• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Bernie Sanders town hall feat. Elizabeth Warren, Michael Moore

Segnosaur said:
Clinton supporters on THIS forum would probably vote for Sanders had he won the nomination. But then, members of this forum probably don't fit the same demographics as the 'average' American.

Sanders would probably have lost votes in the following groups:

- Minorities. While Clinton did worse with many minority racial groups than Obama did in the general election, Sanders probably would have done an even worse job. https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...y-clinton-democrats-race-racial-divide-213948

- Moderate Democrats. Sanders held positions that were to the far left of the American political spectrum, and for better or worse those positions are not always politically popular. (Yes, I'm sure people will drag up all sorts of polls showing that "Hey people love single payer health care and a high minimum wage", but its different dealing with a question asked by some pollster than when you are dealing with an election and get told how "single payer will drive up your taxes".) https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/bernie-sanders-would-have-lost-election-landslide/
Click to expand...

A lot of people insist that Bernie is a "moderate" by European standrads. I reply that is meaningless in terms of US politics.
 
dudalb said:
A lot of people insist that Bernie is a "moderate" by European standrads. I reply that is meaningless in terms of US politics.
Click to expand...

Perhaps a better characterization is Bernie is a 40s Democrat, just as Obama referred to himself as an "80's Republican";)
 
dudalb said:
A lot of wishful thinking here that Bernie is some massively popular politician.
Click to expand...


http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/347811-poll-mcconnell-the-countrys-least-popular-politician

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (R-Calif.) posts a negative 31-47 split, but is viewed favorably by a majority of Democrats.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) remains the most popular politician in the country and is the only national figure in the poll that a majority of voters view favorably.
Click to expand...
 
kellyb said:
Also worth noting, there's still this factor, too:

http://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-most-popular-politician-655315
Click to expand...
probably because for the most part, people think he's honest even if they don't agree with him, a rarity among politicians.

I lean more conservative than liberal but I would have voted for Bernie over Trump, I have a hard time believing that there are any liberal/left folks that would have voted Trump over bernie if given the choice. The worst that would have happened is they stay home, which lot did when it was Hillary vs Donald.
 
Last edited:
kellyb said:
Can I get a link on the "death to America" rallies?
Click to expand...
It was in the Newsweek link that I referred to in another post.

From: http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044
Here are a few tastes of what was in store for Sanders, straight out of the Republican playbook: He thinks rape is A-OK....Yes, there is an explanation for it—a long, complicated one, just like the one that would make clear why the Clinton emails story was nonsense. And we all know how well that worked out. Then there’s the fact that Sanders was on unemployment until his mid-30s, and that he stole electricity from a neighbor after failing to pay his bills, and that he co-sponsored a bill to ship Vermont’s nuclear waste to a poor Hispanic community in Texas, where it could be dumped. You can just see the words “environmental racist” on Republican billboards...Also on the list: Sanders violated campaign finance laws, criticized Clinton for supporting the 1994 crime bill that he voted for, and he voted against the Amber Alert system....Worst of all, the Republicans also had video of Sanders at a 1985 rally thrown by the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua where half a million people chanted, “Here, there, everywhere/the Yankee will die,’’ ...Sanders said, on camera, supporting the Sandinistas was “patriotic.” The Republicans had at least four other damning Sanders videos (I don’t know what they showed), and the opposition research folder was almost 2-feet thick. (The section calling him a communist with connections to Castro alone would have cost him Florida.)

Ok, not exactly "death to America" (I took some artistic liberties there) but "Yankee will die" isn't really that much better in my opinion.
I did know about the other ones.
Click to expand...
If you knew about them, then I'd say you are definitely in the minority, as they were never major issues during the primaries.
- Moderate Democrats. Sanders held positions that were to the far left of the American political spectrum, and for better or worse those positions are not always politically popular. (Yes, I'm sure people will drag up all sorts of polls showing that "Hey people love single payer health care and a high minimum wage", but its different dealing with a question asked by some pollster than when you are dealing with an election and get told how "single payer will drive up your taxes".) https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-dr...ion-landslide/
Click to expand...
You think the moderates would have voted for Trump over that?
Click to expand...
Some might. The bigger risk though is that moderates might simply decide to stay home.

The political spectrum is not some binary hardcore republican/democrat split. There are shades of grey. Being a moderate means that you fall closer to the center of the political spectrum than the far left. Maybe you may even be a former republican voter who decided that the republican party had gone insane and you now feel more at home in a Democratic party that is fiscally conservative and liberal when it comes to social policies. Bringing in a leader who promotes policies that you think are too extreme (ones that threaten to drive up your taxes for example, or ones that are seen as anti-business) may make you decide that its just not worth it to vote.

Remember, while there are polls showing how Sander's policies were popular, polls don't often incorporate the costs. Take for example his promise of "free college". Yeah, lots of people love the idea. But if the republicans point out that "this will take money out of the pockets of hardworking taxpayers", many may decide that they just don't want to vote for that.
 
If a rally in a Nicaragua during the height of Reagan's wars to prop up Latin American dictators is among the best/worst the Republicans have on Sanders, I'll take my chances there. :)
 
Segnosaur said:
It was in the Newsweek link that I referred to in another post.

From: http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044
Here are a few tastes of what was in store for Sanders, straight out of the Republican playbook: He thinks rape is A-OK....Yes, there is an explanation for it—a long, complicated one, just like the one that would make clear why the Clinton emails story was nonsense. And we all know how well that worked out. Then there’s the fact that Sanders was on unemployment until his mid-30s, and that he stole electricity from a neighbor after failing to pay his bills, and that he co-sponsored a bill to ship Vermont’s nuclear waste to a poor Hispanic community in Texas, where it could be dumped. You can just see the words “environmental racist” on Republican billboards...Also on the list: Sanders violated campaign finance laws, criticized Clinton for supporting the 1994 crime bill that he voted for, and he voted against the Amber Alert system....Worst of all, the Republicans also had video of Sanders at a 1985 rally thrown by the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua where half a million people chanted, “Here, there, everywhere/the Yankee will die,’’ ...Sanders said, on camera, supporting the Sandinistas was “patriotic.” The Republicans had at least four other damning Sanders videos (I don’t know what they showed), and the opposition research folder was almost 2-feet thick. (The section calling him a communist with connections to Castro alone would have cost him Florida.)

Ok, not exactly "death to America" (I took some artistic liberties there) but "Yankee will die" isn't really that much better in my opinion.

If you knew about them, then I'd say you are definitely in the minority, as they were never major issues during the primaries.

Some might. The bigger risk though is that moderates might simply decide to stay home.

The political spectrum is not some binary hardcore republican/democrat split. There are shades of grey. Being a moderate means that you fall closer to the center of the political spectrum than the far left. Maybe you may even be a former republican voter who decided that the republican party had gone insane and you now feel more at home in a Democratic party that is fiscally conservative and liberal when it comes to social policies. Bringing in a leader who promotes policies that you think are too extreme (ones that threaten to drive up your taxes for example, or ones that are seen as anti-business) may make you decide that its just not worth it to vote.

Remember, while there are polls showing how Sander's policies were popular, polls don't often incorporate the costs. Take for example his promise of "free college". Yeah, lots of people love the idea. But if the republicans point out that "this will take money out of the pockets of hardworking taxpayers", many may decide that they just don't want to vote for that.
Click to expand...

I don't see why we couldn't fight fire with fire there.
Sander's message of corruption of the last decade and how the wealthy essentially rigged the game could go over well with a heck of a lot of voters. Money? Let's talk about the money..the money gone overseas to wars and big bailouts, etc.

It's not like progressives would keep their swords sheathed when push comes to shove.
 
But if the republicans point out that "this will take money out of the pockets of hardworking taxpayers", many may decide that they just don't want to vote for that.
Click to expand...

It would depend on how it was marketed by the campaign. There's an excellent case to be made that we could switch to single payer without even raising taxes (outside of the initial costs of converting the new system.)
 
ahhell said:
I lean more conservative than liberal but I would have voted for Bernie over Trump
Click to expand...
I am not doubting you. But as I stated before, I suspect the average poster here is more rational and better educated than the average American voter.
I have a hard time believing that there are any liberal/left folks that would have voted Trump over bernie if given the choice.
Click to expand...
A liberal/left wing might not have voted for Trump over Bernie. But a middle-of-the-road voter (perhaps one that favors both lower taxes and more liberal social policies) might.
The worst that would have happened is they stay home, which lot did when it was Hillary vs Donald.
Click to expand...
Yes, many potential democratic voters stayed home (or wasted their votes on Stein). The same would happen had Sanders become the candidate; it would just be a different group of people than who stayed home when Clinton was the candidate.
 
Segnosaur said:
Clinton supporters on THIS forum would probably vote for Sanders had he won the nomination. But then, members of this forum probably don't fit the same demographics as the 'average' American.

Sanders would probably have lost votes in the following groups:

- Minorities. While Clinton did worse with many minority racial groups than Obama did in the general election, Sanders probably would have done an even worse job. https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...y-clinton-democrats-race-racial-divide-213948

- Moderate Democrats. Sanders held positions that were to the far left of the American political spectrum, and for better or worse those positions are not always politically popular. (Yes, I'm sure people will drag up all sorts of polls showing that "Hey people love single payer health care and a high minimum wage", but its different dealing with a question asked by some pollster than when you are dealing with an election and get told how "single payer will drive up your taxes".) https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/bernie-sanders-would-have-lost-election-landslide/
Click to expand...

I don't disagree that some groups such as minorities and moderates preferred Clinton over Sanders. Clinton winning the primary was a pretty clear indicator.

While they preferred Clinton in a Sanders vs Clinton matchup, I think they'd have preferred Sanders in a Sanders vs Trump matchup. And the relevant states that won Trump the election voted for Trump because they saw Clinton as the standard elite politician that wouldn't do anything for them on jobs and economic disparity whereas that was a Sanders strong point relative to Clinton.

There is no way to know for sure. Maybe Trump still would have won. I see many democrats argue it's a given that he'd have lost because socialism and attack ads but I seriously question that. I'm also worried that if they keep pursuing the strategy of running Clinton and Kaine types we're going to lose again come 2020
 
Segnosaur said:
Yes, many potential democratic voters stayed home (or wasted their votes on Stein). The same would happen had Sanders become the candidate; it would just be a different group of people than who stayed home when Clinton was the candidate.
Click to expand...

Clinton was the second least popular candidate in US history.

And Sanders in the most popular in the country.

I don't see the reasonable case that the Sanders "sit it out" effect would be as large as Clinton's.
 
Venom said:
I don't see why we couldn't fight fire with fire there.
Sander's message of corruption of the last decade and how the wealthy essentially rigged the game could go over well with a heck of a lot of voters. Money? Let's talk about the money..the money gone overseas to wars and big bailouts, etc.

It's not like progressives would keep their swords sheathed when push comes to shove.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, when ti comes to wars overseas, how would you have responded to 9/11?
 
kellyb said:
If a rally in a Nicaragua during the height of Reagan's wars to prop up Latin American dictators is among the best/worst the Republicans have on Sanders, I'll take my chances there. :)
Click to expand...
I'm just glad that you're not running the campaign of any Democratic presidential candidate.

Seriously, you don't think seeing Sanders in amongst crowds of people wanting Americans to die won't have a significant effect on his electability, regardless of whatever context you might want to attach?
 
Venom said:
I don't see why we couldn't fight fire with fire there.
Sander's message of corruption of the last decade and how the wealthy essentially rigged the game could go over well with a heck of a lot of voters. Money? Let's talk about the money..the money gone overseas to wars and big bailouts, etc.
Click to expand...
Although talk about "wealthy rigging the system" might go over well with those in the "occupy Wallstreet" crowd, its not enough to just appeal to them. Many voters are plain middle-class voters who are more concerned about their own day to day lives (including their taxes) than they are about corruption and rigged systems. To those people, seeing some politician promise to increase their taxes to pay for social programs that will benefit other people will have a negative effect, even if the politician may also talk of ending corruption.
 
kellyb said:
Clinton was the second least popular candidate in US history.
And Sanders in the most popular in the country.
I don't see the reasonable case that the Sanders "sit it out" effect would be as large as Clinton's.
Click to expand...
Then its a good thing that you're not in charge of running the Democrat's campaign.

There is a rather bizarre tendency on this thread to assume "Because I think X, all other voters must also think X". KellyB with her "People won't care about Sanders in a 'Kill Americans' rally". Venom with his "Just talk about ending corruption and it will convince people to ignore a huge increase in people's taxes".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom