Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

wyldwolf

(43,867 posts)
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:06 PM Apr 2016

MotherJones: The Myth of Sanders' November Advantage

Soon after Sen. Bernie Sanders was declared the loser in the New York Democratic presidential primary on Tuesday night, his campaign manager Jeff Weaver was on MSNBC explaining the path ahead for the independent socialist from Vermont. Weaver contended, optimistically, that Sanders could potentially win all the remaining contests. When pressed on what the campaign would do should Sanders end up second to Hillary Clinton in the delegate hunt, Weaver said the campaign would spend the weeks between the final primary in early June and the Democratic convention in late July trying to flip the super-delegates who have declared their loyalty to Clinton.

To some, this might seem fanciful. Would Democratic officials throw Clinton to the curb in favor of the second-place guy who has never been a member of the Democratic Party? And would Sanders, the champion of small-d democracy and the scourge of machine politics, really turn to the equivalent of party bosses to secure the nomination after losing the popular vote?

Weaver justified this possible strategy by insisting that Sanders is the Democratic candidate better situated to win in the November general election. Sanders, he argued, has more appeal with independents and younger voters and generates more enthusiasm. Polls, Weaver continued, show Sanders faring better in the fall face-off than Clinton. So Weaver indicated Sanders would slog on and put aside for now (and at least until the convention) any effort to unite the party.

The polls do say what Weaver suggested. According to Real Clear Politics' average of recent polls, Sanders performs better than Clinton in hypothetical general-election matchups. Against Donald Trump, Sanders leads by 15 points, Clinton by 9. Against Ted Cruz, Sanders wins by 11 points, Clinton by 2. Many Bernie-ites point to these numbers and confidently declare: Case closed!

Does that settle it? Is it reason enough for Weaver to say essentially that Sanders must win the nomination by any means necessary for the good of the party?

Maybe not. There is one missing factor in these polls, and it might be huge. Sanders has yet to face a true negative ad campaign aimed at destroying his public image. Were he to be the Democratic nominee, he would be confronted with hundreds of millions of dollars in negative ads designed to rip him apart. And everyone knows what that pummeling would focus on: He's a self-proclaimed socialist.

More: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/sanders-socialism-and-myth-november-polls

7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

mikehiggins

(5,614 posts)
3. I love David Corn (in a totally platonic hetero way) though I do disagree with his article
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:24 PM
Apr 2016

He rarely seems to "go along with the crowd" which is why, IMHO, he is well respected.

His criticisms of Sanders, by the way, appear more tactical than they do aimed at blasting him for daring to challenge the Anointed One.

Sanders carries a lot of baggage AND the majority of US voters really aren't paying all that much attention to the campaign. There is lots to nit-pick about in the article but why bother? Hillary will win (the smart money is on her) or Bernie will. Either way the GOPukes will be frothing at the mouth with lies and deceit no matter who is our standard bearer.

My only caveat is that the fact that Sanders can make a reasonable case for a strategy that might gain him the nomination after all is said and done tells me Hillary is a much weaker candidate than the pundits and others foresaw. Someone wrote a while back that it was embarrassing that Hillary could be knocked around so well by a balding old Jew from Vermont.

The powers-that-be in the Democratic Party should be sitting up and paying attention.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
6. Sanders has not made "as reasonable case for a strategy that might
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:42 PM
Apr 2016

gain him the nomination after all is said and done."

There is no such strategy. Sanders needs a major miracle to win the primary voting. If he gets it he's the nominee. If he loses the primary voting then he's not.

NurseJackie

(42,862 posts)
4. We've been saying this all along!!
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:24 PM
Apr 2016
There is one missing factor in these polls, and it might be huge. Sanders has yet to face a true negative ad campaign aimed at destroying his public image.


I'm sure that the Bernie fans here would be very disappointed to discover that in REAL LIFE there is no "Alert Button" that they could click which would automatically shut down the brutal ads from a well-funded GOP attack machine.

Keep in mind that Hillary has SURVIVED all these many years of attacks, and here she is anyway. Keep in mind that her current poll numbers and delegate counts and endorsements and total votes ALREADY INCLUDE the effect of those ongoing attacks.

Bernie? Well, his "approval ratings" and "hypothetical matchup" numbers DO NOT INCLUDE the effects of what a relentless GOP attack machine could throw at him.

Everything about Bernie would be fair game. EVERYTHING. And that includes all the "forbidden" and "taboo" topics that are regularly hidden here. Whether it's his beliefs, his words, his WRITINGS, his TRAVELS, his BOOKS, his religion, his children and family life (and you KNOW they'd go there) ... Bernie hasn't had to deal with all that, and it would knock him off his game.

Mother Jones has NAILED IT with this one!

JohnnyRingo

(18,633 posts)
5. The update at the end is a wake up call.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:32 PM
Apr 2016

The article considers what would happen if a self proclaimed Socialist faces a billion dollar smear campaign from the GOP. I'm sure Bernie supporters see his Socialist cred as a plus, but what about the country in general?

UPDATE: A reader notes that last year Gallup released a poll asking voters about their attitudes regarding political candidates of various races, religions, and beliefs. Over 90 percent said they would be willing to vote for a woman, a black, a Hispanic, a Jew, or a Catholic. Over 70 percent said the same about a gay or lesbian candidate or an evangelical Christian. Only 60 percent said they would be willing to vote for a Muslim, and 58 percent said they could see themselves casting a ballot for an atheist. The label that fared the worst in this survey was socialist. Forty-seven percent said they would be willing to support a socialist candidate; 50 percent said they would not. Certainly, in the Democratic primary, Sanders has not been hindered by his identification with democratic socialism. But in this poll, only 49 percent of independents said they would not be willing to vote for a socialist. The poll was conducted last June, and it may well be that Sanders' performance in the months since has altered public attitudes toward a socialist candidate. Yet the survey's results do suggest that the socialist tag could be a problem for Sanders in a general election.

DCBob

(24,689 posts)
7. "Sanders has yet to face a true negative ad campaign aimed at destroying his public image."
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:45 PM
Apr 2016

I must have posted that a hundred times on this site. I dont think any Bernie supporter ever understood it.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»MotherJones: The Myth of ...