The centrists aren't getting behind a single non-Bernie candidate because they know they would lose

[DanTex]

They've seen the polls, they know that in a 2-person race, Bernie would handily defeat any of the centrists. The only candidate that would come close in a head-to-head is Warren, and she's not a centrist.

The recent NYT article laid out what the centrists' strategy to beat Bernie is. It's not a secret, Democratic insiders are talking to the press about it. By keeping the field crowded, they hope to prevent Bernie from getting an outright majority, and then in a brokered convention, using superdelegates, they plan to override the will of the electorate and pick someone else, even if Bernie has the most votes and pledged delegates.

We'll see if that works, it would be terrible for party unity, and would hurt our chances of defeating Trump. It would be better if those who don't want Bernie just tried to beat him at the ballot box.

[MisterFred]

1. Yeah, right now my hope is that Bernie takes a healthy plurality on Super Tuesday.

And then it comes down to just him vs Bloomberg, Biden, or Warren. That way he can get to a majority.

[DanTex]

3. Yes, the sooner it gets down to Bernie vs Biden, the sooner Bernie starts putting together majority

wins, and then the "most Dems are against Bernie" talking point goes away. And the centrists know that.

[squirecam]

16. At this point

It should be the two of them after Super Tuesday.

[squirecam]

4. So you say Warren is not a centrist.

Then say the centrist strategy is to override the will of the electorate.

But as you know from last night, that is Warrens strategy too, and, as she pointed out, was Bernie’s position in 2016.

So what it boils down to is Bernie doesn’t want to follow the rules his own people had a hand in writing, because they may no longer benefit him.

[DanTex]

5. No, she's not. She's angling to be the "compromise" candidate at the convention.

Bernie isn't saying the rules shouldn't be followed. Where did you get that idea? Bernie thinks the rules should be followed, and the delegates following those rules should respect the will of the electorate.

It's not complicated.

[squirecam]

6. The rules will be followed.

If anyone gets a majority on ballot #1, they are the nominee.

On ballot #2, those less than 15% are eliminated. Then the delegates vote again. If a majority is reached, that person becomes the nominee.

The above isn’t complicated.

What is the will of the electorate though. Sanders got 34% of the vote in Nevada. But he got 47% of the delegates. Isn’t the will of the electorate that he should get 34% of the delegates support?

The fact is, Bernie needs to convince them to vote for him. Not demand it.

[DanTex]

7. Of course. The question is: are the delegates going to respect the democratic will of the people?

On the second ballot, the delegates have a choice. Respect the voters and nominate the person with the most votes. Or ignore the voters and go with the candidate that party insiders want.

That's the question. Bernie is arguing that the delegates should go with the will of the electorate, not the insiders. He's not "demanding" anything, he's making an argument in favor of democracy, which the delegates can ignore if they want.

Like I said, it's not complicated. And it's not about whether or not the rules will be followed. It's about what the people following the rules will decide.

[squirecam]

8. What is the will of the electorate?

Because sanders winning 25-33% of the vote isn’t evidence of the will of the electorate.

[DanTex]

9. The person who gets the most votes and pledged delegates.

And, yes, getting the most votes is evidence of the will of the electorate. Certainly it is stronger evidence than for someone who gets even less votes. This is obvious. There is no plausible argument that someone getting 20% is more the will of the electorate than someone getting 30%. Or 30% versus 40%. It's flatly illogical.

[squirecam]

10. Only in your mind.

As shown by the recent Florida and Texas polls, Bloomberg takes most votes from Biden.

If Sanders gets 1/3 of the vote in a state, and Biden and Bloomberg get 20% each, the will of the voters is that the anti-Sanders block has more votes. That electorate would rather have either of them then Sanders.

You can keep denying it. But it’s true.

[DanTex]

11. In the mind of anyone who can compare two numbers and see which is larger.

All the head-to-head polling has shown that if Bernie were up against any single one of the other candidates, he'd win. And the centrists trying to stop Bernie know that. It's not a secret. The crowded field is the only reason Bernie has a plurality and not a majority.

Sure, you can argue that there is an "anti-Sanders" bloc of 70% of the electorate, but in that case there's also an "anti-Biden" bloc of 80% of the electorate, and same for the other candidates. Which, yet again, means that Sanders is the best representation of the democratic will of the voters.

There are no mathematical manipulations that get you around that basic fact.

[squirecam]

13. You are clearly misreading my post

If Biden and Bloomberg voters are fine with each other, then there isn’t an anti Biden vote of 80%. It’s at most 60%. But I think Biden will claim more of the moderate vote as they drop out.

[DanTex]

21. What makes you think Bloomberg and Biden voters are fine with each other and not Sanders?

There is zero evidence of that. The top second choice of Biden voters is Bernie. In a head-to-head polling Bernie beats Biden, and he also beats Bloomberg. Comfortably.

There is evidence that pro-Biden and pro-Bloomberg pundits and insiders and donors are OK with each other but not Sanders. But there is no such evidence with voters. In fact, with voters, the evidence points the opposite way.

[squirecam]

23. There is clear evidence in the recent TX and FL polls.

In TX, Without Bloomberg on the ballot, his voters mostly go to Biden.

Bloomberg is dropping in FL. Biden again gained at his expense.

That’s called evidence.

[DanTex]

24. No there isn't. None at all. The polls show Biden supporters' top second choice is Bernie.

You're trying to draw causal inferences from correlations. And even there, you're wrong, because various candidates have moved up and down in the polls in ways that don't support your argument.

But there's no need to resort to the kind of hand-waving you are doing, because there is direct polling data showing where second choices would go, and what would happen if candidates dropped out of the race. And all of those polls show Bernie leading if it comes down to a two-person race.

[squirecam]

25. Nope

The TX poll confirms that Bloomberg hurts Biden most.

https://mobile.twitter.com/EdEspinoza/status/1232650504070684679

With Bloomberg on the Texas ballot:
Biden 24
Bernie 24
Bloomberg 17
Warren 14
Buttigieg 10
Klobuchar 4
Gabbard 1
Steyer 1

Without Bloomberg on Texas ballot:
Biden 31
Bernie 25
Warren 17
Buttigieg 11
Klobuchar 7
Steyer 3
Gabbard 1

[DanTex]

27. LOL. One state, and one scenario, and it doesn't even show what you say.

Out of all of Bloomberg's 17 points, Biden picks up just 6 points relative to Bernie. Which shows how absurd it is to add up all the other candidates against Bernie. If you were right, Biden should have opened up a 17 point lead, but of course that didn't happen.

When they poll nationally, and look at not just Bloomberg dropping out, the head-to-head polls show Bernie would beat any single other candidate. This is what would happen if the field wasn't crowded:

[Dem Femme Fatale]

18. Hmmm...

then every other candidate's claim to be the nominee is even worse.

Fundamentally, the argument doesn't hold water and requires a suspension of rationale to be so dumb as to believe that framing of the state of race.

[Autumn]

32. If Sanders has 25-33%of the vote and any other candidate has less than 25-33% of the

vote it certainly is evidence of the will of the electorate.

[MontanaFarmer]

29. Also conceivable that a candidate could

release their delegates to another candidate prior to the first ballot, correct? Say Pete, Amy, and Bloomberg decided to endorse Biden before the convention, can't they instruct their pledged delegates to vote for Joe on the first ballot?

[JudyM]

12. How many times does this failed smear have to be repeated? He didn't have a hand in it, he was

fighting against it all the way and ultimately had to accept it.

[squirecam]

14. He agreed to the compromise.

Nt

[JudyM]

15. He had no choice. The smear is that he was inconsistent, and he was not.

[squirecam]

17. Warren wasn't smearing Bernie.

Nt

[JudyM]

19. Warren made a false statement to imply he is hypocritical. That might not be an outright smear,

but it’s impugning his character, draw your own conclusions.

[squirecam]

20. Watch the video linked below

Sanders says over and over and over and over that the pledged delegates leader shouldn’t win because he is the stronger candidate. So the supers should vote for him.

https://mobile.twitter.com/TheStagmania/status/1232884933930180608

[JudyM]

22. Because that was *the way the system was* back then. He was doing what was necessary to

try to win within the system, when the system was completely stacked against him, as has been amply documented.

[tritsofme]

26. How do you suppose some 30% of PDs equates to the "will of the people"? That is laughable.

[DanTex]

28. Umm, because 30 is bigger than (say) 20...

[tritsofme]

30. Seems odd that the "will of the people" could be someone opposed by 70% of the...people

It takes a majority, not a marginally larger plurality to win.

If it comes down to a contested convention, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a ticket emerge among the non-Bernie candidates that actually represents a majority of pledged delegates and popular votes.

[DanTex]

31. What on earth makes you think someone with 30% would be "opposed" by the other 70%?

There is zero data, or logic, or anything else to support that claim.

Especially if it's Bernie, who has the highest favorability ratings, scores highest in who Dems would be satisfied with as nominee, and beats every single other candidate in head-to-head polling.

[tritsofme]

33. Well...choosing someone other than Bernie is definitionally opposition.

But if what you say is true, he should have quite an easy time winning a second ballot.

[DanTex]

35. Again, there's no basis for that. Maybe among pundits, but among voters, that's not true at all.

The problem with the second convention ballot is that the delegates, particularly superdelegates, are party insiders, not average voters. Among voters, yes, if there were a second ballot, then Bernie would win, as all the polls demonstrate. Hopefully, if it comes to that, the delegates will respect the will of the voters, who prefer Bernie to anyone else.

[themaguffin]

34. Looks like we have Pizzagate type people here now. Jesus Christ.

[fleabiscuit]

36. Non Sequitur. nt

[BeckyDem]

37. If they do this, they're playing with fire. It would be awful for many reasons, trust would be gone.

They have no idea what would come next and its crazy to think they could control the reaction.