Question: why should someone vote for Sanders over Wsrren

[brooklynite]

Sanders has been in 3rd place in polling models since July. Even if Biden crashes and burns, Warren will be ahead of him. Why should a progressive voter chose him over her?

[comradebillyboy]

1. I cannot fathom why anyone wouldn't prefer Warren over

Sanders. Warren is superior in every way to Sanders

[FoxNewsSucks]

3. Can you offer any specific examples?

Personally, I'd be equally happy with either Warren or Sanders. I've had my fill of corporate-friendly establishment Democrats.

My main reason for continuing to support Sanders is that he has been consistent in his liberal views throughout his career. He doesn't stick his finger up to see which way the wind is blowing. In fact, he stood up for things like civil rights and gay rights when it was not yet a popular position. That is leadership.

I also think he deserves recognition of the fact that without him, and all the work he did running in 2016, none of the liberal policies would be talked about now. The corporate media ignored him as long as they could. But the policies he and Warren stand for are things that the public wants and the public would benefit from.

And if the Democratic party wants to grow and flourish in the future, it damn well needs to embrace one or both of the Senators who inspire, energize and motivate younger people and working people. To win in the future, we need to show a clear difference, and reason for future generations and workers to support Democratic candidates. Otherwise, many will continue to vote 3rd party, be fooled by charlatans like tRump, or simply stay home like they did in 2016.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

8. Me too!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!! or
Elizabeth & Bernie 2020!!
Either way, welcome to the revolution!!!

[TomCADem]

18. Okay, what about Bernie's Absurdly Pro-Russian Record?

Here is a question: Name the only member of Congress who voted against (1) the Magnitsky Act (2012), which was intended to punish Russian officials responsible for the death of Russian tax accountant Sergei Magnitsky in a Moscow prison in 2009; and (2) voted against sanctioning Russia in 2017 for interfering with US elections? Answer: Bernie Sanders, not Tulsi Gabbard, though I can understand why some folks might think that she is the natural candidate.

To put this into context, Bernie Sanders was 1 of 2 (out of 100) senators to vote against Russia sanctions. And 1 of 4 to vote against the Magnitsky Act. I am sure that some folks will say that this is just a coincidence, but what are the odds?

At minimum, Bernie should have abstained from the vote given that Bernie received the benefit of Russian election interference in 2016:

Indictment: Russians also tried to help Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein presidential campaigns

WASHINGTON – It turns out Donald Trump wasn’t the only candidate the Russians allegedly tried to help during the 2016 presidential campaign.

A 37-page indictment resulting from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation shows that Russian nationals and businesses also worked to boost the campaigns of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Green party nominee Jill Stein in an effort to damage Democrat Hillary Clinton.

The Russians “engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump,” according to the indictment, which was issued Friday.

* * *
“Specialists were instructed to post content that focused on ‘politics in the USA’ and to ‘use any opportunity to criticize Hillary and the rest (except Sanders and Trump – we support them),’” the indictment said.

Finally, Bernie has largely been given a free pass on the above since no one is running attack ads against Bernie noting the above record, let alone Bernie going on a honeymoon to the Soviet Union:

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/17/bernie-sanders-mystery-soviet-video-revealed-1330347

Politico: Bernie's mystery Soviet tapes revealed

BURLINGTON, Vt. — It’s 1988 and newlywed Bernie Sanders is in the Soviet Union with his wife, Jane, handing out gifts to the mayor of a midsized city they’ve befriended. The mood is festive as the two bestow the items: A Beatles album, a red “Bernie for Burlington” button, “delicious Vermont candy” and a tape of tunes Sanders recorded himself with fellow artists from Vermont, among other goodies.

“I have met many fine mayors in the United States,” Sanders says, “but I want to say that one of the nicest mayors I've ever met is the mayor of Yaroslavl.”

* * *
The scene is part of 3½ hours of raw, never publicly seen footage of the trip Sanders took to the Soviet Union that year — his “honeymoon.” POLITICO viewed the tapes this week, along with a forgotten hourlong episode of a TV show created by Sanders that featured the same trip, at the offices of a Vermont government access channel.

Earlier this year, two minutes of the long-lost videos went viral when a staffer at Chittenden County’s Channel 17 posted a compilation of the station’s archival footage online. The clip featured a shirtless Sanders and other Americans singing “This Land Is Your Land” to their hosts after relaxing in a sauna. A few minutes later, Sanders doled out the gifts to his Russian friends with a towel wrapped around his waist.

Choosing Bernie Sanders to run against Trump would pretty much neutralize any effort to criticize Trump's efforts to cozy up to Russia.

[George II]

45. He is the only Senator to vote against BOTH the Russia Sanctions and Magnitsky Act.

[TomCADem]

15. Alex, I Will Take Bernie's Pro-Gun Voting Record for a $100

Of course, there is Bernie's support of the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which made gun makers immune from lawsuits. Ironically, Bernie is now campaigning on repealing this law, but always fails to mention that he voted for the bill that he helped pass. But it does not stop there. Bernie has a long history of pro-gun votes:

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/bernie-sanders-2020-presidential-campaign-will-face-scrutiny-clinton-got-ncna973136

For example, many Democratic voters may now be surprised to learn that Sanders opposed a staggering number of gun safety measures throughout his career. He voted five times against the Brady Bill, a common-sense measure mandating a waiting period and background check before purchasing firearms. Rather than apologize, his 2016 campaign doubled down: His top aide, Jeff Weaver, characterized the Brady Bill, in Politifact’s words, a "federal overreach."

* * *
But Sanders’ gun votes don’t end there: He voted to allow firearms on Amtrak trains; he voted to create what is now called “Charleston loophole” that allowed Dylann Roof to obtain the weapon used to murder nine African-Americans in a Charleston church in June 2015. He even voted repeatedly against holding gun manufacturers liable for the destruction caused by their products, which was strange because he supported similar consumer protection measures for other industries, like food manufacturers.

Still, he felt so strongly about protecting the gun industry from lawsuits that he actually defended his votes on the campaign trail before being forced to flip flop.

Democratic voters who listened to his relentless attacks on Clinton (who wasn’t even in Congress at the time) over the 1994 Crime Bill — which was partially responsible for the mass incarceration crisis facing our country — might also be shocked to learn that Sanders voted for it. The excuses for his vote were pathetic: His supporters pointed to the fact that he gave a strongly-worded speech condemning aspects of the bill before casting a vote in favor of it.

[pnwmom]

22. It's wrong to credit Bernie with all of the liberal policies that are being put forward now.

Last edited Tue Sep 3, 2019, 10:02 PM - Edit history (1)

Who do you think wrote the consumer protection law? Who has been working on bankruptcy and banking regulations and how they affect American workers ever since she entered politics? Why would you think Bernie is the only candidate who is concerned about climate change, or environmental protection, or civil rights, or a woman's right to control her own body?

Bernie is not single handedly responsible for the Democratic party's liberal agenda, and Warren has been much more successful than he has in writing successful progressive legislation. She's also stronger on gun legislation. Unlike Bernie, she wants to make gun manufacturers subject to product liability laws.

https://www.npr.org/2019/08/10/749946102/elizabeth-warrens-new-plan-on-guns-has-a-goal-reduce-gun-deaths-by-80

But Warren is going beyond some of the more commonly discussed ideas, such as stricter background checks or a ban on assault weapons. Her plan calls for creating a federal licensing system, limiting the number of firearms someone could buy, raising the minimum age to 21 for purchasing a gun, holding gun manufacturers liable (and, in some cases, even holding gun industry CEOs personally liable).

She also wants to raise taxes for gun manufacturers (from 10% to 30% on guns and from 11% to 50% on ammunition).

[True Blue American]

37. I am guessing here, but could it be that Elizabeth Warren

Is the true Progressive here, not Sanders?

[pnwmom]

46. Well, she certainly has gotten more done. Being able to work with people

to pass legislation is an important skill, and she has demonstrated it.

[FoxNewsSucks]

69. I didn't say he invented them,

my point was that prior to the last election, there was far less publicity to things like the CPB, medicare-for-all, and other liberal policy. Sanders got those things into the national presidential discussion. Had he not run last time, they'd still be background topics.

And again, as I said, I'd be equally happy with Warren. In fact, I do think she's doing a better job on her campaign than Sander so far.

[pnwmom]

93. At least every 4 years, during the PRIMARIES, Democratic candidates push more liberal issues.

And other liberals, including non-Presidential candidates, have fought for Medicare for all and single payer for decades.

Bernie didn't initiate that.

That was Ted Kennedy in the 70's.. And John Conyers introduced a Medicare for All bill every term starting in 2003, till he retired in 2017.


https://time.com/5586744/medicare-for-all-history/


The first major change to Medicare came in 1972 when Richard Nixon added individuals with disabilities and those with end-stage renal disease. But this took the program in a fundamentally new direction: serving as a fallback for people who couldn’t get insurance through their employers, rather than building toward universal coverage as Medicare’s designers had hoped.

Amid these discussions about how to rein in health care costs, Sen. Ted Kennedy introduced his first national health insurance plan in 1971, proposing financing it through payroll taxes. But this failed, along with the rest of the plans discussed at this time.

Still, someone else did see hope in Medicare. One of these failed plans came from Republican Sen. Jacob Javits, who proposed expanding Medicare to cover the entire country’s population. Javits still used the language of “national health insurance,” but he became one of the first people publicly associated with the phrase “Medicare-for-all” when the New York Times used it to describe his plan, declaring on April 15, 1970: “Medicare For All Is Asked By Javits.”


SNIP

In this climate, “Medicare-for-all” finally arrived in Congress. In 2003, Rep. John Conyers introduced the Expanded and Improved Medicare For All Act, a bill that would create a universal single-payer health care system. His fellow lawmakers largely ignored it at the time, but Conyers introduced the bill in each session of Congress until he resigned in December 2017 in the wake of sexual harassment allegations. In 2006, Kennedy also tried again, introducing the Medicare for All Act, which proposed gradually expanding coverage to include all citizens and legal residents.

[aikoaiko]

108. "Unlike Bernie, she voted to make gun manufacturers subject to product liability laws."

How is that possible when the PLCAA became law in 2005 but she was elected into the Senate in 2013?



Was there a vote to rescind it?

[pnwmom]

109. You're right. Unlike Bernie, she SUPPORTS making gun manufacturers liable. Happy now?

https://www.npr.org/2019/08/10/749946102/elizabeth-warrens-new-plan-on-guns-has-a-goal-reduce-gun-deaths-by-80

[aikoaiko]

110. I think Bernie has some reservations about this law now, too.

[betsuni]

29. Ridiculous.

[lapucelle]

88. Warren, Harris, and Booker are all rated more progressive than BS.

https://progressivepunch.org/scores.htm?house=senate

[Blue_true]

105. Don't waste your time. Actual voting records have been pointed to before.

For the Sanders supporters those facts fly off like water off a duck's back.

[Cha]

7. Amen, brah!

[comradebillyboy]

14. Hi Cha

[thesquanderer]

56. Sanders does have some advantages over Warren...

Polls show him beating Trump more handily than Warren does. (We'll see how that looks by the time Iowa rolls around, though. A lot can happen, and Warren still lags Sanders in name recognition.)

Sanders can't be beaten over the head with the pocahontas thing. I guess Bernie's equivalent is the socialism thing, but Warren would still get her share of being attacked as a socialist regardless of her capitalist claims.

Also, in the OP's scenario where Biden crashes and burns, I don't agree with the OP that Warren will be ahead of Sanders, there are numerous polls that have Sanders in second place, not third, and the RCP poll average still has him in second place. Plus the Morning Consult poll of "second place" preferences consistently shows more Biden supporters moving to Sanders than to Warren, further support of the likelihood that Sanders would be in the lead if Biden flames out.

[MrsCoffee]

70. Lol.

[thesquanderer]

77. "LOL" is what one posts when one can't dispute the proposition, so thanks.

My current choice is Warren, but there are perfectly good reasons for someone to prefer any of the other candidates (or at least the major ones). And recognizing those reasons is useful for helping us maintain respect for supporters of other candidates, as well as for that person's candidacy if s/he ends up being the nominee, as unlikely as it may sometimes seem.

[MrsCoffee]

84. Or it's what they post when they read something laughable.

Sanders has been falling in the polls and Warren has been rising. And any claim that there is a "pocahontas" thing or "socialist" thing to be beaten over Warren's head is laughable. So much so, I laughed out loud. Those two issues/labels will be bashed over two other candidates heads not hers.

[thesquanderer]

87. re: "Those two issues/labels will be bashed over two other candidates heads not hers."

One of the two issues I mentioned was "pocahontas" -- there are two OTHER candidates who will be bashed on that one? I can't even think of ONE!

As for "Sanders has been falling in the polls and Warren has been rising," Sanders is still ahead. Here are the 8 national polls from the last two weeks. Warren only beats Sanders in 2 of the 8, and ties in 1.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

I hope Warren continues to climb, but I'm not going to put blinders on and say that she's ahead of Sanders, even though she's been making progress.

[MrsCoffee]

102. Trump is a candidate. I didn't say both were our candidates.

I didn't say it would be bashed over two candidates heads. I said those two issues would be bashed over two candidates heads. I guess you know which head gets the other issue.

[brooklynite]

72. However he CAN be beaten over the head with "Socialist"

[thesquanderer]

73. Yes, that's what I said. {confused} (n/t)

[Demsrule86]

74. Sanders has a better chance than Warren as he has ties to the rust belt...particularly Wisconsin

where I believe the election will be won or lost...Wisconsin, Wisconsin, Wisconsin. However, he doesn't have a good chance...Hail Mary chance...but better than nothing. Biden has the best chance. I believe we will lose the general if Biden is not the nominee in the electoral college and win the popular vote...and everyone will cry end the EC which will never happen. We need to strategy that takes the electoral college into consideration...it is the only way we win.

The polls showing any nominee beating Trump measure the popular vote which we will likely win, but the electoral college determines who the next president will be. Biden is the only one who can win the states we need and win the electoral college...and I think Sanders has a lesser chance,but at least he has a chance...the others aside from Biden wo has a very good chance have no chance.

[True Blue American]

89. Biden is the one

With ties to the so called Rustbelt that is not all rusty any more.
Sanders is far east belt.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. Ya got me.

Warren has pretty well captured the more progressive position without using Bernie's kiss-of-death term "socialism." She also has been able to articulate her plans in detail so they don't sound like vaporous promises (though I'm still not convinced many of them would survive the Congressional meat-grinder). And she seems positive and passionate but without anger, yelling and finger-wagging. She's Bernie without the Bernie.

[True Blue American]

38. Amen to that.

[Turin_C3PO]

11. That's kind of a slander

to imply that Warren (or Sanders for that matter) embraces “America Firstism”. In no way is she like Trump. Her policies aren’t based on hateful, xenophobic, isolationism.

[Celerity]

27. +1

[BlueMTexpat]

28. Thank you!

To say that Warren is in any way responsible for giving us Trump IS a slander!

Thanks for your response!

[Hoyt]

32. Her bashing of Obama and Clinton over trade did help trump, sorry.

While I agree her position on trade is not as hateful as trump, and have said so before, the result is the same. People in poor countries are hurt under Economic Patriotism, America First, or whatever you want to call it.

[DemocracyMouse]

61. I believe "economic patriotism" refers to an economy that benefits all INSIDE the US

It is being falsely equated with Trump's nonsense. Warren is going after monopoly capitalism in favor of a people's capitalusm. She favors small business and workers/consumers rights.

[Clash City Rocker]

62. And Bernie didn't bash them?

[Celerity]

26. How did Warren help 'give us Trump'? Seems completely over the top. She campaigned hard for Clinton

in 2016, which is part of the reason the extreme non-DU, Bernie or Bust crowd does not like her at all. You are basically saying that people on DU who support DU's number one supported candidate (of the declared supporters that would be Warren) are supporting a person who played a role in giving us Trump and is an American Firster (and using a model of AF in a Trumpian fashion via inference.) Both of those positings are slanderous, defamatory charges IMHO.

[Hoyt]

31. Her bashing of Obama and Clinton on trade was hard to miss.

[Celerity]

41. that is ridiculous, you cannot try and and rewrite history to call something bashing when it

was a POLICY stance that was shared by a very large part, if not a majority of the party. Certanly it was large enough that Clinton even backed off the TPP for instance. It is not 'bashing Democrats' to call the TPP a bad deal, most assuredly it is NOT bashing in the way you are disingenuously trying to frame it.

If you are going to tow that ridiculous line you are literally accusing a massive part of the entire elected federal caucus of our Democratic Party of 'helping getting Trump elected' and accusing them of being 'American Firsters.'

That is a complete false dichotomy. You are making it a false choice that one either 100% supports whatever trade agreement is tossed into peoples' laps and if you do not you are a Trump-aider, and an American-Firster. That is simply ludicrous.

[pnwmom]

47. +1. n/t

[True Blue American]

39. Agree!

[brewens]

6. I was Bernie all the way last time. So far I'm leaning toward Warren.

I feel the same way about Biden as Bernie. If they were going to be president, they should have made it happen last time.

[FoxNewsSucks]

9. To be fair,

2016 was Bernie's first run. Biden has run several times and his polling was terrible. I'm sure he's a great guy to know, but I'm truly mystified by why he's now "the savior". Biden is of course, far superior to MF45, but among the current Democratic offering, my opinion is that he's not even close to being the best choice. We need to run the Best Choice.

Warren, Sanders, Buttigieg, Harris, Castro, O'Rourke, Klobuchar, maybe Yang; all are just better choices and will appeal to those who either stayed home or wouldn't vote Democratic last time .

[AlexSFCA]

21. Biden may not be the best choice but he is our best chance

and in 2020 election, those are synonymous because it is the only criterion dem primary voters will be guided by.

[oasis]

49. +1. Yup, Biden's our "best chance". nt

[pnwmom]

48. He lost the primary last time by 4 million votes. How do you think he will win enough

Hillary voters to get a majority of votes this time?

So far I see no effort at all on his part to reach them, and I don't see how he could win without millions of them preferring him over Warren, Biden, Castro, O'Rourke, or one of the others.

[Demsrule86]

76. This isn't the last election...and he is already winning...as for Warren she can't be the nominee

unless she wins AA voters...and thus far she has not. We will lose badly in the general if we do this.

[pnwmom]

92. Sanders is not "winning". None of the top three has ever polled a majority,

though Biden has polled in the 30's. Warren and Sanders are neck and neck for second place.

[tirebiter]

10. Biden will not crash and burn

He is the candidate needed to take back Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Vote your heart in the primary. We need both Sanders and Warren to remain senators so we can put energy into getting it back.

[Turin_C3PO]

12. I think he'll keep up his momentum.

But I wouldn’t be disappointed with a nominee like Warren.

[Demsrule86]

78. I absolutely agree.

[myohmy2]

13. simple...

...Bernie's much better looking and looks like a marvelous President...

...Elizabeth, not so much...

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

...

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

16. LOL! Sexist, much?

[betsuni]

24. Jumping the shark right here: "Bernie's much better looking ... Elizabeth, not so much"

Stop.

[True Blue American]

51. I also laid out why

I prefer Warren.

Sense of humor missing? I simply followed up the Presidential look.

[betsuni]

52. What are you talking about?

You laid out what?

[True Blue American]

53. What I think of Warren and Sanders plans.

You jumped in the middle of the posts.

[betsuni]

55. I jumped where?

You laid out what?

[True Blue American]

40. Better Looking?

Surely you jest. Pot belly, wild hair, shouting.

Elizabeth, classy, neat, intelligently discussing issues.

[George II]

42. Is that the criteria we use to choose our nominee and president?

[True Blue American]

50. They started it!

Last edited Tue Sep 3, 2019, 03:04 AM - Edit history (1)

I just followed along.

For me, I listen to the plans laid out, compare both their records and what they want to do tht is possible.

After 30 years in Congress I see little that Bernie has accomplished and posting with those who live in Vermont complain about no Doctors, one health care plan, jobs lost, taxes rising on Seniors, loos of work I see little accomplishments for Bernie
Massachusetts? Elizabeth created an agency before she even entered Congress. Republicans denied her running the agency she created so she ran and won against Playgirl model Brown Has aggressively worked hard to protect Consumers.

Is that better as to why I prefer Warren?

[George II]

65. My comment wasn't directed to you, but the person above you.....

....who thinks that looks are important in choosing a president.

[True Blue American]

67. Thanks for that.

I do not care about a persons looks, but I really do care about what they say, even how they say it

That may be biased on my part, but that is how I feel. If you have to scream, attack another member of your own party to try and make a point, you lose me.

I want to hear what your plans are, how you plan to accomplish them, if they are feasible in the climate today.

Democrats and a few Republicans wanted health care for 80 years. Obama made a start against all odds.

All I see in Republicans is tear down, tax breaks from for the wealthy.

I relish the day John McCain cast his last vote. Did not agree with his Politics, but he stood up when the country needed him!

[George II]

83. Neither do I. A person could have three heads but if he/she uses them all....

...to say and do the right thing, I'm voting for that person.

I honestly can't believe that someone here made those comments.

[questionseverything]

104. bernie got the money added to the aca for community clinics....they serve the poorest of the poor

and he got the fed audited...the only time it has been audited

love warren but there is no need to belittle Bernie

[True Blue American]

106. I do not

Belittle Bernie, i just do not agree with him

[questionseverything]

107. you said he hasnt accomplished anything

when he is literally the only reason we have community clinics for the poorest of the poor


now since that isn't you I guess you don't think it's important

[Cha]

99. No, sorry.. you're way wrong.

[crazytown]

17. Bernie & Elizabeth have different world views

Elizabeth Warren is a Teddy Roosevelt progressive. Her number 1 priority is ending corruption - In TR's words "to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day". Elizabeth believes that people and corporations must play by the rules (her Republican background) and those rules must be fair, compassionate, and enforced against all (particularly the powerful). Her signature policy, is the wealth tax which would fund assistance for opportunity, particularly for women - federally funded childcare, pre-k, health care, tuition free public college and student loan relief. It is her story - single mothers from modest backgrounds can reach for the stars.

Bernie sees the world as a struggle between the billionaires, the oligarchs, the top 1% and the rest. It is a struggle that ordinary folks have been losing. Obscene poverty is an indictment of obscene wealth. To fight back, the enemies of progress must be named and defeated by political revolution. Whatever the state of play, Sanders believes that the most practical way to protect ordinary people from the depredations of the ruling class is to establish and entrench a 21st Century Bill of Economic Rights - "the right to quality health care, the right to as much education as one needs to succeed in our society, the right to a good job that pays a living wage, the right to affordable housing, the right to a secure retirement, and the right to live in a clean environment".

[FM123]

64. Yes!

[crazytown]

68. Thank you.

I have posted something like this a few times, but no one has commented. Elizabeth has spoken about policy being formulated in Washington where 9 out 10 at the table represent huge corporate interests. The end result is that government works for a thin and thinner slice of the people, not because of a struggle between capital and workers, but "corruption, pure and simple".

[Demsrule86]

79. I see no difference...both will be branded socialist by the pugs...Biden has the best chance

and will be the nominee and president IMHO.

[JI7]

19. they shouldn't .

[crazytown]

82. Right

who cares if a candidate is a left liberal vs a socialist? I do.

[aeromanKC]

20. The Senate

They do not want to lose a D Senate seat like they would if Warren won.

[grantcart]

25. Not a material factor.

Joe Kennedy has already formed an official exploratory committee and is 20 points ahead of the other incumbent Senator. Obviously if Warren gets the nomination he can run for Warren's seat.

If Arizona can have 2 Dem Senators (and we will) then I am very confident that we will have 2 in Mass.

Doubtful that any major Republican would bother to run. If Warren is on the ticket then MASS will have a landslide up and down the ticket.

[aeromanKC]

33. BULLSHIT!! Warren losses the Dems a Senate seat in 2020 if she wins

Warren is a loser for the Dems in the Senate in 2020. (MA has a R Gov.)

[True Blue American]

43. Once that Kennedy runs

We shall see. Joe is articulate, smart, handsome and gives off the Kennedy attraction.

[Celerity]

44. For only a few months months. Look at Massachusetts law.

https://malegislature.gov/laws/generallaws/parti/titleviii/chapter54/section140

Section 140: Senators and representatives in congress; vacancies

Section 140. (a) Upon failure to choose a senator or representative in congress or upon creation of a vacancy in that office, the governor shall immediately cause precepts to be issued to the aldermen in every city and the selectmen in every town in the district, directing them to call an election on the day appointed in the precepts for the election of such senator or representative. The day so appointed shall not be more than 160 nor less than 145 days after the date that a vacancy is created or a failure to choose occurs. Filing a letter of resignation creates a vacancy under this section, even if the resignation is not effective until some later time, but the date of the election to fill a vacancy under this section shall be after the resignation is effective.

(b) If a vacancy under this section is created after February 1 of an even-numbered year, the governor shall not issue the precepts required by subsection (a), except as subsection (c) provides for a vacancy for senator.

(c) If a vacancy is created for senator in congress after April 10 of an even-numbered year, the governor shall issue precepts under this section, unless section 152 requires that office to appear on the biennial state election ballot in that year. If this section prevents issuance of precepts for senator, the office shall appear on the biennial state election ballot in that year. If a vacancy for senator is created after April 10 of an even-numbered year, but on or before the seventieth day preceding the regular state primary, the precepts shall appoint the day of the regular state primary and the biennial state election for holding the special primary and special election required by this section.

(d) If at the time a senator or representative in congress is elected at the biennial state election, there exists a vacancy in that office, the senator or representative shall also be deemed to have been elected to serve out that vacancy.

(e) A senator elected to fill a vacancy under this section shall serve for the remainder of the unexpired term.

(f) Upon failure to choose a senator in congress or upon a vacancy in that office, the governor shall make a temporary appointment to fill the vacancy; provided, however, that the person so appointed shall serve until the election and qualification of the person duly elected to fill the vacancy pursuant to subsection (a) or (c).

snip

[Demsrule86]

80. There is a GOP governor...and the person appointed by this governor could win a special...just

like Scott Brown did ...bad idea...no senator with a GOP governor should run...I love Sherrod Brown...but we need him in the senate.

[grantcart]

23. Anyone who feels that the Democratic brand is insufficient should vote for Sanders

Anyone who thinks President Obama should not have faced Romney with a strong united voice but primaried him and possibly replaced him in 2012 should vote for Sanders.

Anyone who believes that transparency should only apply to Sec Clinton but not have to release their taxes should vote for Sanders.

Anyone who feels that it is better to give bitter emotional speeches rather than inspirational speeches filled with practical progressive options should vote for Sanders.

Finally anyone who believes it's better to have successive trillion dollar give aways without having to bother with realistic plans to increase revenue (like Warren's brilliant plan to tax assets).

But this is well known at DU where Sanders seriously under performs in comparison to the general Democratic voter

[Tarheel_Dem]

30. +1

[betsuni]

35. Talking points:

Democrats don't care about the working class, are beholden to corporate lobbying.

Democrats aren't progressive.

Democrats only follow polls and are weathervanes, are ideologically bankrupt.

Making it about Hillary.

[Sherman A1]

36. In the general I will vote for the nominee

until then I will stick with my preferred candidate because of his lengthily and well thought out list of policy proposals.

https://www.yang2020.com/policies/

[Demsrule86]

81. vote blue yes...

[betsuni]

57. Is "sandersover" like easy over?

Is it a DNC breakfast special?

[irisblue]

58. Welcome to DU bammap56. A suggestion, reread the Terms of Service

A first post that disparages Dems will get alerted on.

Enjoy the view and stay

[irisblue]

59. And not even quality trolling. Geez

[cstanleytech]

60. To be honest I do not care which Democratic wins the nomination as I intend to fully support them as

any of them would be a far better choice than the shit stain that is currently in the White House playing at being President and throwing childish tantrums.

[Alpeduez21]

63. cause they're sexist.

Sanders is a narcissist. He thinks he is more important than the democratic party the rules of which he agreed to follow and fights at every turn.

[SidDithers]

66. They shouldn't...nt

Sid

[Tom Rinaldo]

71. I could become convinced that he would more likely win the Presidency than Warren

By and large most posters at DU consistently underestimate Sanders. He has been written off as a spent force by many here since before the first debate. Yet boomlets for O'Rpurke, Buttigieg, Harris and others come and go while Sanders remains firmly in the top tier, sometimes in front of, sometimes behind Warren. Outside of activist circles, Sanders often appeals to different voters than does Warren. I say this with some sense of irony, but for now Sanders has greater support than does Warren among African American voters, which Sanders detractors in the past were always quick to point out is a prerequisite constituency for Democratic candidates to win over. As others have pointed out, your statement that "Even if Biden crashes and burns, Warren will be ahead of him" is not fact based. Sanders appeals to many of the same working class white voters that Biden does. Many voters choose someone who they can relate to who they believe understands their concerns rather than running their choice through a check list screen of policy positions. Both Biden and Sanders share a long held public perception that they care about "the little guy", which isn't to say that Warren doesn't, just that perceptions and a sense of familiarity matter to many voters.

[aikoaiko]

75. One reason is that Bernie showed a lot of courage in 2016.

Elizabeth Warren, who I like a lot, kind of ducked out.

[pnwmom]

94. She strongly supported the former Secretary of State. That wasn't ducking out. n/t

[aikoaiko]

95. Actually she stayed neutral until June 9th.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/elizabeth-warren-endorse-clinton-rachel-maddow-show-n589236

[pnwmom]

96. Uh-huh. But Bernie was still running then.

He didn't endorse Hillary till July 12 and didn't campaign for her till 2 events in September.

Warren gave Hillary strong support at a time when it was crucial.

[aikoaiko]

97. Sure but she did wait until Obama.

She waited until the end.

[pnwmom]

98. That wasn't the end. Bernie continued to campaign for a month after Elizabeth

gave her endorsement.

[Autumn]

85. Because they prefer Sanders over Warren? Nothing is set in stone, certainly not polls.

[empedocles]

86. Which one, Sanders or Warren is most likely to lose in November 2020?

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

90. If you think that having someone take office

a few months shy of age 80, then go for it!

Me, I want a much, much younger president. Elizabeth Warren, despite having just turned 70, seems a decade or more younger than Sanders or Biden. Or even Hillary.

We need a President from a younger generation.

[Gothmog]

91. I like Warren over sanders

I sat three rows behind Warren at the National Convention in Philadelphia

[Joe941]

111. Actually he has been consistantly in 2nd...

He is really the brains and warren has conveniently borrowed much from him.