Bernie Sanders has a problem. Her name is Elizabeth Warren.

[RandySF]

Stanfield represents a growing problem for the Vermont independent in his second run for president: Warren has begun to eclipse Sanders’s once-dominant standing among the Democratic Party’s most liberal voters and surpass him in some polls in the first two states in the nominating process: Iowa and New Hampshire.

They both support what would be a massive economic restructuring with ideas such as Medicare-for-all, but Sanders, 78, has carved out his brand as a democratic socialist while Warren, 70, has described herself as a capitalist who has operated more as part of the Democratic mainstream. While Sanders drew notice in 2016 for his avid fans and big crowds, it is Warren this time who is gaining traction that way.

These challenges have been compounded by volatility inside Sanders’s operations in Iowa and New Hampshire. The campaign quietly fired its Iowa political director in the late summer and has yet to name a replacement — a key vacancy as the race enters a crucial phase, with less than five months to go before the February caucuses.

Sanders’s difficulties in Iowa have come into sharper focus over the weekend. The most respected pollster in the state released a survey late Saturday showing Warren surging to 22 percent, two points ahead of former vice president Joe Biden, with Sanders at 11 percent. That places him third in the state where he fought Hillary Clinton to a near draw in 2016, launching an electrifying national movement.

Perhaps more worrisome for Sanders, the poll provided the clearest indication yet that Warren is eating into his base. She is winning a bigger share of people who caucused for Sanders in 2016 than he is, and she is outpacing him among those under 35, his former strong suit, according to the survey conducted by Selzer and Co. for the Des Moines Register, CNN and Mediacom.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bernie-sanders-has-a-problem-her-name-is-elizabeth-warren/2019/09/22/1223d6a6-dd57-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html

[PoliticAverse]

1. Could be worse, he could be polling 5th in his home state like some candidates. n/t

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

2. Good point... and happy for Elizabeth!!

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

[pnwmom]

4. How would we know, without a Vermont poll? We DO have a number of NH polls,

a state where Bernie did very well in 2016, but now he's mostly splitting 2nd place finishes with Warren.

https://www.vox.com/2019/8/22/20805268/new-hampshire-primary-bernie-sanders-elizabeth-warren

[ehrnst]

12. Senators in small, primarily white states do much much better - Like #1 Senator Angus King of ME.

Senators in more diverse, larger populations aren't going to get the kind of lockstep approval that they would get in a homogenous population.

Sanders's disapproval rating went up in his home state last quarter. Could be better.

https://morningconsult.com/senator-rankings-q2-19-2/

[Cha]

3. Whataboutism aside.. this is great for Elizabeth!

[Tarheel_Dem]

5. Which begs the question, why did BS decide to run again when Warren was already in the race?

[JI7]

6. remember all the bs about how he only ran last time

because Warren didn't. and some acted like it was some great sacrafice on his part.

[Tarheel_Dem]

7. I do. I've never been convinced that he ever really wanted to be Prez. There are many reasons....

people run. I have my own ideas, but so as not to run afoul of the rules, I'll keep them to myself.

[JI7]

8. i think we are thinking the same thing

[ehrnst]

11. +1000. (nt)

[Liberty Belle]

9. There are lots of reasons for this.

Sanders is sounds like an angry old man more often than not. His age is as issue, as is Biden's. Even if he's sharp enough at 78, will he be at 82? Let alone capable of two terms? Elizabeth, while not young, is significantly younger than these two.

Second, many women may simply prefer a woman candidate, all other things being equal. After all, we were cheated out of Hilary last time, and for Bernie voters in the primary who later backed Hilary in the general, they felt twice robbed.

Warren may seem more electable running as a capitalist with progressive views than Sanders, who embraces the democratic socialist label proudly or Biden, who is closer to the mainstream/DNC wing of the party. Biden's views on issues such as healthcare aren't adequate for many progressive voters and he's made mistakes in the past on issues such as race, something African-American voters aren't likely to forget.

Warren has been consistent and stayed on message with few if any gaffes, unlike Biden. But Sanders she would go after corporate greed and work to help the middle class.

She has Midwest roots, having been raised in Oklahoma, and can relate better to Midwest voters and their issues than either Sanders or Biden.

She has no known baggage, except the Native American heritage issue, but frankly most voters won't care about that.

All three of these candidates are fighters who would make mincemeat out of Trump in a debate, but Warren, with no gaffes or baggage, and an ability to offer a positive message with warmth and a smile, in some ways takes the best qualities of all three of these candidates.

I could see a ticket with Warren on top and any other strong Democrat who excites people enough to vote out Trump as VP. Maybe someone who is more moderate to assuage concerns of moderate decline-to-state voters and a few Republican women who may be sick of the anti-choice authoritarianism but frightened of too many changes too fast. Maybe a VP choice from a swing state. I would've said Beta O'rourke but his "hell yes" on taking certain guns away will scare all the gun owners and give fodder to the NRA and GOP attack ads. Yes we should take those AK 47s away, but we shouldn't advertise it. Just do it after elected.

[IronLionZion]

10. I voted for Sanders in the primaries in 2016 and Warren now.

She's the most liberal candidate who can win. I don't believe she has many haters on our side, just the other side.