Non-Trump voters --- are you NeverBernie?

joko104 said:

If the Democratic Party becomes lead by the Socialist Worker's Party there is likely no way to return to being the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party as you wish it to be will vanish. The MSM/press has so successfully polarized the two political parties and their partisans that both will increasingly be dominated by intolerant extremists on both sides. There is not moderate center. The result is most voters having to select between 2 candidates they greatly dislike.

Click to expand...

The Socialist Workers Party is running their own candidate. Sanders is not a member of the Socialist Workers Party. I know facts are hard and don't push your agenda, but you could at least make an effort.

Redress said:

The Socialist Workers Party is running their own candidate. Sanders is not a member of the Socialist Workers Party. I know facts are hard and don't push your agenda, but you could at least make an effort.

Click to expand...

Not officially, true. Is it the word "Workers" you think is inaccurate?

My core complaint against the Democratic Party has been it's shift from American liberalism to international "progressivism" - an abstract term that I generally see as meaning corporate-fascism - the merger between a highly authoritarian centralized government married to big international corporations.

In most revolutions - whether called socialism, fascism, communism, right-wing, left-wing or whatever label is attached, the rich and mega corporations believe they can interface with the revolutionaries successfully - since they always had been able to merge with and exercise great influence over government. However, that only works so long because revolutions are based upon social emotional grievances and feelings of victimhood at the hand of those super rich and corporations. Ultimately, companies become controlled by the revolution and revolutionary ideas.

NOT to claim Sanders is Hitler and knowing the NAZI comparisons are a real turn off, Germany in the 1930s is the most known example. Western corporations and liberals alike saw Hitler as a huge success because of initial economic success to the extent of quelling growing revolution in Germany. They overlooked the negative aspects of it, until it far too late. Thus, for this example, Germany's largest drug company (and still one of the largest in the world), Bayer was making the poison gas for holocaust camps - knowing exactly what they were doing. Yet a decade earlier the mere suggestion that Bayer - that made life saving drugs - would be making poisons for mass exterminations would be laughed at as a crazy wacko prediction and conspiracy theory.

The danger of Bernie Sanders isn't limited to specifically what he advocates for. But what it leads to. Notice already Sanders supporters are claiming we shouldn't worry because he won't be able to do what he wants thru Congress and he's not really a socialist anyway - when that is exactly who he is and when he says he wants a "revolution" (over and over and over) that is exactly what he means. There is no such thing as good revolutions without at least going thru a lot of suffering, a lot of persecution, and a lot of death and fleeing.

Where I differ with many is whether it would be legitimate for Democratic leadership to pro-actively try to stop Sanders, the non-Democrat, successfully raiding the Democratic Party. My answer is yes, just like it was legitimate for the Republican party to try to stop Trump.

Sanders is more dangerous than Trump because it will be far more difficult for the MSM and press - generally more Democratic and liberal (not "progressive") to intensely oppose him they way they have done to Trump. There are far more institutional and MSM/press obstacles to Trump's excesses than there would be to Sanders. In addition, the USA is still the capital of capitalism in the world, and the fight back by capitalists both domestic and foreign (given tens of trillions invested in the USA and USA based assets), could be huge - or they could take their money and flee the USA on a massive level. Either way, nothing good comes out of either scenario.

Most of all, I like liberals. While I don't seem so on the forum, on some fronts I'm quite liberal and even when not I respect true liberals. I do not respect progressives (to my distinction). I do not like seeing the end of the classic left of center liberal Democratic Party. We are seeing how a minority can take over a large organization such as the Democratic Party is facing. Potentially, that same minority (Sanders Bros) might take over the government. A person has to admire the passion of activist young people, but they don't really have a good grasp on the complexity of government and economics.

jpn said:

I'm not a teacher, but I don't think the problem is the number of commas. Rather, it's a lack of periods. I'd break up the sentence like this:

"When it comes to "the lesser of two evils" there are limits. Where both are so bad, it is not even really a choice." I guess I'd remove one comma after all.

By the way, of course you're free to use you vote however you wish. If you're a Democrat (you have "Lean: Very Liberal"), and you don't vote for the Democrat's candidate, then you're effectively voting for Trump.

Would Sanders really be worse than four more years Trump?

As you know, unless the Democrats also win sixty seats in the Senate (will not happen) while retaining control of the House (much more likely), Sanders will have trouble getting even moderate reforms passed. Most Democrats are moderate, and the Republicans in the Senate will resist almost any meaningful policy improvements in order to keep Sanders from getting a "win." So at best Sanders will appoint non-conservative judges on the courts, stop Trump's mindless assault on regulations, and maybe get a few moderate policies enacted.

Click to expand...

The biggest alarm bell of Sanders supporters now is trying to convince people "don't worry, Sanders can't do what he says anyway because of the Senate." What the hell kind of campaign pitch is that?! The 60 vote rule could be eliminated by the Senate at any time the majority wants to because 60 votes isn't constitutional, it is only a rule from back when it was felt this was a safeguard to prevent sudden, radical change and to try to assure some respect of opposing views to force compromise.

If Sanders can't do what he is promising, why would any one vote for then unknown alternative effect of his presidency? If Sander's supporters are right and Sanders can't do what he says, why would anyone vote for him?

azgreg said:

It is and there isn't a bigger socialist then the one in the White House.

Click to expand...

He's definitely a NY liberal, but if he's the biggest socialist in the world, then what's the problem?

azgreg said:

Click to expand...

Those of you who agree with that sentiment should find it easy to understand and relate to the majority of Trump voters.

Josie said:

For the sake of this poll, let's assume Bernie Sanders wins the nomination for the Democratic Party.

For those who definitely aren't voting for Trump, are you NeverBernie? Who do you plan on voting for if he's the nominee? Do you think that it would be better for Trump to win over Bernie if they are the final two?

Click to expand...

As most folks know on this site, I voted third party in 2016, against both Trump and Clinton. Both disgusted me to no end. I know come November I won't be voting for Trump for the reasons I expressed many times. But that doesn't make me an automatic Democratic voter either. That depends on who their candidate is. For me, candidates matter, not party. Due to their politics, being way to far left for my blood, I wouldn't vote for Sanders nor Warren. It would be third party once again if either of those two are the nominees. I would vote for Biden, Klobuchar, Gabbard, Steyer. Buttigieg, Bloomberg, I'm not sure, but probable.

Josie said:

For the sake of this poll, let's assume Bernie Sanders wins the nomination for the Democratic Party.

For those who definitely aren't voting for Trump, are you NeverBernie? Who do you plan on voting for if he's the nominee? Do you think that it would be better for Trump to win over Bernie if they are the final two?

Click to expand...

I'm a pragmatist. I never liked Trump, even back when he was wildly popular 20 years ago, and didn't want him to be the nominee. But he was, and between him and Hillary I chose Trump, and stand by that decision.

Sanders is an outright socialist and an extremist, and would be a VERY bad President for this country. If he also got Congress to go along with even half of what he wants, we'd be starting down the road to being the next Venezuela. Yeah I know the Venezuelans didn't think it could happen there either, they were the richest nation in SA.

If that's the choice, I'll be voting Trump again. Not because I love him or agree with everything he does, but because the alternative will be worse.

azgreg said:

Click to expand...

Should read
Time to give the 2 party system the boot

in one left wing fantasy, another Rich Guy (a one percenter) jumps in at the last moment as a republican, spends more than the rest, and insists he can brag about it and should be elected on that reason alone.

Lovebug said:

That is the 'stick your head in the sand' mentality that keeps the 2 parties afloat.

Click to expand...

Being aware of the vast policy differences between the two parties is a "stick my head in the sand" mentality? How do you figure?

joko104 said:

The biggest alarm bell of Sanders supporters now is trying to convince people "don't worry, Sanders can't do what he says anyway because of the Senate." What the hell kind of campaign pitch is that?! The 60 vote rule could be eliminated by the Senate at any time the majority wants to because 60 votes isn't constitutional, it is only a rule from back when it was felt this was a safeguard to prevent sudden, radical change and to try to assure some respect of opposing views to force compromise.

If Sanders can't do what he is promising, why would any one vote for then unknown alternative effect of his presidency? If Sander's supporters are right and Sanders can't do what he says, why would anyone vote for him?

Click to expand...

The majority of Democrats are moderate. The Dem's who won in 2018 largely ran on saving the progress we've made on health insurance from Republicans who would roll it back. Democrats in general do not support taking private health insurance away from those who have it today. Despite whatever Republicans say.

I'd say returning to a country in which insurance companies can refuse to insure people because of preexisting conditions if far more radical than anything Sanders proposes.

Josie said:

For the sake of this poll, let's assume Bernie Sanders wins the nomination for the Democratic Party.

For those who definitely aren't voting for Trump, are you NeverBernie? Who do you plan on voting for if he's the nominee? Do you think that it would be better for Trump to win over Bernie if they are the final two?

Click to expand...

I actually would prefer Sanders not be the nominee, and the reason is reflected in this poll. Tens of thousands, if not millions, of voters who don't want Trump re-elected will not vote for Sanders; they'll write-in or stay home.

That said, I will vote for whoever is the Democratic nominee. Period.

jpn said:

The majority of Democrats are moderate. The Dem's who won in 2018 largely ran on saving the progress we've made on health insurance from Republicans who would roll it back. Democrats in general do not support taking private health insurance away from those who have it today. Despite whatever Republicans say.

I'd say returning to a country in which insurance companies can refuse to insure people because of preexisting conditions if far more radical than anything Sanders proposes.

Click to expand...

Not sure I have heard any proposals which would leave people with pre-existing conditions uninsured. Have you???

washunut said:

Not sure I have heard any proposals which would leave people with pre-existing conditions uninsured. Have you???

Click to expand...

Yes. The GOP is trying to repeal the ACA. The ACA requires that health insurance agencies offer coverage to all comers, without regard to their health. They cannot charge higher premiums for those born with defects, etc. Before the ACA, they could.

DiAnna said:

I actually would prefer Sanders not be the nominee, and the reason is reflected in this poll. Tens of thousands, if not millions, of voters who don't want Trump re-elected will not vote for Sanders; they'll write-in or stay home.

That said, I will vote for whoever is the Democratic nominee. Period.

Click to expand...

I could vote for most of the democratic candidates,possibly even Warren. I draw the line with Sanders.

jpn said:

Voting third party is meaningless. Might as well stay home.

You mean there are no policy issues that interest you at all? Health care? Abortion? Environment? Immigration? Foreign policy? Nothing? Because the differences between the two parties on almost every issue has never been more stark.

Click to expand...

I strongly disagree with the bolded part. This isn't just about getting Trump out, although that's certainly the most important thing to me. It's also about keeping the House in Democratic hands and more importantly, taking control of the Senate; as long as Moscow Mitch is in charge, no judges nominated by any Democratic president will even come to a vote!

Seriously, this election is the most important in my (rather extensive) lifetime for those reasons alone. Another four years of Trump/McConnell control could irreparably destroy our democratic form of government along with co-equal branches of government.

jpn said:

Yes. The GOP is trying to repeal the ACA. The ACA requires that health insurance agencies offer coverage to all comers, without regard to their health. They cannot charge higher premiums for those born with defects, etc. Before the ACA, they could.

Click to expand...

So they wanted to repeal ACA and replace it with nothing. Wow, news to me.

washunut said:

I could vote for most of the democratic candidates,possibly even Warren. I draw the line with Sanders.

Click to expand...

Just don't stay home; vote and support Democrats running for House and Senate seats. That is crucial.

washunut said:

So they wanted to repeal ACA and replace it with nothing. Wow, news to me.

Click to expand...

Yes indeed. For the first couple years they voted just to repeal the ACA. But they got such criticism for being so callous that they eventually came up with "repeal and replace" rhetoric. It sounded better.

They offered a bunch of "replacement" plans, but all were terrible compared to the ACA. Here's one, for example:

June 20, 2018:
Latest Republican ACA Repeal Plan Would Have Similar Harmful Impacts on Coverage and Health as All the Others

The ACA is now so popular it's going to be a real problem for the GOP if their legal attempts to repeal it succeed:

DiAnna said:

I strongly disagree with the bolded part. This isn't just about getting Trump out, although that's certainly the most important thing to me. It's also about keeping the House in Democratic hands and more importantly, taking control of the Senate; as long as Moscow Mitch is in charge, no judges nominated by any Democratic president will even come to a vote!

Seriously, this election is the most important in my (rather extensive) lifetime for those reasons alone. Another four years of Trump/McConnell control could irreparably destroy our democratic form of government along with co-equal branches of government.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. I hope every American votes against what Trump has turned our government into but for those who won't stand up to Trump and vote for certain dems, at least get out and vote for as many senators and members of the house as you are willing.

Anyone blatantly refusing to vote for Sanders (assuming he wins) is choosing to vote for no change in POTUS. But getting the senate to the dems and keeping the house can really limit what Trump can do. At least don't let the cowardly Republicans allow Trump to do whatever he wants.

If Sanders gets the nomination, I'll vote third party.

Sadly, yes I would.

Of course it goes without saying that a vote for a third party will be a vote for The Donald.

Please be prepared to take responsibility for that in some unthinkable but possible near future.

Yes, it's my opinion, but it's also very likely true.

I hope your principles are enough to help you sleep at night, because they'll amount to nothing more.

I'm torn.

If he were to say Tulsi is his VP or SoS pick I would likely vote for him because I would feel he is more likely to be genuinely anti-war. My fear is he would compromise on foriegn policy with the establishment Republicrats in order to get some of his domestic policies passed. So my vote will ultimately come down to if I believe he will truly end the BS wars. Considering his flipping on immigration and guns for political expediency, I'm skeptical.