If Bernie Sanders gets the nomination, I will sigh

[MineralMan]

and vote for him in the general election, and then prepare as best I can for four more years of Trump. The same goes for a couple of other current candidates, like Tulsi Gabbard and Tom Steyer. I'll vote for the nominee in any case, because I always vote for the Democratic nominee.

But, as with several other Democrats I've voted for, I'll know we'll lose that election. More's the pity, and I'll have to deal with yet another Republican in the White House. That's really painful, and even more so with Donald J. Trump, who is the worst President in my rather long lifetime.

So, no, I don't support Bernie Sanders to become the nominee. I don't want us to lose and have Trump win. I really, really don't. But, that's what will happen. Still, the Democratic nominee will get my vote, without question. whoever it turns out to be. I'm just hoping to be voting for the next President, instead of the next also-ran.

[Dopers_Greed]

1. I just hope

That we don't hear 4 years of "If he runs further to the left, he can win in 2024!" from Sanders supporters.

[MineralMan]

6. Given his recent heart attack, I doubt he will be alive to run in 2024.

The odds are against that. The actuarial tables aren't kind to 70-something men who have already had a heart attack. They just aren't.

That's another reason I don't support him in the primary races.

[MineralMan]

72. Ask me again when you've made 100 posts.

[DarthDem]

76. LOL. Can I Ask?

And worded slightly differently. What is your opinion of Bloomberg and take on his candidacy?

[MineralMan]

80. Sure. I think Bloomberg is running a very savvy campaign.

I think he could beat Trump, too. You can see who I'm supporting, below.

[PJMcK]

90. That exchange is why I always read your posts, MineralMan

Your internet and political insights are always intelligent, informed and witty.

You get a heart, dude.

[MineralMan]

114. Thanks!

[DarthDem]

112. My take and status as well

Thanks.

[Red Oak]

91. Bloomberg is very dangerous.

Trump is an idiot. A con. Incompetent. Even so, he has managed to wrap the Republican party, much of Congress and the Department of Justice around himself so as to have almost no accountability for anything he says and does.

Bloomberg says one of his assets is that he takes no money from anyone. He can't be bought. Also, Bloomberg is smart. Very, very smart.

Now combine all that and I see extreme danger. A presidency that has even more executive power than his predecessors, shielding him from Congressional oversight, coupled with a man that is a special interest of one and a record to match, with the money and power to pull off anything he wants and not give a damn about what you or anyone else thinks. Want a war? Which country? Iran maybe? Want to have entitlements cut? Who is going to stand in the way? The progressive wing of the Democratic party after it has been neutered?

Might it work out well? Yes. Money alone is not a predictor of doom. Roosevelt and JFK were not poor and both were good Presidents in another time with Congressional oversight. However, might it be the most horrific choice for President in the history of the United States. Yes.

You want an authoritarian government? Have a set up where the "party of the working class" has to go to a man with $54 Billion dollars to win with little Congressional oversight.

We have good candidates on the stage competing hard for the Presidency. They are not buying their way in. They are busting it in good old retail politics. I would very much like to vote for one of them for President and let Bloomberg go tend his tens of Billions.

My opinion. YMMV.

[Demsrule86]

98. Sanders won't win...and if I have to choose between Bloomberg and Trump, I choose Bloomberg.

Sure Sanders has my vote...but I expect we will lose. I would prefer Biden or Warren...but it is what it is...we have to beat Trump. I am sticking with Joe for now and we will see what happens...two tiny white states have voted. I want to see super Tuesday.

[broiles]

102. So much for Joe's electability

He's run for president three times and never won a primary.

[Demsrule86]

103. I am not giving up on Joe...we have two small states ...let's see what happens. But if Joe falters

then I support Bloomberg. He can beat Trump.

[MH1]

104. Bloomberg is running as a Dem, the electoral map is tilted towards republicans

This is really a terrible place to be in, but we are here because not enough Dems got off their ASSES and voted for HILLARY in 2016.

Now that we are here - YES Bloomberg is better than Trump.

And NO, the risk of authoritarian government is NOT as high. Because a Democrat is more likely to be thwarted by the opposition party, and trust me, they will be trying to thwart.

As disgusting as it is to say, at this point we would have been better off if Trump had run as a Democrat. (well he wouldn't have been nominated, but you get the point)

And all that said, please, please let there be a better nominee, who can and does beat Trump.

[hangaleft]

113. Your post is so gloomy

And spot on.

I’m also all in for Warren, and hope against hope that she’s our candidate for president.

I’m not really crazy about any of the other candidates. But when I weigh all of the considerations, including electability, I reluctantly go with Klobuchar. I think she’s electable, she’s a real Democrat, and would restore dignity to the Office.

[Red Oak]

78. I'm Michael Bloomberg and I approved (and paid for) this question.

Amazing to have a man claiming to now be in the Democratic party see if he can literally purchase the Presidency.

If he wins, at least we'll know what the price of the Presidency is.

[mchill]

79. I'd take Bloomberg over Bernie in a heart beat

We will lose with Bernie. Some of these moderates need to drop out or we will end up with Bernie, just like the GOP ended up with Trump for the same mathmatical reasons.

[Marty Marzipan]

88. You believe the only way to beat Trump is to elect a candidate just like him.

[Demsrule86]

99. Bloomberg isn't like Trump.

[mchill]

115. Huh?

Not a very nuanced thought comparing Trump to Bloomberg and coming up with “same.”

[Marty Marzipan]

81. We don't need a racist Republican as the Democratic candidate...

… think again...

[wryter2000]

8. I'm afraid we will

Yes, polls show people support progressive ideas, but that doesn’t translate into them voting for “libruls.”

[cab67]

39. It certainly doesn't translate into votes for Sanders.

[HarlanPepper]

29. I suspect saving the party

From far left ideologues is going to be an ongoing battle.

[aggiesal]

54. FDR would be considered Far Left in today's politics ...

yet we are still living under many of the New Deal progressive programs
that FDR implemented.

[OliverQ]

57. People here don't realize that.

America used to elect Socialists quite frequently.

[aggiesal]

67. I won't say that FDR was a Socialist ...

but he did have an eye towards Social programs.
Big difference.

[OliverQ]

68. Correct, which is how I see Sanders too.

He supports the Nordic model which is just regulated capitalism with heavy emphasis on social programs.

[wnylib]

86. FDR ran at a time of severe economic

crisis when, as a result, the nation experienced a rise in fascism on the right and communism on the left. He was a moderate by comparison.

He was also a capitalist who saved capitalism by tweaking some ideas from socialism. I fully agree with the need for reasonably regulated calitalism. I also agree with the need for a social safety net that empowers people to improve their lives beyond the need for it. I favor a single payer option to expand Medicare.

But after a lot of thought, I cannot support Sanders. He has tagged himself with a term that the majority of Americans do not understand. They equate it with Cuba and China and with loss of personal liberty. Sanders would need to spend his entire campaign explaining himself while Trump et.al. stoke American fears. Maybe Sanders would enjoy having the soapbox to preach his views, but he would not win with them in the general.

Even if he could win, who would he get for a cabinet? What coalitions would he be able to form for cleaning up the Trump mess? Divisions would be even worse between left and right, and between left and left among ourselves.

I like Warren. But she would be crushed while trying to explain her plans against Trump stoking fears of socialism/communism to an American public already disposed to believe the worst about those labels. Why give R's fuel to burn us with?

Sanders and Warren can fight for their reforms much better in the Senate than in the WH where cleaning up after Trump will not be a one person job.

Biden has the experience, knowledge, and contacts needed to set the nation back on course again. He could be a good president for the times we are in, but I have concerns about his ability as a campaigner. A good running mate, like Klobuchar, could help with that. Support from Bloomberg in the campaign would be another boost.

Buttigieg and Klobuchar also would be good alternatives to Biden or Sanders. Even a billionaire like Bloomberg could probably win against Trump, although he is a R transplant as well as a billionaire, and I prefer a solid Dem.

But Sanders or Warren would be too divisive, I think, for a nation already divided. Sanders relishes the division while I believe Warren prefers unity, but won't get it with her positions.

We cannot afford more divisions, especially not among ourselves.

[Red Oak]

92. I agree with you

FDR would be seen as extreme.

Teddy would be seen as extreme.

JFK would be seen as extreme.

Hell, Eisenhower would be seen as extreme and he was a Republican.

I say relax. I think a wet noodle would beat Donald Trump this year.

If you think not, then tell me where all his new voters are coming from that would propel him to win in WI, MI, PA, etc? You think there are going to be a ton of former Hillary voters changing sides? Yeah, nope.

His base dying off, Dems are very highly motivated and demographics are changing every day. He is underwater in all the states that he really, really needs to win.

So go ahead and vote your heart no matter your candidate and feel good about doing the right thing. Then relax, we've got this.

[wryter2000]

2. Amen

People who think we need to run someone who’s a socialist don’t understand how uninformed the people of the US are. They don’t understand the difference between socialism and communism.

[oasis]

10. Bernie's Cabinet is what'll be my greatest concern. nt

[CarlitosMMT]

89. Stephanie Kelton for Tsy Secretary?

The moderate candidates like Mayor Pete and Klobochar are all committed Deficit Terrorists.

If you think an austerity platform is going to win an election, please think again.

[FakeNoose]

46. Chump WANTS to run against Bernie - why is that?

Because he knows he can beat Bernie without even trying.

Why is our Party toying with a potential nominee who refuses to even join the Party?
This entire line of thinking is absurd.

I'm committed to voting for our Party's nominee - NO MATTER WHO - but I'm praying it won't be Sanders. I'd take Mike Bloomberg any day over Sanders.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. Me, too.

Of course I'd vote for him but I wouldn't feel very hopeful about winning - or in the remote event that he did win, that his presidency would be effective. It certainly would not bring about Medicare For All or Free College or the Dictatorship of the Proletariat.

[MineralMan]

12. You're right, of course.

I don't see Sanders having coattails that will give us a majority in the Senate. We might even lose some House seats. So, Bernie's high ideas about making huge changes would almost certainly not be realized.

Still, I think he has a very poor chance of becoming the nominee. I think he has hit his ceiling of support at this point, and that someone else will end up with the nomination. It could be Biden, or Klobuchar or Bloomberg. I'm beginning to think that Bloomberg will end up pulling it out of his hat, somehow.

Biden would beat Trump. Bloomberg would beat Trump. Amy Klobuchar might beat Trump, but that would be a close call.

Sanders, however, I believe, would lose to Trump in a landslide that would end up destroying US democracy for decades, if not forever. Still, he'll get my vote, just as have all Democrats who have run since 1968. I could vote in no other way.

[Desert grandma]

97. I so hope you are right.

If Sanders gets the nomination I do fear we will be in for another 4 years of the Orange Maggot. I too have voted Democratic for a long time and voted in the election that McGovern lost by a landslide. I can appreciate where these younger people are coming from. We felt that same way in 1972. The stakes are so much bigger this time. I am hopeful Joe gets the nomination. If he does, Bloomberg will pour al lot of money and other resources to help him defeat 45. If Joe is not the nominee, I hope it is Bloomberg. I agree with you. Biden and Bloomberg are the only two candidates that are sure to defeat Trump. We cannot afford to take chances. Trump is far too dangerous. Winning needs to be the ONLY priority IMO.

[RandySF]

4. I will vote for Bernie, too.

And pray.....hard.

[msongs]

5. if its bernie/tulsi the anxiety will skyrocket nt

[LanternWaste]

7. Seems everyone has a unique, yet absolute knowledge of who will and who can't win.

[tonedevil]

11. The truest of trues. /nt

[MineralMan]

14. We all have our opinions about that, yes.

And, you know, some of us will be proven right. Others will get it wrong. Each of us has one vote. That's all. But, we all get to have our opinions, as well.

No doubt you have an opinion, as well. You're welcome to post it in the Democratic Primaries forum, too.

[brooklynite]

9. If Sanders wins the nomination, I won't send him my money...

1) he won't want it

2) I'll need to spend like crazy to firewall the House (the Senate will be a lost cause).

[Fresh_Start]

13. same...I will support house and senate candidates

but the senate will sink further into GOP hands...and the House will probably lose democratic representatives...

[MineralMan]

15. That's a good point.

We'll all have to do what we can, if it comes to that.

[jimfields33]

22. There are young people in every district

Bernie will result in supermajority in both houses. He’s the only one that will make gains in both. Bloomberg will give us hopefully a few seats in the house and nothing in the senate.

[brooklynite]

24. Please back up such a ridiculous claim...

In the Senate we have 47, but we'll likely lose AL, so you'll need 14 to break a filibuster. I'll be kind and spot you ME and CO. Name 12 other States Bernie will pick up.

[Horizens]

36. Wishful Thinking

90% of the house seats won in 2018 were won by moderate democrats. They won't want to be seen with bernie who would not only lose but will cost us house and senate seats.

[cab67]

40. there are less-than-young voters in every district, too.

Relying on one demographic is a bad idea, in my opinion.

[Mike 03]

94. Well I guess you haven't spent much time in Arizona.

In the last six years I've met one Bernie supporter and she was too young to vote.

We have a life and death Senate race here.

[Codeine]

105. Why do people say such things?

I know you’re trying to support your candidate but that’s just a ridiculous assertion. Supermajority my pale scrawny ass.

[jimfields33]

106. Obama got it. Don't see why sanders can't. We always settle for the lowest

Possible win.

[Codeine]

107. Sanders isn't Obama.

He’s not even in the same league.

Name the states you think we can gain seats in for a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

[jimfields33]

109. Arizona, Maine, Kansas, 2 Georgia, North Carolina, texas,

Alabama (incumbent usually win), Kentucky, Iowa and Montana. Easily by sanders due to the youth and Latino vote plus majority of black vote and suburban whites.

[Codeine]

111. Dream big, I guess.

Ain’t happening, but a vivid fantasy life is healthy, I suppose.

[Polybius]

110. It's impossible to get 67 Senators in 2020

The math isn't there.

[Demsrule86]

42. Yup, we have to save the House...

[Pacifist Patriot]

16. I hear what you're saying, but I don't have confidence...

his handlers would be able to prop him up for an entire four year term. Frankly, I'm surprised his health hasn't deteriorated to the point where a campaign this year wasn't even viable. I really did expect his accelerating health issues to be having more of an impact by this point.

[Turin_C3PO]

17. If it helps ease your mind

Sanders actually is performing pretty good in head to head against Trump. As are Biden and Bloomberg. According to polls, we should be worried most about Warren or Buttigieg because they poll pretty poorly against Trump. In any case, I still think Biden will win this thing.

[MineralMan]

18. The Republicans have not even begun to campaign against

Bernie Sanders. They're praying he gets the nomination, so they're holding back everything they have in case he does.

You have no idea.

[Turin_C3PO]

19. You're probably right

but I will still work like hell for whoever the Dem nominee is. My goal is to convert at least two (hopefully more) non-voters this November.

[OliverQ]

21. Their campaigns against Bernie don't work too well.

Bernie actually polls better being a Socialist than he does being a Democrat.

I'd be more worried about the dirt Lindsey Graham is digging up on Biden and Hunter.

[Butterflylady]

44. Was just going to comment on that.

You are right on the money MM. If he becomes the nominee the Republicans will let loose an avalanche of anti- Sanders propaganda that will be unlike anything you've seen before. The problem is they will have people so scared the everyone will believe it. I've seen it before.

[Callado119]

100. Yup..

The oppo on sanders is extensive and damning, and that’s just what we already know but has barely been touched by the media and other candidates. Just imagine what else is out there that we don’t know. Republicans and the media who want nothing more than to see trump re-elected have just been biding their time. It’s going to be brutal. I suspect if he’s the nominee his favorables will be in the low 20’s or worse by October, and even a lot of his current fans will be disgusted and say both sides are the same and just stay home..

[Bradshaw3]

31. That's false about Warren and Pete

Not only are they NOT performing poorly against drumpf as you put it, they are actually within the margin of error of the three you mention and beat drumpf:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/general_election/

[Demsrule86]

45. No...when they unleash the two foot thick oppo on Sanders, he is toast. And that is why

the GOP wants him to win the nomination. We have to defeat Sanders in the primary in order to defeat Trump in the General. He will lose the EC....maybe even the popular vote...and states like Virginia and Delaware. I will fight to save the house and that will be hard enough. He has my vote of course...but I expect the worst.

[OliverQ]

20. Biden isn't going to beat Trump either, so do you plan on preparing for another 4

years of Trump if he wins?

[Fix The Stupid]

23. "They'll" just blame Bernie and all the other candidates...like clockwork. n/t

[Demsrule86]

48. Biden would beat Trump by winning WI, PA and MI...an EC win. Bloomberg will beat Trump...Sanders

won't win...vote blue no matter who...but only two candidates can beat Trump.

[OliverQ]

53. Sanders is beating Trump in WI, PA, and MI according to polls

He has about the same numbers as Biden in those States, but Sanders is polling much higher nationally.

[NeoGreen]

25. A few unappreciated facts...

...


Just sayin'

[MineralMan]

26. In Vermont.

Vermont goes its own way.

[NeoGreen]

28. intransigent pessimisim tends to be...

...self fulfilling.

[Happy Hoosier]

27. Ah. David Sirota. No Sale. NT

[NeoGreen]

33. Facts are stubborn things...

... regardless of who speaks them (or whom may disregard them):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Representatives_from_Vermont




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_senators_from_Vermont

[Happy Hoosier]

34. Yeah....

I just don;t see that this has any pertinence to our current situation. If you do, great. I think it's poppycock.

[SCantiGOP]

41. FDR won 46 of 48 states in his first re-election in 1936....

The two he didn't carry? Maine, and the traditional Republican stronghold of Vermont.

Until the 1970's there wasn't a single Republican in any statewide or countywide position in SC. Look at the map now.

Things change, so Bernie beating republicans years ago is not really relevant.

[cab67]

47. No one's challenging the facts.

They're challenging their relevance.

Sanders replaced Jeffords in the Senate. Jeffords ended up leaving the Republican Party and caucusing with Democrats, even if he never actually became one.

Sanders replaced Peter P. Smith in the House before that. Smith is not a far-right loony, and he was an early never-Trumper among Republicans.

So, yes - Sanders replaced Republicans. But he did so in a notably progressive state, and replaced notably less-than-right-wing Republicans. Extrapolating that to replacing a conservative Republican in a national vote is questionable, in my opinion.

[NeoGreen]

56. Thank you for...

...your cogent response.

[Demsrule86]

49. Such bullshit. Sirota is as always full of it.

Last edited Thu Feb 13, 2020, 06:42 PM - Edit history (1)

[NeoGreen]

58. Nice...

...the strength of your argument and your eloquence are noted.

[Demsrule86]

93. Let me expand Leahy was elected way before Sanders...vermont was not a red red states...

Sirota as usual is full of shit. Sanders replaced Jeffords who was a moderate GOP at that who become an independent. But one of the Democratic Senators had been there since 75...Leahy.

[MineralMan]

32. I voted for Hillary in 2016, because I thought she had a better

chance to win, yes. She did win the popular vote. Bernie would have lost in 2016, for the same reasons he'd lose in 2020. Here's one of those reasons, which will appear in every opposition ad after the convention, if Bernie is the nominee:

Please note that this is not the short, poor quality, video often posted. Watch it. If Bernie is the nominee, you will see it hundreds of times during the GE campaign.

[Happy Hoosier]

35. Yeah, get used to seeing that clip....

If Sanders gets the nom, we'll see this over and over and over.

[ehrnst]

87. +1000.

[Still In Wisconsin]

37. Bernie is literally my last choice, even behind Gabbard. But I will do the same as you.

I will hold my nose and vote for Bernie Sanders. His supporters love to cite polls that show Sanders leading Trump in national polls. The problems with that logic are twofold: first, Sanders' overwhelming popularity in deep blue states skews the polls; in the Rust belt, FL, and AZ Sanders is dead in the water vs. Trump. Second, as you noted, the Republicans have not even begun to unload on Sanders. When they're done with him he will be nothing more than a quivering mass of Democratic Socialist goo. And that's if he doesn't have another cardiac event and drop dead during the campaign.

[Nanjeanne]

38. I think most of us feel that way about anyone but our candidates.

I'll vote for the nominee. But I only support Bernie Sanders to be the nominee right now. I don't want us to lose and Sanders is the only one I see beating Trump.

Primaries - the place to support your candidate.

[cab67]

50. Many of us see things the other way around.

We see Sanders as the least likely among Democratic candidates to defeat Trump.

[Nanjeanne]

52. Yes many do. I don't - and thank goodness the polls also say otherwise so far.

[cab67]

59. Those polls aren't as meaningful as we might want.

Sanders has a lot of baggage. Democrats haven't used it against him for fear of alienating his base. Republicans won't be so reluctant. He looks strong now, but after a couple of months of being tarred as an anti-American commie, a deadbeat dad, a draft dodger, and a hypocritical empty suit who tried to send Vermont waste to parts of Texas with large Latinx communities? Let's see what happens to the polls then.

It won't matter that the labels I listed may be questionable, or that some could just as easily be applied to Trump. Universal health care was tried in Vermont, and it failed. It won't matter that the economy of Vermont cannot be compared with the economy of the US as a whole - it'll be used against him.

I'm like everyone else here. If Sanders is the nominee, he'll get my vote. That's not even up for debate. But like many others here, I don't think he's as electable as many of his core supporters seem to think.

Please read this, if you haven't already done so:

https://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044

[Nanjeanne]

62. All the candidates have baggage. I've read this. I support Bernie. You don't. No worries.

[LW1977]

43. I am getting tired of Debbie Downer threads!

Why is this one of the threads on the front page? I’d like to trash it so I don’t have to see it again.. But it’s in my face when I log on to the website!

[mac56]

73. I believe you can block it, if it troubles you.

[MineralMan]

74. Because a lot of people have recommended it.

That's how posts get into the Trending list. But that only last for three hours, so soon you won't see it there.

[ibegurpard]

51. So will a lot of other people

Still many others will be excited. The way it always is. The key is to find a reason to get behind whoever wins and be able to communicate that to everyone else you know. Like it has always been.

[BlueWI]

55. A lot of prophecy here. Why go there?

Did you predict that Clinton would lose in 2016?

And, the same surveys that show Biden to be competitive in a GE race show Sanders to be competitive. Why are these results so convincing in Biden's case and so unconvincing in Sanders' case?

Everyone is going to be needed to defeat Trump, regardless of the candidate. Are moderate Democratic voters and officials going to sit on their hands and not put the work in if Sanders is nominated? Would we excuse that behavior if it were any other candidate?

Sanders appeals to younger, disaffected, and left leaning Democrats. Maybe a strong appeal from a moderate Democrat would appeal to these voters. Rather than a pity party, how do we improve on common purpose and determination to win?

None of the candidates is risk free or devoid of upside, and focusing only on the negative elevates conflict and lowers our chances. Obviously, that lesson from 2016 hasn't been learned.

[ananda]

60. I will be very happy!

Go Bernie!

[tiredtoo]

63. We all have our opinions don't we?

Personally, i think any of the top 5 or 6 candidates can and will beat trump. And i will also vote blue no matter who. Cannot imagine either of the two you mentioned being the candidate.
Our job from this day forth should be to get out the vote. one way to do this is to speak up and support any and all Democratic candidates to everyone we know. In response to the usual "ya but he's a socialist" comment my reply is always. Yes, wouldn't it be nice to have a president who thinks we, the common folk, are just as important as the billionaires on Wall Street?

[aikoaiko]

64. I sighed, voted for Hillary in the GE, and got Trump in 2016. It sucks.

Hopefully, we will rally and win in 2020 no matter who the Democratic nominee is.

All hands on deck.

[BusyBeingBest]

65. That's the spirit!

[totodeinhere]

66. Where I disagree with you is your certainty that Bernie would lose.

I think that to beat Trump we need a revolutionary with a vision and Bernie is that person. But I too will vote for whoever the nominee is. And I love Joe and would gladly vote for him. I do not trust Bloomberg but given the alternative of course I would vote for him. But I'm afraid that he would lose. If we put up another billionaire against Trump I'm afraid that too many potential voters would throw up their hands in despair and just walk away. And a non vote is in effect a vote for Trump because we know that his zombie supporters will be voting.

[JDC]

69. Honest Question: Is this about Bernie(and the field) or about your disappointment in Biden

perhaps not being the leviathan we hoped he would be?

I understand the overall point, am 100% with you on "voting blue no matter who," and although I don't think it is the intent, to lump a Gabbard in with Sanders to get in a veiled "Joe is our only hope, don't you all get it" insinuation comes across as giving in and a premature parting shot.


We have some very solid candidates and there is more that one than can beat trump. AND Joe has plenty of time to get his train on the tracks.

[Politicub]

70. After I sigh, I'll put on a Bernie tee shirt and place a sign in my yard.

I don’t want him to be the nominee, either, but I’ll go all in to support him in the general election.

[krissey]

71. Right.

[jg10003]

75. Latest Quinnipiac poll; Sanders beats trump 51 - 43

[Awsi Dooger]

77. Once Trump was elected you had to expect 8 years

That's the way I've always looked at it.

Foundational aspects above any belief that this incumbent had to be an exception. Lots of wasted energy around here pretending Trump had to be an exception.

But given the low approval ratings Trump is handing us an opportunity. If we nominate Bernie Sanders we throw away that opportunity and Trump's approval rating might as well be 5 points above current level.

[Liberty Belle]

83. If he wins the nomination we will all need to stop with negative prophesies.

The truth is crystal balls are often wrong in politics.

Whether you're for Bernie or Bloomberg or anyone in between, whoever wins the primary suddenly needs to have not only our votes, but at least a pretense of enthusiastic support.

And honestly I think more may support Bernie than you think. In recent days I've talked to Republicans, even some who hold local offices. Several have been wallopped as I have by skyrocketing healthcare premiums, and while they don't agree with all of Bernie's policies they are ready for radical healthcare reforms.

What I've said to moderates who have concerns is that no president can attain policies far out of the mainstream without support of congress (other than through executive orders or appointments). You're not going to see radical laws passed when there is not a single Democratic Socialist in Congress, let alone communists or full-on socialists. There is a good likelihood Republicans will still control the Senate for at least two more years, too. What a Bernie presidency would mean would be that healthcare reform would be talked about from the president's bully pulpit and hopefully some sort of compromise reforms pushed through Congress that won't be what the far left or far right wants, but something far better than the mess we have now.

If Bloomberg wins we won't see the taxes on the wealthy increased the way many want to see, and some areas like criminal justice reforms may not happen, but we would certainly see action on things like climate change and going back to basic human decency and respect.

With ANY Democratic nominee we will see a return to normalcy and an end to the politics of hate and demonization, and a start to restoring our democratic institutions that have been shredded. We will have a president appointment judges that we can again have trust in, restoring the social safety net and protecting our clean air, water and public lands, and stopping family separations and caging of kids at the border -- those things alone are worth supporting whoever is the nominee not just by holding our noses, but with enthusiasm -- and that means talking the nominee up to others, and pointing out that a dangerous descent into fascism is far, far worse than living with four years under president you don't love.

Even if a President Sanders or Bloomberg or whoever did manage to somehow push through a few bills that people didn't like, laws passed can be overturned and done over by a future Congress. How many times have we seen laws repealed or improved upon through the years? Many, so we really don't need to be so fearful about a Dem going too far. The pendulum in politics swings back and forth for a reason.

This is about protecting our democracy, and being 100% behind whoever wins with full-throttled enthusiasm, working to convince moderates, liberals and even some conservatives that a vote for the Democratic nominee is the only way to get our country back. The worst thing any Democrat could possibly do is far less destructive than what four more years of an out of control megalomaniac like Trump will do.

[onecent]

85. I don't think Bernie will be around. I am counting on Biden getting alot of votes from people

of another race. You know he worked with Obama...and worked well with him....

I'm not giving up. They only went to 2 states that don't have what I think we need.

I hope this happens this way...I CANNOT STAND THAT AWFUL RED TOP, WIGGY THING HE HAS ON HIS HEAD, AND i THINK HE
IS one of the WORST PRESIDENTS i HAVE EVER SEEN.

[myohmy2]

95. "...and vote for him in the general election,..."

...thank you, I'm prepared to the same...

...and should it be Bloomberg, I'll be feeling your pain...

[Progressive dog]

96. I will sigh and put whatever effort and money

I can muster into electing the other Democratic candidates. I will vote for Bernie if he is the Democratic nominee.

[Gothmog]

101. I will be preparing myself to see Democrats lose down ballot races

I shutter at the concept of Speaker Kevin McCarthy

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Tarc]

108. Which stage of Kubler-Ross is this?

[Gothmog]

116. Same here

Link to tweet

?s=20

[MineralMan]

117. Of course, the Berners are claiming they had nothing to do with that.

I have no idea.

[Gothmog]

118. We'd be f--ed': Texas Dems sweat a Bernie Sanders ticket

We have made a great deal of progress that will go down the drain if a weak and unelectable candidate like sanders is on the top of the ticket. After the 2010 elections, there were 101 republicans members of the Texas state House compared to 49 Democrats. We flipped 12 state house seats in 2018 and need 9 more to take control of the Texas House. We flipped two Congressional seats (Lizzie Fletcher and Colin Allred). The DCCC is targeting 7 congressional seats. I have hopes that HJ Hegar could beat Cornyn. Texas would be a battleground state if Biden is the nominee

If sanders is the nominee, we can kiss Lizzie's and Colin's seats goodbye. sanders would be poison.

Link to tweet

“Sanders is a complete disaster and Warren is a complete-disaster-lite,” said Texas-based campaign consultant Jeff Hewitt, who has been working in Democratic politics since he served on Clinton-Gore’s campaign team in the 1990s. “At the end of the day, most of us want to win.”....

Hewitt said O’Rourke’s loss reveals that far-left ideas don’t bring out enough people to flip seats. “The idea that more people will come out to vote if a progressive is on the ballot, that’s fools gold,” he said....

Polls have offered little guidance. Biden is still a favorite among establishment figures and led a poll of Texas voters before Iowa but Sanders surged after the caucuses and Michael Bloomberg is on the rise.

Texas will eventually turn blue due to demographic trends but having sanders at the top of the ticket would set these efforts back

[Gothmog]

119. This stunt is disgusting

Link to tweet

?s=20