I think misread it, he's saying Bernie will cause us to lose those states. In that case I think all the states where Obama won by less than 2% would be at risk.
Bernie can win in 2016
- Thread starter Dark_AnNiaLatOr
- Start date
- Status
I think misread it, he's saying Bernie will cause us to lose those states. In that case I think all the states where Obama won by less than 2% would be at risk.
Not sure how long Bernie could kick around for. But if he get's Warren on the ticket, she maybe be primed to run herself one day.
I think what Noam Chomsky said about the Sander's campaign is true. This upsweep of support will need to be maintained long after the elections if people want to see a shift.
teruterubozu
Member
New Hampshire loves Bernie though. I imagine he'd do well in Colorado too.
So it's either Sanders or a Republican nutjob...? Honestly, considering how catastrophic it would be for Republicans to have both Congress and the Presidency, I have no idea how people like you think.
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
That's the joke. None.
Without that coalition, some states are on jeopardy. Hillary driving women voters keeps her ahead.
Although I think many Republicans are hopeful people forget the racial, sexist things they have said.
Does Hillary really have that strong of sway with women voters? I haven't see the numbers, but most women that I've talked politics to, don't find her that appealing as a women in politics.
teruterubozu
Member
Almost guaranteed the GOP VP is going to be female. It's their only card vs Hillary.
ChosenPredator
Banned
he should come on neogaf and take the advice here,asap.
KuwabaraTheMan
Banned
Whoever wins the Democratic primary wins the general election. That's what it comes down to.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
No. This is a really common thing I see repeated that just isn't that true. Sanders' support is marginally more male than female - 53% of likely Sanders voters are men, 47% are women (the figures are exactly the reverse for Clinton). That's a tiny gap, and it doesn't account for very much of the difference in their performance. Sander's big problem is a) old people and b) minorities, especially the latter. He's actually more net favourable than Clinton among black voters who know who he is... but still a quarter of minority voters don't know who he is. The trouble is, his lead amongst white voters is so slim he can't really stop campaigning in Iowa to hit up the HBCUs and churches in places like South Carolina; he'll have to win Iowa, rely on the momentum from that to be able to ignore New Hampshire, and then hit South Carolina hard.
I used to think this as well. His following is actually huge considering almost everyone in my friend group and that I follow on social media is very vocal in their support of him. But after the Benghazi hearing I knew Hillary would probably be too big of an obstacle for him.
For me, it's six in one hand and half a dozen in the other. As long as a democrat is holding office next year I'm content.
For me, it's six in one hand and half a dozen in the other. As long as a democrat is holding office next year I'm content.
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Banned
Maybe he's not a democrat? I certainly am not one and I most likely am not voting for Clinton if she gets the nomination and I have listed some of my reasons in a previous post.
For the record, I might not vote in the primary because I don't know the tax implications that I would have since neither Clinton nor Sanders can be bothered to show me what their detailed tax plan is.
Like Clinton is not republican like hawkish.
"People like you think" That is an extremely condescending remark. So if he doesn't think like you and has different opinions, then he's wrong?
Jelly Rajah
Banned
Not really much of a chance at all.
There are still tons and tons of Americans who don't even know who Bernie is.
There are still tons and tons of Americans who don't even know who Bernie is.
Holy moley.
Bill Squabber
Member
Lets stop with the self-fulfilling prophecy and saying he can't win. Half the battle is overcoming that mindset. Many people on here like to bring up how Dems don't vote during midterms, then a candidate with actual liberal policies comes along, and those same people just brush him off and say he has no chance. Strawman, I know, but just go out and vote in the primaries people.
Setzer
Member
Apparently if the individual running has no integrity, is dishonest and two-faced then it's perfectly ok to give them your full support just because they share the same ideas as someone else? If you don't have confidence in the individual, same views or not, then why should they have your support? I have more confidence in Sanders than I do Hilary. That's just my opinion but apparently if I don't share the same opinion as you or everyone else then I'm wrong. I guess that's how politics work?
I never said I was voting Republican so I don't know where you got that from. IF it comes down to Trump or Hilary then I'll either not vote or I'll vote Hilary because she's the lesser of the two evils.
It's a seriously frustrating mindset, and people somehow think they are still entitled to complain about the ends up transpiring. As if campaigning isn't part of a larger political push whether your candidate wins or not.
I don't know about other people, but I honestly don't know anyone who's wild about Hillary. Sure, a handful of my friends support her, but not with much enthusiasm, simply because she's the democrat everyone's heard of. Whereas it seems that Bernie's supporters would be willing to do almost anything to get him elected.
The polls honestly aren't that important right now, especially for Iowa. A caucus isn't simply walk in, vote, walk out. Typically the political junkies tend to dominate in that field, and as I just said I don't know anyone who is extremely interested in politics that supports Hillary. The Iowa Caucus requires a level of dedication and structure that I'm not sure Hillary has.
That said, Bernie is still the underdog but I wouldn't be surprised if he wins Iowa. And I think he actually has a great shot at winning NH. If both of those occur then Hillary is in deep trouble.
The polls honestly aren't that important right now, especially for Iowa. A caucus isn't simply walk in, vote, walk out. Typically the political junkies tend to dominate in that field, and as I just said I don't know anyone who is extremely interested in politics that supports Hillary. The Iowa Caucus requires a level of dedication and structure that I'm not sure Hillary has.
That said, Bernie is still the underdog but I wouldn't be surprised if he wins Iowa. And I think he actually has a great shot at winning NH. If both of those occur then Hillary is in deep trouble.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
The kind of people who say that are the kind of people who don't vote in general elections to begin with. I don't care at all about Bernie supporters who whine incessantly that they won't vote for Hillary in the general. It's a statistically insignificant number of people in terms of the general election turnout.
Giant Panda
Member
Bernie winning a general election isn't impossible if he would face Trump or Cruz, but his victory would be more unlikely. I don't think the added risk is worth it though, and I think Bernie is likely to be too leftish economically anyway to make him a good President. I like his social policies but Clinton provides an overall package of policies closer to what I want.
Sanders probably wouldn't do too badly against the Republican nominee, but he probably wouldn't win by as much as Clinton. Moreover, his effect on down-ticket races would be a lot less positive than Clinton's would be. In the end, Clinton is the clear favorite of the Democratic party, and she should end up winning the nomination pretty handily.
Why just against Trump? Why not against the rest of the Republicans?
Beer Monkey
Member
The system is broke re: the importance of factors like superdelegates and endorsements.
So no, he can not win.
Promise me you'll vote for Hillary when Bernie endorses her.
So no, he can not win.
Promise me you'll vote for Hillary when Bernie endorses her.
Your Entertainer
Member
And Bernie is easily better in terms of actual positions so I'm voting for him. I also just like him more. Pretty simple, at least for me.
Will definitely still vote for Clinton if she's the nominee.
JesseEwiak
Member
Even if Sanders wins NH & IA, all the win will be out of his sails once Clinton smashes him in Nevada and South Carolina.
As for the rest, shockingly, pastors in black churches, suburban housewives, and older Democratic voters don't spend a lot of time on Reddit, Buzzfeed, or posting sick memes to Facebook. Hillary's core supporters are the actual core of the Democratic party - the people who do the hard work of getting people to the polls on Election Day during the midterms, instead of posting on FB about how Obama is a neoliberal sellout and that's why they're not voting in the midterms this year.
Jelly Rajah
Banned
Quoted for truth. All very good points.
Man-is-Obsolete
Member
Al any candidate needs to run against trump is to get the daily show staff and anytime Trump talks about an issue fire back with how he has shown to be racist, sexists, or just be a plain idiot.
Best thing to do is to not let people forget how much of pretentious buffoon Trump is.
Edit: seriously the republicans better hope someone else gets the republican nod. Because trump has no chance
teruterubozu
Member
That's not exactly comforting given their track record.
Bill Squabber
Member
It's a shame. What incentive do people have, to get out and vote (in the primary), if they believe their candidate already lost. Frustrating as hell. And like you said, you're also pushing your ideals forward regardless if he wins or loses.
AstroNut325
Member
This all or nothing mentality is the reason Republicans have complete ownership of the legislative branch.
If you want the country to move left, you will need to work at it. Expecting one person to get to the executive branch to result in this country to move leftward is not going to result in the outcome you desire.
AnotherDayAnotherDollar
Banned
You are saying people who say that are the kind of people who do not vote in the general election to begin with, and then you say that's a statistically insignificant number. Maybe I'm misreading your statement, but people who do not vote in the general election is far from statistically insignificant.
Voter turnout for the past 40 years:
2012: 54.9%
2008: 58.2%
2004: 56.7%
2000: 51.2%
1996: 49%
1992: 55.2%
1988: 50.2%
1984: 53.3%
1980: 52.6%
1976: 53.6%
The reason republicans have the legislative branch is due to abysmal voter turnout in off years.
Your second statement is true regardless if it's Clinton, O'Malley, or Sanders who end up winning the presidential election. Of course, there's also the fact that not everyone wants the country to move left...
ShodanMAN
Member
British public have lurched further to the right than the US if Bernie gets elected
Not the whole of the British public, just the English.
Bill Squabber
Member
How is that an all or nothing mentality? I didn't say "if he loses, don't vote at all during the pres. election" and I also didn't say the executive branch is the only thing that matters.
Edit: oh i see. I meant: what incentive do people have to vote in the primary if they already believe prior to the primary that their candidate will lose.
Dangansona
Member
I actually was just listening to a podcast about polling and they had Bernie Sander's campaign pollster on, and he said one of the types of polls that is being ignored by the media is what you guys are talking about: Bernie vs repub candidates. He said that in those polls Bernie actually is ahead of Hilary, so what they are focusing on is trying to win over democrats in important states like Iowa. He also mentioned the biggest problems being the elderly and minorities, not women.
This episode was released on December 2, the show is called The Pollsters.
TheLaughingStock
Member
Lloyd Blankfein, Charles Prince III, Jamie Dimon, Henry Paulson, and Ken Lewis are some notables in the US among possibly thousands or tens of thousands of individuals that could have fallen under the fraud umbrella and been subject to federal investigation. https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/white_collar
FBI analysis suggested mortgage fraud in particular was growing more pervasive and systemic roughly 11 years ago. https://www2.fbi.gov/congress/congress04/swecker100704.htm
The S&L era, in which various frauds were much less pervasive and damaging, saw more than 1,000 individuals prosecuted and in general nearly 3,000 with a conviction rate well over 90%.
Here's an old 2011 comparison to the most recent crisis:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/04/14/business/20110414-prosecute.html
Specific to the Great Recession, we know based off loan samples of SISA, to a lesser extent NINA, and other research that numerous lenders created, inflated, and sold millions of fraudulent products over a relatively short period of time.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/secrs/2006/august/20060801/op-1253/op-1253_3_1.pdf
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2215422
Civil settlements and probes in areas like LIBOR, forex and bonds suggests an avalanche of felonies on top of loan origination fraud, appraisal fraud, and so on with virtually no justification for deferred/non-prosecution agreements. Essentially, these institutions shouldn't even be operating as they currently exist in the US because they're serial fraudsters.
Testicular Sound Express
Member
lol what are you talking about? I haven't seen a single mention of that in ages.
SolicitorPirate
Member
I'd be quite comfortable betting a few thousand dollars against him being the Dem nominee, let alone winning the General.
AngryNapkin
Banned
The chance of Bernie winning the primary is about as high a chance as Ron Paul had. Both drew absolutely huge crowds, high amounts of individual donations, polled very high in Internet polling and both were/are rejected by their respective party.
Your party has to support you and the DNC does not support Bernie.
I personally think Bernie would be disastrous for the country but also feel the same way about all the Republicans save Rand Paul. If it was between Trump or Clinton I would probably vote Clinton which is remarkable to be honest.
Your party has to support you and the DNC does not support Bernie.
I personally think Bernie would be disastrous for the country but also feel the same way about all the Republicans save Rand Paul. If it was between Trump or Clinton I would probably vote Clinton which is remarkable to be honest.
I think that if he won, there are aspects of his campaign that he could play as a mandate from the people and maybe get a little action.
Mainly, campaign finance reform. I think that if he won - against trump - it might get through. Even then, it'd be a "weak tea" version. That might be the only thing.
No idea weird effect he could have on congressional elections. Probably not as much ad I would want.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Probably more, because he won't know how to deal with Republicans or even Democrats in Congress like Hillary has been doing for a long time now. It will be like the lost years of Obama in 2009 - 2011.
ShutterMunster
Junior Member
If everyone goes and sees THE BIG SHORT he's a shoe in. Holy shit! That shit plays like one big "Vote for Bernie" advertisement (it's a marvelous film).
The people who shout "Bernie's got no shout" would probably classify themselves as realists, but they're more cynics than anything. People have proclaimed Hilary a sure thing over nothing other than 'she's been around a while'. They talk about her political prowess like she's been president before and passed tons of bills. It's absurd. Bernie isn't dead and he'd have a real shot if certain people developed fucking spines.
The people who shout "Bernie's got no shout" would probably classify themselves as realists, but they're more cynics than anything. People have proclaimed Hilary a sure thing over nothing other than 'she's been around a while'. They talk about her political prowess like she's been president before and passed tons of bills. It's absurd. Bernie isn't dead and he'd have a real shot if certain people developed fucking spines.
Yeah, the SNL skit was pretty unremarkable, aside from the Clinton smoking a cigarette moment. This Trump vs Sanders debate parody tho
Vigilant Walrus
Member
Noam Chomsky being interviewd by Aby Martin, talking about why there is no anti-war candidates and where Bernie fits in; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBZLnfKSa_k
Noam Chomsky seems like one hell of a guy. I don't know that much about the man, but he seems like a truly wise and sharp person and on point!
Noam Chomsky seems like one hell of a guy. I don't know that much about the man, but he seems like a truly wise and sharp person and on point!
Vigilant Walrus
Member
Democratic Socialism doesn't mean you don't have free markets and capitalism. Bernie Sanders and people like him are aware of the importance of business. It's not the type of socialism you're thinking of
Dixon's Jet
Banned
Let us be clear about one thing. Bernie Sanders will be the next President of the United States.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked