Not voting for Clinton is a vote for whichever one of the racist, homophobic, antisimetic assholes the other side chooses to nominate. Clinton really isn't that aweful of an alternative to Bernie just because she's not super far left like he is. I like Bernie a lot, probably more than Hilary. But we all need to do our part in ensuring a Tea Tard doesn't get elected and fuck everyone over.
Post Debate Poll Shows Clinton Recovering in New Hampshire
- Thread starter Butts-a-plenty
- Start date
- Status
Not voting for Clinton is a vote for whichever one of the racist, homophobic, antisimetic assholes the other side chooses to nominate. Clinton really isn't that aweful of an alternative to Bernie just because she's not super far left like he is. I like Bernie a lot, probably more than Hilary. But we all need to do our part in ensuring a Tea Tard doesn't get elected and fuck everyone over.
RustyNails
Member
No, this is a conspiracy. Just like with Ron Paul who actually won the Republican primary back in the day despite the rigged results.
It was always going to be a coronation even if some people deluded themselves into thinking otherwise. She has the female vote, a huge campaign behind her with lots of $ and also has name recognition among people who don't really follow politics.
Butts-a-plenty
Banned
Brand new Reuters poll showing Momentum post-debate for Hilldog as well.
Hillary 51
Sanders 24
Biden 16
O'Malley 2
Chafee 1
Butts-a-plenty
Banned
This was always going to happen.
Marauder Shields
Member
Gonna be fun to watch Hilary wreck Bernie.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Why do we fall, Bernie.
Your Entertainer
Member
Regardless, Bernie gave better answers for the most part and had better stances on the issues almost across the board
Plus the whole campaign finance thing - raising awareness for that is monumental
ChronotriggerJM
Member
As a Bernie supporter, I totally want more debates. I don't care if Hilary wins them all, I want more chances for the issues to reach a focal point, and just more Democratic coverage in general.
More debates a perfect way to differentiate the party from the Republicans.
More debates a perfect way to differentiate the party from the Republicans.
User 463088
Banned
She's not going to wreck him in the traditional sense. She doesn't need to do so. She'll debate the issues and point out areas of difference between them, like on guns, but that's all she'll need to do. (For now at least). You don't punch down unless you have to.
Her enemy the last few months has been the potential Biden candidacy, not Bernie Sanders. That's why her numbers should improve at the expense of Biden's. Bernie's 20-25% national support is pretty baked in. His issue has been getting above that. Hillary's numbers have gone down as Biden's have come up. Sanders isn't picking up those Biden voters. (Sanders has an issue getting above that 20-25% because of Hillary's strength with people of color, women and working class whites.)
If (and this is a big, big if), Iowa is a wash for both candidates (i.e. they go for the Wolf Blitzer tie), Sanders absolutely has to win New Hampshire. He cannot lose it if he wants to remain viable. South Carolina will be a bloodbath for him. Nevada won't be much better, and nearly all of Super Tuesday (with the exception of Vermont) does not play well to him. Based off of what each candidate has spent, I don't think Sanders is building his ground game in those states. I think he has one paid staffer in Nevada while Hillary has 20 something. That ground game makes all the difference in the General.
If it gets rid of all the smug political prognostication around here then it can happen tomorrow for all I care.
I'll tell you what I told Melkr, which is that technically, there are still other debates.
uncelestial
Member
Thanks, dad.
User 463088
Banned
There are a million reasons why 2008 and 2016 have nothing in common except that Hillary's name was on the ballot both times.
But maybe Hillary would like me to explain why again?
Okay, then.
uncelestial
Member
You could try naming one.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
She was Obama's Secretary of State for four years. I am not an expert but that probably counts as relevant executive branch experience.
User 463088
Banned
Sure.
Bernie Sanders is not Barack Obama.
Bernie Sanders has no endorsements within the Democratic Party. (He might have gotten one or two, but Hillary's at 400+)
Bernie Sanders is losing the African American vote by 50-60 points against Clinton. (And the Latino vote, women, and every other demographics that's not white, male liberals).
Bernie Sanders does not have the ground game that became Obama for America, most of which have been acquired by the Clinton campaign.
Hillary won the popular vote in 2008 against Obama. She lost the delegate count by a few hundred out of close to 4000. A big part of this was Obama's campaign knowing how to play the caucus game better than Clinton's. That mistake will not happen again.
President Obama was a once in a lifetime candidate. He ran the greatest campaign I've ever been a part of, and I came in after the primary season. Even during the primary season, his machinery was completely insane. (Hillary's primary campaign in 2008 ran circles around Kerry's general in 2004, but it was still outpaced by Obama's) Sanders doesn't seem to be investing in that type of ground game. You want a comparison, I'd say look at 2000. That's the closest thing we have here. With her being Hillary Clinton, she's basically an incumbent, with a challenger from her left.
So many Bernie fans kept saying for months the first debate would change everything. The nation just needs to see him and he was going to crush Hillary in the debate.
What they failed to think of is what happens if Hillary won the debate and generated a wave of positive media coverage of her "comeback"? Which is what happened and why her poll numbers are rising.
What they failed to think of is what happens if Hillary won the debate and generated a wave of positive media coverage of her "comeback"? Which is what happened and why her poll numbers are rising.
ErasureAcer
Banned
Bernie is now leading in Maine.
User 463088
Banned
I've never understood how a Sanders (or Clinton) supporter can say they won't support the other in the General.
It's like going out for dessert with your friends. You wanted chocolate cake, but the group decided to get chocolate tart instead. So, you just say fuck it, I'm ordering the sauerkraut.
It's like going out for dessert with your friends. You wanted chocolate cake, but the group decided to get chocolate tart instead. So, you just say fuck it, I'm ordering the sauerkraut.
This isn't news. Cmon. We have all known this was going to happen. I know there were a few that genuinely thought otherwise, but I think most already have known how this was going to play out for a while now.
I have never seen a Hillary supporter say this. But I agree, its absolutely moronic, and shows that you don't really give a shit about the political process at all. Just grown ass children playing a game.
I have never seen a Hillary supporter say this. But I agree, its absolutely moronic, and shows that you don't really give a shit about the political process at all. Just grown ass children playing a game.
Elfforkusu
Member
I think it's defensible to support Bernie and not support Hillary. I'll suck it up and vote for Hillary if (when) it comes to that, but she represents more of the last 8 years: destabilizing foreign countries' regimes (Libya), the status quo on the surveillance state, health care, education, etc etc. These are not good things. (imo!)
It's why he's the best man for president running. It's why he has very little shot at winning. The problem isn't that he couldn't win the general if he won the nomination -- the problem is too many Democrats don't want him to win the nomination.
This is the only one that really matters. Bernie is not an establishment candidate.
It's why he's the best man for president running. It's why he has very little shot at winning. The problem isn't that he couldn't win the general if he won the nomination -- the problem is too many Democrats don't want him to win the nomination.
He isn't even officially a Democrat. What a shock that the party doesn't want him to win.
User 463088
Banned
In a poll that ran from Sept 24-30th. Almost a month ago, and before the debate.
I don't think any Clinton supporter would say it, but I included it just to appear fair and balanced.
Elfforkusu
Member
I'm not talking about just the party. I include Democratic voters. How many times do we see "he can't win in the general" in these threads? That's a fox news-esque talking point. Just because you repeat something doesn't make it true.
User 463088
Banned
There are reasons why a lot of us feel that he won't win in a general. I mean, there are plenty of trends that one can look to if one wants to understand why he's potentially less electable than Hillary. (I'm trying to use inclusive language, lest I'm accused of pretending to know everything.)
Elfforkusu
Member
I agree that he is less electable than Hillary. But it's far cry from that to "can't win in the general".
I think it would be a closer election (for president) if he got the nomination. That is to say, that there are Democratic voters who could vote for Jeb over Bernie. But I also think he would catalyze enough interest from lazy voters to give Dems a crack at the Senate.
e: The other thing to account for is that the way the electoral votes break, the GOP is fighting an uphill battle. That's part of why I think Bernie would still win.
I think a lot of the fear mongering that he's guaranteed to get destroyed in the general is just certain GAFfers being Chicken Littles.
Still, there's a variety of very real reasons to think Bernie would be a weaker general election candidate than Hillary. And regardless of how many like to act like this election is a slam dunk for Democrats, 46-47% of the country will always vote Republican. The election like always depends on how Independents split.
Butts-a-plenty
Banned
And I would prefer not to test those water right now, given what hangs in the balance.
User 463088
Banned
I'll be honest. I do think he's unelectable in the General. I think he knows it too. I think his campaign is about bringing his economic agenda to the forefront. You could tell he is completely out of his depth when it comes to foreign policy. He should have known he'd get the gun question, and should have had a coherent, smart soundbitey answer ready for it. His lack of debate prep (to me at least) reinforces this.
Yep, that's all that needs to be said. If we had a Democratic congress as s fall back I bet you more would be open. But risking the GOP controlling every single branch of government? Fuck no.
In the current climate it's not something that can be tested, considering that it's unlikely Bernie will win the primary.
However, with general research available about Americans' attitude towards socialism and the general margins by which presidential elections go by, plus Bernie's deficiencies in other areas such as money and ground game, it's fair to say that he will have significant trouble in a nationwide election. And that's what we go by. You can call it a Fox News-esque talking point, but the difference between Fox News and why someone would consider Bernie unelectable is that one has basis in legitimate information and history.
It is unwise to consider something extremely challenging won before the race happens.
Elfforkusu
Member
Well, what hangs in the balance? It's not just the Supreme Court. There's a lot of shit wrong with this country, and I have no confidence in Hillary to fix it. Especially with a hostile Congress.
Win the presidency + split the Congress is the only viable path if you actually want to make changes like, say, drop in a carbon tax.
User 463088
Banned
This is a big part of it. Sanders will not be able to help down ticket candidates financially. The DNC will have to decide to help his campaign (which won't have PAC money) or to help down ballot candidates. I know a lot of people think the money just goes to TV ads, but there's a hell of a lot more that goes with it. This shit's not free, and Presidential infrastructure helps the House and Senate candidates in the state.
Why the fuck do people get off so hard on predicting this shit?
He's less electable than Hillary? Cool. You've got nothing to worry about. Let it play out. Let it be interesting.
If he wins the primary that kind of throws a wrench in the "unelectable" scenario. But that won't happen. Because he's unelectable, right? Just enjoy the ride and let the naive children play with their toys or whatever. You've known who the next president was going to be for ~8 years now. No need to worry now that you're so close.
He's less electable than Hillary? Cool. You've got nothing to worry about. Let it play out. Let it be interesting.
If he wins the primary that kind of throws a wrench in the "unelectable" scenario. But that won't happen. Because he's unelectable, right? Just enjoy the ride and let the naive children play with their toys or whatever. You've known who the next president was going to be for ~8 years now. No need to worry now that you're so close.
The primary and general election are 2 totally different things. Someone can win the primary but be "unelectable" or at least a lot less likely to be elected in the general election.
A lot of shit is depending on this election, this isn't some game.
Butts-a-plenty
Banned
The only thing I expect of a Clinton presidency is to preserve what Obama achieved. That's it. Those are my aspirations for our next president. Congress is going to be Republican, I want to put the candidate forward with the best chance of winning to make sure that Marco Rubio or whoever can't undo what has been achieved over the past 8 years.
User 463088
Banned
As a gay, partially disabled (visually) person, the GOP could, literally, revoke the ACA and cost me my one change at getting my sight back. My mother relies upon Social Security and Medicare. The GOP has shown they want nothing more than to cut "entitlement programs."
Winning a partisan primary does not mean you'll go on to win the general. If it did, there would never be a loser ever. I also don't think anyone here has said Sanders should drop out. IF someone is to win, someone has to lose, after all.
- Status