• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How things have changed: from Bernie detractor to Bernie voter

iguanaman said:
Really? So Trump's pick is the one that will beat him? There is something fishy about that. I think we would be better off with the candidate Trump fears most instead.
Click to expand...

I guess you don't understand that politicians, especially trump, might not always be honest about who they want to run against. And even if they are, they can be wrong. Hillary PUSHED trump as her candidate, thinking he was the most beatable. We know what trump said privately - he was most scared of Bernie on the ticket in 2016, 'the only one' he was scared of.

In a recently leaked tape of Trump in conversation with donors at a private dinner, he conceded that, in 2016, he worried Hillary Clinton was going to pick Sanders as her running mate. Trump understands that Bernie is ‘a big trade guy’. He appreciates that the key to his electoral success has been his appeal to workers who are angry about globalisation.

Trump would surely rather face married gay man Buttigieg, or ‘Wall Street Pete’ as Bernie fans call him. Buttigieg is a bit like Emmanuel Macron. His technocratic centrism somehow wins votes, but it jars with the times. Worse, his vocabulary seems to have been generated by some marketing jargon algorithm. Trump could have a lot of fun at his expense, without resorting to naked homophobia.
Click to expand...

Is Trump scared of Crazy Bernie Sanders? | The Spectator
 
jamesbyoung said:
Bloomberg can easily handle Trump, and with Klobuchar or Mayor Pete or Warren or whomever, the Dems will accept an "anybody but Trump."
Click to expand...

No, Bloomberg cannot, any more than Jeb Bush could. This isn't a bidding war, it's an election. Democrats want Bernie, not the twice Bush-endorsing former Republican plutocrat with all kinds of baggage who will not turn out the Democratic vote.
 
Craig234 said:
You're wrong on Bernie, but we Bernie supporters will vote for the Democratic nominee, and glad you will also.
Click to expand...

That's great attitude; it's what we need.
 
jamesbyoung said:
Bloomberg can easily handle Trump, and with Klobuchar or Mayor Pete or Warren or whomever, the Dems will accept an "anybody but Trump."
Click to expand...

Bloomberg can handle Trump in debates (supposing that Trump will accept debates; likely he won't, and shouldn't, if he is smart), but Bloomberg can NOT attract Bernie's voters, and Bernie's voters are at least 25% of all Democrat voters.

In the last several presidential elections the difference between the Dem and GOP candidates was small. You simply CANNOT win the general election if you alienate 25% of the people who might supposedly vote for you.

Bloomberg if he wins the nomination will seduce all moderates on the Dem side. He won't seduce the moderates on Trump's side because those will vote for Trump no matter what. Trump's side is united; it is a cohesive bloc. So, Bloomberg needs the Dem moderates PLUS the progressives, to edge above Trump. But he won't have ANY progressives, so, he is toast.

I think Bloomberg is the least electable of all candidates because there is no fix for him. Short of getting as veep Michelle Obama (which will NEVER happen) or Sanders himself (who will NEVER join forces with a Wall Street-friendly billionaire) he can't fix the problem, so, he WILL lose ALL progressives in November. He simply can't win in November without the progressives.

All others might even be somewhat viable if they pick veeps who supplement them and compensate for their weaknesses. But Bloomberg can't do it. The perception that he is buying his way into the nomination is so turn-offish for progressives that even running against Trump, I'd be surprised if any true progressive voted for him.

And then, his path to the nomination is very unlikely to go through a simple, clean, and fair majority set of pledged delegates who will deliver him the victory in first convention ballot, simply because even if he grows and grows, he won't be able to attract ANY of the support for Sanders who travels on a different lane. Therefore, given that the Dems allocate delegates proportionally, it is highly unlikely that Bloomberg, starting late, will earn more than 50% of pledged delegates in the first ballot. Sander's delegates and some other delegates for other candidates will keep Bloomberg below 50%.

Therefore his ONLY path to the nomination, is to count on the Party's establishment and superdelegates, to give him the victory in second round (remember, this time, superdelegates only vote starting with the second convention ballot).

Now, if this happens, Sanders' supporters will be pissed off, 100% outraged, and a lot of people will feel cheated as well even if they aren't Sanders' supporters.

An illegitimate nomination for Bloomberg will be perceived as a back room deal filled with fat cats smoking cigars. Conspiracy theories will pop up saying that he used his billions to bribe people into submission. His support will plummet. He may end up with only half of the Dem voters, not even 75% (after irreversibly losing the 25% Bernie people, he'd lose even more people by being perceived as a cheater).

Good luck winning the general election against Trump, with only 50% of Dem voters supporting him.

So, if the Trump campaign is trying to run against Bernie, if they are smart they should switch and try to run against Bloomberg. Billionaire vs. Billionaire? Most leftist Americans younger than 30 will sit out. Essential blue colar workers in the Rust Belt will sit out.

In the unlikely event that Bloomberg wins the nomination fair and square with a majority of pledged delegates in first ballot, obtained through winning enough primaries and caucuses, he'd be my least preferred Dem candidate but I'd vote for him against Trump, sure.

If he buys his way into the nomination and is handed the nomination on a silver platter through an unfair brokered convention, even I, one of the most anti-Trump people out there, won't vote for Bloomberg. Of course I won't vote for Trump either, but I will sit out or vote third party.

Sure, I've said that doing that is indirectly voting for Trump, but in the case of Bloomberg, no, it isn't, because he won't win anyway without Bernie's 25%, so the election would be all but decided in favor of Trump; may as well teach the Democratic Party a lesson by going third party.
 
Last edited:
RabidAlpaca said:
You are 100% right about Bernie supporters not voting for Bloomberg. The same **** that appeals to Republicans does not appeal to the Democratic base. What is the blue collar average worker in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan that is struggling going to think about a billionaire vs. a fake billionaire in the election? They will label it plutocratic and rigged either way and will stay home, guaranteed.



This is what I'm talking about, you keep pushing Bloomberg, who will turn off a LOT of the Democratic base and is the only person I won't vote for. Fighting swamp with swamp is not a winning strategy.
Click to expand...

I don't want Bloomberg. I want the only sure thing which is Biden. You don't realize how many voters are not happy about being kicked off their employer healthcare. Bernie is a sure loser on that issue alone.
 
GreatNews2night said:
I'd think that by now, this would have surfaced already. We all know what Bernie's skeletons are... supporting the Sandinists, honey-mooning in the Soviet Union, making some strange sexualized remarks about married women and teen girls, his wife's embezzlement accusation, having mentioned nationalization of the electricity sector, having proposed convicted felons having voting rights, etc.

But the issue is, although these things are already known, he continues to go strong.

And come on, in the matter of sound bites and disgusting past stances and statements, our liar-in-chief has more than anybody, right? So it's not like the Sanders campaign will be unable to counter-attack when the right wing starts attacking him.

Some other October surprise? I doubt. Bernie has been around in politics for 4 decades... anything major would have been known already.
Click to expand...

We do not know what Putin has in the soviet archives about Bernie do we?
 
Craig234 said:
Is Trump scared of Crazy Bernie Sanders? | The Spectator
Click to expand...

Beware of what you quote. This piece which I've just read, is actually quite bleak regarding Bernie's chances. It emphasizes Bernie being old and frail, looking tired, the Dem voters being indecisive and confused, blue collar workers gravitating to Trump, while Trump voters remain enthusiastic, united, and know what they want ("four more years").

It seems like Trump was afraid of him in 2016. It is less clear if Trump is afraid of him in 2020. Probably not.

But again, with the right veep, Bernie can be competitive.

Usually veeps don't decide elections, but this is an atypical one. The Dem front runner is 77 years old and is just coming out of a heart attack. A lot of people will be paying much closer attention to who is Bernie's veep, because that person may very well become the president if the ticket wins.

I'm thinking, why not Sherrod Brown? He would be more presidential material than other people I've quoted. Amy Klobuchar might be a good veep choice, too.

It is ESSENTIAL for Bernie to pick his veep wisely and not repeat Hillary's arrogance.

If Hillary Clinton had invited Bernie to be her veep in 2016, definitely there would be no Donald J. Trump in the Oval Office.

Bernie should learn from this and pick a very viable and respected veep, not an unknown quantity campaign worker like Nina Turner (many people close to his campaign float this name) whose experience in public life is just being a City Councillor then a State assembly senator (not a US senator, just a state senator). After that, she ran for Ohio Secretary of State in 2014 and lost, and hasn't held public office ever since. She was offered a veep slot with the Green Party and declined. Her education is not that impressive - community college then Cleveland State University. Never left Ohio. Working experience, her only two jobs other than the two public offices she held, were as a fast food worker, and Payless shoe store clerk. I don't see her as reassuring anybody that in case Sanders dies in office, she will be a good president.

Contrast that with Sherrod Brown, a US senator for the last 16 years, previously a US House Representative, and a State Secretary of State for 8 years. Yale University grad. Now, *that's* presidential material.
 
Last edited:
iguanaman said:
I don't want Bloomberg. I want the only sure thing which is Biden. You don't realize how many voters are not happy about being kicked off their employer healthcare. Bernie is a sure loser on that issue alone.
Click to expand...

Biden is not a sure thing. He is falling apart.

Voters not happy about being kicked off their employer healthcare: probably GOP voters because a lot of Dem voters are enthusiastic about Single Payer, Medicare For All. The upper middle classes is well insured, but the lower middle class is often under-insured, the lower class is often uninsured or has crappy Medicaid or VA.

VA workers and Veterans themselves are big fans of Bernie and are among his biggest donors, in part because they know that Medicare For All would fix the dysfunctional VA.

Everybody knows that Sanders is for Medicare For All but still, in polls, he gets a consistent lead over Trump.

Trump on the other hand has NO plan for health care, and despite lip service, effectively undermines protections for pre-existing conditions, and his recently proposed budget contains cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security, contrary to his campaign promises.

Somehow I think Trump's plan or lack thereof is much worse and people know it. One thing cancels the other. Health care won't doom Bernie's candidacy.
 
iguanaman said:
I don't want Bloomberg. I want the only sure thing which is Biden. You don't realize how many voters are not happy about being kicked off their employer healthcare. Bernie is a sure loser on that issue alone.
Click to expand...

Biden is a sure thing - a sure loss. They'll still have healthcare, and they can give a crap about the rest of the country getting it.
 
Interesting bit from Fox Business, sounds like Trump now fears Bernie more than he fears Bloomberg:

[FONT=&quot]Last week, Trump insisted that he'd rather face-off against Bloomberg rather than Sanders in the general election, despite pure glee among some Republicans at the prospect of the president, who's campaigning on the strength of the U.S. economy, running against a self-avowed democratic socialist.
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]"Frankly, I would rather run against Bloomberg than Bernie Sanders," he told reporters. "Because Sanders has real followers, whether you like them or not, whether you agree with them or not — I happen to think it's terrible what he says — but he has followers."[/FONT]
Click to expand...

Can a Democrat beat Trump in November? Las Vegas predicts 2020 election results | Fox Business
 
Last edited:
Craig234 said:
No, Bloomberg cannot, any more than Jeb Bush could. This isn't a bidding war, it's an election. Democrats want Bernie, not the twice Bush-endorsing former Republican plutocrat with all kinds of baggage who will not turn out the Democratic vote.
Click to expand...

Foolish talk, my friend. Bloomberg is meme over Trump's twitters. Every day in every way with every say, Bloomberg is going to ad campaign Trump to his knees then to his big orange nose in the sand. Bloomberg will show Trump who Mr. NYC is. It is not the Orange Cheeto.
 
jamesbyoung said:
Foolish talk, my friend. Bloomberg is meme over Trump's twitters. Every day in every way with every say, Bloomberg is going to ad campaign Trump to his knees then to his big orange nose in the sand. Bloomberg will show Trump who Mr. NYC is. It is not the Orange Cheeto.
Click to expand...

The Foolish talk is thinking Bloomberg's ads are enough, not Bernie's army and revolutionary policies the country wants and needs. Bloomberg is likely Jeb Bush 2.0. He's not what the country needs, and is a surrender to the war on big money buying elections. Ya, we need another wealthy New York Wall Street figure. Worked great in 2016.
 
GreatNews2night said:
...See, it's because my ultimate goal is not to select candidate X or candidate Y in the Dem primaries. My ultimate goal is to beat Trump in November...

...I also warmed up to his Medicare For All proposal, despite being against it in the past, and since health care is a big focus for me, it was a big motivator for my vote...
Click to expand...

If your ultimate goal is beating Il Duce, why the focus on healthcare? Doesn't that come second, third, or? Besides, polls show very little support for Medicare for all. Just ask Warren who backtracked on it.

...Besides, Bernie's most radical ideas that spook moderates are not even likely to pass Congress, even if both houses get a Democratic supermajority, which is very unlikely anyway. If the Dems don't get both chambers and with a comfortable majority, then Sanders ideas won't pass anyway. It's not like America will turn "communist" (and I know, he is not communist) with widespread nationalizations and a Great Depression kind of Wall Street collapse if Sanders wins. Life will continue. Capitalism will survive...

...I just hope that if he is not nominated, his followers will still vote Dem, as long as it is in a fair process.
Click to expand...

I agree that his most radical proposals would never pass Congress, but the vast majority of moderates won't give that any thought. The only thing they'll hear and remember are his most radical proposals, period. He calls himself a democratic socialist. Which part of that name will people hear and focus on? America won't be electing a 'socialist' (I know he's not), anytime soon.

When dealing with an obviously corrupt leader and his cult, who lie, cheat, and are out to win a all costs, I hope our high standards of propriety won't result in four more years of our dictator wannabe destroying everything America stands for...
 
Last edited:
Craig234 said:
The Foolish talk is thinking Bloomberg's ads are enough, not Bernie's army and revolutionary policies the country wants and needs. Bloomberg is likely Jeb Bush 2.0. He's not what the country needs, and is a surrender to the war on big money buying elections. Ya, we need another wealthy New York Wall Street figure. Worked great in 2016.
Click to expand...

Bloomberg's ads and memes are already enraging Trump as he realizes that America increasingly laughing at his Trumpian foolishness. Your arguments, Craig, are silliness embodied, but don't worry, for your hatred and fear are going to grow immensely over the next few months.
 
SoCal said:
If your ultimate goal is beating Il Duce, why the focus on healthcare? Doesn't that come second, third, or? Besides, polls show very little support for Medicare for all. Just ask Warren who backtracked on it. I agree that his most radical proposals would never pass Congress, but the vast majority of moderates won't give that any thought. The only thing they'll hear and remember are his most radical proposals, period. He calls himself a democratic socialist. Which part of that name will people hear and focus on? merica won't be electing a 'socialist' (I know he's not), anytime soon. When dealing with an obviously corrupt leader and his cult, who lie, cheat, and are out to win a all costs, I hope our high standards of propriety won't result in four more years of our dictator wannabe destroying everything America stands for...
Click to expand...

The moderates, SoCal, will be giggling at such arguments as yours while the vote Democratic. Not to worry: your hatred and rage at what is going to happen will increase immensely, so immensely, over the next months as you see Defeat slouch forward to gobble you up.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
I don't know what the future holds, but I know that a lot of people are dramatically underestimating the power of generating hope. For some reason the "moderate" Democrats always try to feed us a down-the-middle candidate that inspires no one and often loses. You see Bloomberg and Biden as safe, but if 2016 taught us anything, normal rules and perspectives don't matter anymore, it's a different ballgame. The candidate we need is the person who can get the most people motivated and hopeful, and in that Sanders is the best choice, despite his vulnerabilities.

On a side note, he really, REALLY needs to pick a centrist candidate to balance the ticket, and it should probably be someone who's running. Hillary's big unforced error was refusing to unite the party and turning her back on progressives. A Sanders / Klobuchar ticket would unite the party and kick the rats out of the White House.
Click to expand...


I don't know which candidate stands the best chance against Trump. It's way too early to tell. According to RCP averages, the main candidates for the nomination all lead Trump from 1-6 points. Sanders is in the middle. Perhaps the best reason for nominating Sanders is to keep his supporters voting democratic. In 2016 Hillary won the democratic base vote, 89-8 over Trump with 3% voting third party. Sanders supporters did vote for Hillary, but by a 75-12 margin over Trump with a whopping 13% voting third party.

Bernie Sanders Voters Helped Trump Win and Here's Proof

Who knows how many stayed home like my grand daughter did. Very angry at the DNC and Democratic State party leaders rigging the primaries in Hillary's favor. Sanders after all is an independent running for the Democratic nomination. One last thing, if one looks at the favorable/unfavorable ratings of all the Democratic candidates, all are under water when it comes to the independent voter, the non-affiliated voter. Meaning their unfavorable's are higher than their favorable's which make it hard to use them in a predictable manner. Of course Trump is in the same category, higher unfavorable rating than favorable among independents.

Both Trump and Clinton had much higher unfavorable's than favorable's which caused 12% of independents to vote for third party against both. Some 9 million voters. The same very well could happen again in 2020. Questions 10 and 11

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/l37rosbwjp/econTabReport_lv.pdf

You can compare the major candidates favorable and unfavorable below. 2016 was a unique year in which both major party candidates set the record for the lowest favorable's and highest unfavorable's ever or since Gallup and Pew Research started keeping track of these things. So which candidate would do the best against Trump. That is for the democrats to figure out.

Highest to lowest favorable/unfavorable ratings of each major party presidential candidate.
Favorable/unfavorable
1956 Eisenhower 84/12%
1964 LBJ 81/13%
1976 Carter 81/16%
1960 JFK 80/14%
1960 Nixon 79/16%
1968 Nixon 79/22%
1976 Ford 79/20%
1972 Nixon 76/21%
1968 Humphrey 72/28%
1984 Reagan 71/30%
1980 Carter 68/32%
1984 Mondale 66/34%
1980 Reagan 64/31%
1992 Bill Clinton 64/33%
2008 Obama 62/35%
2012 Obama 62/37%
1956 Stevenson 61/31%
2004 G.W. Bush 61/39%
2008 McCain 60/35%
1992 G.H.W. Bush 59/40%
2000 G.W. Bush 58/38%
2004 Kerry 57/40%
1996 Bill Clinton 56/42%
1988 G.H.W. Bush 56/39%
2000 Gore 55/45%
2012 Romney 55/43%
1972 McGovern 55/41%
1996 Dole 54/45%
1988 Dukakis 50/45%
1964 Goldwater 43/47%
2016 Hillary Clinton 38/56%
2016 Donald Trump 36/60%
 
Craig234 said:
Which is why he's beat trump in practically every poll for five years. But for you: Hillary 2020! Electable!
Click to expand...
I have literally never cast a single vote for Hillary Clinton and only once for Bill. My gut told me that election was not the time for a traditional establishment candidate. Too close to the Great Recession. The republicans have done everything but turn Sanders into a saint so that they can have him splitting the dems apart for as long as possible. That means he will poll better than Trump with independents, until the GOP begins the barrage.
 
GreatNews2night said:
I'm back from early voting. My state is a Super Tuesday one and early voting is open; I have a day off from work today so I went ahead and got there, and cast my ballot.

After months agonizing about this, and despite not really being a Sanders fan, I voted for Sanders after all.

I started my comments here this election cycle by calling Sanders a moron, a hypocrite, divisive, vacuously populist, opportunistic, partially responsible for Trump's win, ineffective, with pies-in-the-sky ideas, and called his followers hopelessly naive and arrogant. I said that in my limited capacity of being just one citizen, one vote, one common Joe, I'd still try to do all I could to try and prevent Sanders from winning the Dem nomination, and speaking against him here was part of this effort.

And I ended up voting for him. :shock:

I did it for several reasons, not exactly because I like him more than any other candidate.

See, it's because my ultimate goal is not to select candidate X or candidate Y in the Dem primaries. My ultimate goal is to beat Trump in November.

I came to believe that Sanders is the candidate who can generate the most enthusiasm, the most turnout, and is maybe the only one who can be competitive (as long as he picks a good veep) and beat Trump (although it won't be easy - but I think all the others are even worse equipped to beat Trump). I also warmed up to his Medicare For All proposal, despite being against it in the past, and since health care is a big focus for me, it was a big motivator for my vote: maybe it is time after all for single payer in America, and no president will be as enthusiastic about it as Bernie Sanders, so, this may be the one decent shot at doing it (although I remain very skeptical that it can be done, and worried about unintended consequences and turmoil - but I guess we can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs).

I also stopped worrying about moderates being alienated by Sanders and sitting out. You know, first of all, this is probably an exaggerated concern. The only people among moderates and independents who may come over to the Dem side are the anti-Trump folks, and those are almost guaranteed to prefer Sanders to Trump even if they don't particularly like Sanders. The moderates and independents who are for Trump won't come around and vote for any Dem, anyway. They are lost causes already.

Besides, Bernie's most radical ideas that spook moderates are not even likely to pass Congress, even if both houses get a Democratic supermajority, which is very unlikely anyway. If the Dems don't get both chambers and with a comfortable majority, then Sanders ideas won't pass anyway. It's not like America will turn "communist" (and I know, he is not communist) with widespread nationalizations and a Great Depression kind of Wall Street collapse if Sanders wins. Life will continue. Capitalism will survive.

Sanders regardless of what he does or doesn't do, or is not allowed to do (by means of congressional obstructionism), will still nominate judges and justices much more attentive to the rights of the citizens, in order to balance a bit the right-leaning courts that have been stuffed with people nominated by Trump who will be always more likely to find for the interests of corporations rather than the interests of the people.

Now, don't disappoint me, Senator Sanders!

I do hope that he picks a veep like Val Demings or Sherrod Brown or Stacey Abrams rather than one like Ayanna Presley or campaign insiders Nina Turner or Ro Khanna. He needs to show some ability to compromise and make concessions, and to reach out to the rest of the party beyond his circle of ultra-progressive people.

I'd prefer to see him pick someone to his right (even if still progressive) rather than an ideological twin. And if it's a youngish female of color, even better, because she will add some demographics to the ticket and enhance its support in November.

OK, so, Go Bernie!

I just hope that if he is not nominated, his followers will still vote Dem, as long as it is in a fair process.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with your decision, but I can respect how you made it. May the best Democrat get the nomination, and let's vote out King Donald in November!
 
SoCal said:
If your ultimate goal is beating Il Duce, why the focus on healthcare? Doesn't that come second, third, or? Besides, polls show very little support for Medicare for all. Just ask Warren who backtracked on it.

I agree that his most radical proposals would never pass Congress, but the vast majority of moderates won't give that any thought. The only thing they'll hear and remember are his most radical proposals, period. He calls himself a democratic socialist. Which part of that name will people hear and focus on? America won't be electing a 'socialist' (I know he's not), anytime soon.

When dealing with an obviously corrupt leader and his cult, who lie, cheat, and are out to win a all costs, I hope our high standards of propriety won't result in four more years of our dictator wannabe destroying everything America stands for...
Click to expand...

My focus on healthcare are for reasons that I will not share right now (another poster here does know them, by Private Message) for the sake of privacy, sorry. It does come second. Like I said, my first priority is beating Trump, but my second priority is health care, which is why I mentioned that beating Trump is my *ultimate* goal but I *also* care for health care - notice that I didn't put it on the same level. Ultimate is ultimate. No tie. So yes, with my choice of words I made it clear that it takes second place to beating Trump. My focus on health care still makes it a close second and a very important political priority for me, regardless of how popular or unpopular Medicare For All is.

I firmly believe that if it is unpopular, it is because people haven't experienced the advantages of a well-oiled European-style universal payer system. I have experienced it, by virtue of having lived, studied, and worked in Europe for several years, and by virtue of some medical issues that happened there affecting my wife, my son, and myself - all three got state-of-the-art care and all three were restored to full health for a cost of a round zero, efficiently and fast. Other Americans who have not had this experience may be prejudiced against European-style single payer systems, thinking of rationing of care like in the British system (the country where I lived has a MUCH better system than the British one, as confirmed by numerous rankings). So, I believe that our fellow Americans just don't know what they are missing. With more explanations and demonstrations the idea will grow more palatable. Still, I'm aware that it will be very difficult to implement or maybe even impossible, given that it will face contrary winds by powerful lobbies and court challenges. But we should try. It's worth it.

Yes, Bernie will be accused of being a crazy socialist who will destroy America's economy. But you know, in ALL elections, after the primaries, the nominee veers a bit to the center. Bernie is very consistent in his views and unlikely to budge as much, but at least he may be able to explain his ideas a little, make them sound less scary, and acknowledge that he will need to try to implement them slowly, not abruptly. By the way, one of the reasons I like Bernie better in his MFA all proposal as compared to Warren's, is that the latter committed the huge blunder of clearly lying about it by saying that she will fix health care by the 90th day of her term... which is utterly and absolutely impossible and ridiculous, dishonest, and a big fat lie, while Bernie did say that it will take years of transition.

If America will or will not elect a socialist anytime soon, remains to be seen. Remember, all polls continue to show Bernie ahead of Trump in their match up. Still, going just by polls is not all and I am aware that beating Trump will be extremely difficult, but we must try.

And sure, all candidates have vulnerabilities... and one of Sanders' is the fear of socialism... but like I said in a previous post, I believe that other candidates have even bigger vulnerabilities and are even less likely to beat Trump, for different reasons. So far, Nate Silver gives Bernie the best odds, and Las Vegas gives him the second best (they have Bloomberg as first but I think they are wrong about that, for reasons I spelled out in previous posts).

So, you know, polls and statistical models are not really showing that Bernie can't be elected. And if he picks a more moderate veep, he will reassure a lot of people.
 
jamesbyoung said:
Bloomberg's ads and memes are already enraging Trump as he realizes that America increasingly laughing at his Trumpian foolishness. Your arguments, Craig, are silliness embodied, but don't worry, for your hatred and fear are going to grow immensely over the next few months.
Click to expand...

Let's not get divisive. We're doing Trump's job when we do.
 
iguanaman said:
Any Democrat can beat Trump. He is the least popular President in the history of polls. The one Trump is most afraid of is Biden. That makes me want him more.
Click to expand...

Like I showed you with the most recent statements by Trump, it seems like he is switching to being most afraid of Bernie and to desiring Bloomberg. Biden is falling apart, iguanaman, and all statistical models are now predicting that he will be the least competitive of them all. You seem to be stopped in time, and not noticing the sharp deterioration in Biden's campaign and chances. You need an update, my friend.

Have you realized that this is Biden's third try after having failed twice, and even when he was a lot younger and sharper, he NEVER finished above 3rd in any state or territory? That is an impressive losing record. And then, the first two contests, same thing. As of now in three presidential runs Bernie has never placed better than 3rd in ANY state.

I don't know why people initially overestimated Biden so much. I guess it was name recognition. But it's becoming clearer and clearer that he won't succeed.

Now, if you still like him best, by all means, vote for him, but when he loses the contest, please do vote for whoever the nominee is, in November.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom