2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWe should also consider defeating Cruz: Clinton +2.5, Sanders +16.5
With Clinton and Cruz TIED in the latest matchup.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html
Why is the Democratic establishment so set on the weaker candidate? What are their priorities? Maintaining control of the WH and shaping the SC for the next generation certainly don't seem to be among them.
At what point (if any) will they put party and country above their own a$$e$?
Want to know why so many are leaving this party? Look no further.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)If Bernie wins, they all need to find new jobs.
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)Lack of Sanders on the ballot will be the end of some of their careers.
DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)This is where the progressives need to have a 50 state strategy.
Crowdsource ourselves a new congress.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)a Cruz vs Clinton GE is a no-lose situation for them.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/ted-cruzs-goldman-sachs-problem
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)The Republicans haven't even started on Sanders. Why should they ? Because Sanders can't even win his adopted Party's nomination. Because polls claimed a week before the 2012 election that Romney was a lock. For all those reasons and more, polls like this carry no more weight than toilet paper. Actually probably less weight come to think of it......LOK
CalvinballPro
(1,019 posts)Just sayin'!
DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)The Republicans have already finished with her.
revbones
(3,660 posts)I mean, that's obviously what you have now right? New super-powers allowing you to predict the future right? Otherwise, someone smart might tailor that language and cite facts rather than constantly screaming "My opinion says this and my opinion is fact!"
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)just days before that primary. How is 5 months out relevant ?
DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)Hillary's performance have generally been worse than the polls predicted.
So I see where you are going with this.
In 5 months her numbers will be even worse.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)Just like it was President Kerry and President Gore's turn
Jitter65
(3,089 posts)DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)I can't see it.
Yavin4
(35,442 posts)but not believe polls when they show Hillary beating Bernie?
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)Good question.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Clinton and Trump are drawing all of the attacks.
if Cruz steals the nomination from Trump at the convention, his numbers will go down pretty fast once that spectacle unfolds
DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)They are just propping up Cruz to help keep Trump from earning the required delegates.
At the convention they will pick someone else on the 4th vote, after trying and failing to swing the votes to Kasich on the 3rd vote.
Paul Ryan would be my best guess.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)So they have to vote Trump in the first ballot.
Second ballot, they'll vote for Cruz.
Boom.
DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)But I don't think he will have enough.
It's going to be interesting.
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)
Gothmog
(145,321 posts)The reliance on these polls by Sanders supporters amuse me. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/harrys-guide-to-2016-election-polls/
Sanders supporters have to rely on these worthless polls because it is clear that Sanders is not viable in a general election where the Kochs will be spending $887 million and the RNC candidate may spend an additional billion dollars.
Gothmog
(145,321 posts)Here are some warnings from Nate Silver's 538 site. Warning number three is very relevant
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)He's been wrong a lot lately.
I know, I know...not his fault. It's the fault of the polls. Except when he's right; then he's a genius.
Gothmog
(145,321 posts)Match up polls are inherently worthless unless both candidates have been adequately vetted. Sanders has not been vetted.
Gothmog
(145,321 posts)Dana Milbank has some good comments on general election match up polls https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/democrats-would-be-insane-to-nominate-bernie-sanders/2016/01/26/0590e624-c472-11e5-a4aa-f25866ba0dc6_story.html?hpid=hp_opinions-for-wide-side_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory
Watching Sanders at Monday night’s Democratic presidential forum in Des Moines, I imagined how Trump — or another Republican nominee — would disembowel the relatively unknown Vermonter.
The first questioner from the audience asked Sanders to explain why he embraces the “socialist” label and requested that Sanders define it “so that it doesn’t concern the rest of us citizens.”
Sanders, explaining that much of what he proposes is happening in Scandinavia and Germany (a concept that itself alarms Americans who don’t want to be like socialized Europe), answered vaguely: “Creating a government that works for all of us, not just a handful of people on the top — that’s my definition of democratic socialism.”
But that’s not how Republicans will define socialism — and they’ll have the dictionary on their side. They’ll portray Sanders as one who wants the government to own and control major industries and the means of production and distribution of goods. They’ll say he wants to take away private property. That wouldn’t be fair, but it would be easy. Socialists don’t win national elections in the United States .
Sanders on Monday night also admitted he would seek massive tax increases — “one of the biggest tax hikes in history,” as moderator Chris Cuomo put it — to expand Medicare to all. Sanders, this time making a comparison with Britain and France, allowed that “hypothetically, you’re going to pay $5,000 more in taxes,” and declared, “W e will raise taxes, yes we will.” He said this would be offset by lower health-insurance premiums and protested that “it’s demagogic to say, oh, you’re paying more in taxes.”
Well, yes — and Trump is a demagogue.
Sanders also made clear he would be happy to identify Democrats as the party of big government and of wealth redistribution. When Cuomo said Sanders seemed to be saying he would grow government “bigger than ever,” Sanders didn’t quarrel, saying, “P eople want to criticize me, okay,” and “F ine, if that’s the criticism, I accept it.”
Sanders accepts it, but are Democrats ready to accept ownership of socialism, massive tax increases and a dramatic expansion of government? If so, they will lose.
Match up polls are worthless because these polls do not measure what would happen to Sanders in a general election where Sanders is very vulnerable to negative ads.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)care what the letter after the name is.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Unfortunately that will not happen during the Primaries since the Republicans are generally extremely silent about Bernie in the hopes of helping along his campaign.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)DemocracyDirect
(708 posts)Which is strange since she has several scandals going on and she is usually their favorite to beat up on.
HughLefty1
(231 posts)At this point It's the 1% vs the rest of us. Bushes, Clintons, Kissinger, DNC, GOP, Cruz (although he does seem especially deranged) are all the same to me.
Honestly I'm not even worried about the DNC/GOP branding.
By the day as people wake up it's appearing Bernie would be the stronger GE candidate. DNC mobsters know their time at the corporate trough (lobbyists) and our US treasury trough would come to an end with Bernie in the W.H. That's all that matters to the elites.
