candidate are likely doing more harm than good.

Because every candidate has zealots. Its not only Bernies campaign who has magically created them.

It is a problem, but not a problem that Sanders can control; that speaks of him as a person or that signifies a big margin of his supporters base. The average Sanders supporter looks more like a young women than a proto-Ron Paul supporter.

Ok, lets put it this way: How much overlap do you think there is between "Ron Paul supporters" and the average AA of voting age? Be it World outlook, income & feelings on the economy, feelings on race, stances on social issues, etc. Is it fair to say there isn't a lot? If there is little to no overlap, do you consider if surprising that the message that appeals to the first group is less appealing to the second group? Do you find it surprising that when said groups interact it tends not to go well?
 
I admire your passion, but I just want you to know that you do not inherently represent the majority or even a significant amount of Democratic African Americans just because you're black. That [inferred] line of reasoning is just as patronizing and insulting as the line of reasoning that asserts that the only reason that black democratic voters support Hillary is because they don't know who Bernie is, and as a fellow gay African American who is politically engaged, it's starting to irritate me a bit.

Now, I'm not saying that you're arguing that you definitively speak for all democratic African American voters, but I've been paying attention to your posts for quite some time and it is clear that you have no qualms about speaking for black democratic voters, which is a problem, imo.

Presumably, you're not a reputable pollster, and outside of anecdotes, you would have no earthly idea on how many black democrats are being pragmatic in their decision to vote in the primaries or how informed they are, and even if you had scientific polling data to support your 'theories', you wouldn't necessarily be right.

Not long ago, nearly all politically scientific polls suggested that Hillary Clinton favored black democratic voters across the board, yet ACTUAL RESULTS in New Hampshire have shown that Bernie Sanders won over nearly every single demographic in the state. In light of that data, we need a better explanation for how this was possible, and it ain't gonna come from the notion that New Hampshire is 'too liberal' and 'too white'.

I suspect that Bernie having a stronger ground game in New Hampshire than Iowa had something to do with his sweep of demographics, and the impact that it had is not something that the polls could accurately forecast (there was a significant amount of voters who decided on their candidate only within the last few days after all). If Bernie can continue to spread his message at the street level in states where he's perceived to have a huge disadvantage, then I think he may have a fighting chance, regardless of how informed the voters are.

So what am I saying? Are most black democrats simply low information voters and need to see the light so that they, too, may feel the bern? Absolutely not. But that doesn't mean that there aren't a significant portion of minorities that are low information voters simply due to their minority status inherently putting them at a priority disadvantage when it comes to politics. Maybe there are a significant amount of low information minority voters out there, but it isn't necessarily because they're stupid, rather, they may just have more pressing matters to contend with.


Not the best argument to make since I think she still does have the lead over blacks, and just because she had a overwhelming lead with them does not mean a small portion won't vote for Bernie. Lastly, in IW Hillary got 58% of the no-white vote judging by the exit polls in IW.
 
Watching the shit Obama had to go through was a pretty big wakeup call to me about how quick younger voters are to quit when things don't go their way (some Democrats running away from Obama's accomplishments also pissed me the fuck off too). How the power of personality can only go so far. What tools are available to the President to get anything done and the powers he actually has as President. It feels like a lot of other people weren't paying attention :(

I mean one thing is being obstructed, I certainly don't blame Obama for that. But then another thing is when Obama did things like offering to cut social security to appease the republicans. And people like you wonder why young people are apathetic. And not to say I think becoming apathetic is the right response, I don't think it is. But c'mon, saying young voters just quit because they didn't get what they wanted is simplistic as heck.
 
(Citation Needed)



GE Polls this early are truly useless.

Head-to-head polls might be, but its pretty established by now that Clinton is not well-liked at all among basically everyone who isnt a card-carrying democrat. Quite frankly she is a terrible candidate with a tremendous amount of baggage. She is incredibly lucky that she will get to run against an absolute disaster like Trump
 
are you seriously comparing anyone who doesn't think bernie would be a useless president to fucking anti-global warming groups?

I'm comparing anyone who wants to ignore the entire history of our country and the functioning of our government and instead believe a fantasy created in their heads because it makes them feel better to people who want to ignore the entire history of our climate as well as accompanying data to instead believe that it's all an invisible man in the skies doing... Yes
 
Seems like a lot of people are putting Marco Robot out of the picture. What are his odds of getting the nomination with his lackluster performance now?

I think he's been fatally wounded. Demonstrated to crack under pressure and be a bit of an empty suit.

He really needed to have a strong second place finish in New Hampshire to knock Kasich, Bush and Christie out of the race, so establishment support could rally behind him. He basically didn't get that meaning he's going to have to limp along in a bunch of unfavourable states and hope his establishment rivals somehow fuck up worse than he did.
 
I get so frustrated with Bernie pivoting back to economics when social justice issues are brought up. Economic issues are very important and why he has my vote, but economic policy doesn't erase racism or sexism or any other axis of oppression. He hired staff to have policy positions drawn up to deal with these issues after the BLM interruptions. Now he needs be willing to talk about them. Because Hillary not only has policy positions drawn up, she has a history of writing and advocating for laws in this area. Bernie is a solid, reliable vote for the right things, but he's not the guy proposing and pushing for them.

Bingo. The pivoting, the "class issues over race issues" rhetoric, and bringing up MLK despite knowing damn well how much his image has been tarnished for political gains in this country are stuff Bernie's campaign and supporters NEED to stop doing to court black voters.

I want Bernie to win. I want Bernie to look like an electable option. And one way he can do that is to make people of color FEEL like their issues matter. From Flint to PR.


I know folks want to rule out what Royalan's been saying because he supports Clinton, but he's been right on the money on what Bernie and Bernie supporters need to stop doing in order to win.
 
Ok, lets put it this way: How much overlap do you think there is between "Ron Paul supporters" and the average AA of voting age? Be it World outlook, income & feelings on the economy, feelings on race, stances on social issues, etc. Is it fair to say there isn't a lot? If there is little to no overlap, do you consider if surprising that the message that appeals to the first group is less appealing to the second group? Do you find it surprising that when said groups interact it tends not to go well?

I am not sure you are making the same point now. This current post seems to imply that Ron Paul supporters are unlikely to be African American.

This makes sense to me, because I feel as if Ron Paul's positions are innately detrimental to that community. Obviously they won't be likely to receive his messages as well.

What wouldn't make sense to me is not supporting him because someone got their feelings hurt on twitter. I don't feel like your post addressed this at all, and I feel like I am missing what you intended.
 
Seems like a lot of people are putting Marco Robot out of the picture. What are his odds of getting the nomination with his lackluster performance now?

He needs to turn it around in Nevada or he's done. 3rd is probably his best case scenario in SC, but he can't fall behind Jeb there again.
 
Okay... then so is making generalizations about how one candidate is going to do so much better because reasons. Thank you.
And why is Hillary suddenly going to do so well in the general exactly? Aren't they polling very close right now?
She also lost these states in 08 right? Like Bernie bros say, she's pretty much a Republican compared to bernie who currently isn't helping anyone but himself run. Southern seats are gonna get flipped with bernie on the ticket, as his "extremism" gets paired to them, especially in gerrymandered areas. Hillary can appeal to both sides for better or worse and isn't known for fighting against their own party until it suits them. Which helps when we try to get the country working together; instead of treating corporations like enemies, and probably getting nowhere, we can have some one they know to try to get them to push on issues.
 
I'm comparing anyone who wants to ignore the entire history of our country and the functioning of our government and instead believe a fantasy created in their heads because it makes them feel better to people who want to ignore the entire history of our climate as well as accompanying data to instead believe that it's all an invisible man in the skies doing... Yes
I have a feeling you think "the entire history of our country" is comprised of the post-Nixon presidencies. Some of the biggest changes in our social and economic structures have been the result of single, high-minded initiatives often accomplished in a 4-year term.
 
Seems like a lot of people are putting Marco Robot out of the picture. What are his odds of getting the nomination with his lackluster performance now?

I think he has no chance. There are some things you can come back from, but he was literally exposed as a fraud, and he was exposed in a way that he can't really make up an excuse for it or write it off as out of context.

It showed that he literally does not have 1 single idea of his own, and he believes in nothing other than what people tell him to believe in. That's not a leader, that's a follower.

He's finished.
 
I feel like this primary cycle is exposing fractures in the Democratic Party which may have long term implication going forward.

The way I see it, the Dems have four core groups:
- young liberals
- educated, middle-upper class professionals
- racial minorities
- older blue collar workers

The various groups have disparate goals, but have generally been able to unite over a common dislike of the GOP. With this cycle, the glue keeping everyone together is being undone.

Young liberals support Sanders in overwhelming numbers. This has already been well documented and I have little to add.

Educated professionals are less polarised, but edge Clinton. People with a masters degree and above in particular are more likely to side with Clinton. Sanders constant attacks on industries a lot of these people work in probably isn't helping. Anecdotally, I fall into this group, and have never hid the fact I think a Sanders nomination is one step away from gift wrapping the White House before handing it to the GOP.

Racial minorities currently are strongly Clinton, but while I do not believe Sanders can win them this cycle, I do believe a Sanders-like candidate can do so in the future. This is probably the most interesting group as while the Dems have historically treated minorities as a single bloc, communities like the African Americans, Hispanics and Asians are all culturally and socially different, and it will be interesting to watch those differences play out in future.

Finally, we have the older, blue collar workers of a bygone Democratic era. While still a force today, their importance is diminishing with each cycle. I personally am most interested to see if the young liberals will eventually age into a bloc similar to this one, or something else entirely.

Ultimately, I think Dems should be concerned as to whether their various groups will be able to hold together or if they are heading towards a fate similar to today's fractured GOP
 
I think he has no chance. There are some things you can come back from, but he was literally exposed as a fraud, and he was exposed in a way that he can't really make up an excuse for it or write it off as out of context.

It showed that he literally does not have 1 single idea of his own, and he believes in nothing other than what people tell him to believe in. That's not a leader, that's a follower.

He's finished.

Maddow compared it to Walker and other candidates where there were suspicions about them, then a singular event goes viral that confirms that and tanks their chances.
 
Maddow compared it to Walker and other candidates where there were suspicions about them, then a singular event goes viral that confirms that and tanks their chances.

Like Rick Perry being a bit of an idiot then he can't remember the name of the third government department he'd eliminate.
 
So because we can't be entirely sure what will happen, but we can with Hillary (for some reason), let's not try to take the clearly better candidate? Hmm, seems strange, but okay.

Why not?

I can't predict the future but nothing I say seems to be out of line, based on past experience.

What guarantee do you have that Bernie's revolution will fall flat on its face just like Obama's once it is clear that he cannot get any legislation passed? Will he be able to continue to make the Democratic party a stronger institution despite not being able to deliver, knowing that a more charismatic, younger, and more motivational person has not been able to accomplish even one tenth of what your fantasy is?

Absolute bullshit. Hillary is completely loathed by everyone who isn't a firm Democrat. Conservatives think shes pure evil and independents dont believe a single word she says.

Good thing the DNC is on her side then. The DNC will back stab Bernie and let Trump in before a socialist and outsider gets the party nomination. Their pride won't allow it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom