Link to tweet

lol

There are actually people on this site who think it would be wise to deny Sanders if he has a plurality of delegates and to allow racist, misogynistic, bribery kingpin Bloomberg to buy the nomination. That's positively insane. Much of this seems to stem from a misunderstanding about the electorate, in particular so-called independents, swing voters and the disenchanted non-voter/3rd party voter. Those trying to suggest that the electorate of today is no different than it was in the early 1970s or late 1980s are terribly misguided.

Opposition to the status quo is the driving force in the US today.

Today's so-called independents are more partisan (more likely to always vote for the same party) than the average party-affiliated voter of the 1970s. They're also less likely to actually vote than the party-affiliated, partly due to being disenchanted with the status quo.

And true swing voters aren't as great in number as some claim--more importantly, what they tend to swing against is the status quo or party in power (it's not a well-defined ideology - some mix of conservative and liberal views - or a party platform that dictates how/if they vote--instead, it's a sense that things ain't right and the boat needs to be rocked).

Conventional wisdom of the past is no longer wise, and we fail to recognize that at our peril. But people like Carville have a really hard time accepting that their formula is outdated. The notion that we should select a candidate or run a campaign based on appealing to some imagined mass of undecided middle-of-the-road voters or winning over the MAGA hat wearers is dangerously misguided.

Dems should take the following articles to heart:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/9/20750160/liberalism-trump-putin-socialism-reactionary

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/02/06/rachel-bitecofer-profile-election-forecasting-new-theory-108944 (the headline is misleading, as that's not what she says, but what she actually does say should be heeded)

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/what-everyone-gets-wrong-about-independent-voters/

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/14/politics/independents-pew/index.html

I think if the country was like it used to be, the 2016 election would have been a Trump landslide. Things have changed.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Not 1972.

It will be worse than 1988, much worse. And remember Lee Atwater has a lot of proteges that will be happy to take up the gauntlet.

He also had better than 50% approval ratings for much (but not all) of that election year, something Trump has never achieved. Bush was also not widely seen as incompetent, irrational, a danger to international relations and to the U.S. Constitution, barely literate, or suffering from a psychiatric mental condition.

So many people who weren't so happy with Dukakis had a somewhat reasonable alternative. Far fewer people (not already Trump fans) are going to see Trump as a reasonable alternative to whoever the Dems put up.

So you're right, it's not 1972, but it's not 1988 either.

Trump will end up winning the Electoral College unanimously.

Sanders will make Trump historical as the second president in history to do that, too. Hasn't happened since Washington.

featuring some of the countless young African American men who had their civil rights violated under Stop-and-Frisk start running against Bloomberg. Unless, of course, the whole grand strategy is to literally defeat Dotard by winning over his racist base.

I think I'll take my chances with a candidate who actually extols the core values of our party, especially equality, economic justice, and civil liberties. There will be no repeat of 1972, 1988 or 2016 if our base is sufficiently energized, and African Americans and other POC are an integral part of that base. It would a catastrophic mistake to forget that.

You're right. Nominating Bloomberg would have very demoralizing effect on Democratic turnout.

African American voters and other POC will stay home on droves if Bloomberg is the nominee. It would a monumental insult to all of them to ask them to simply put their concerns and feelings about his past aside and blindly vote for him. This is not what we have fought for as a party for the past six decades, is it? Is Mike Bloomberg what African Americans get from the Democratic Party after the decades-long struggle for civil rights in America?

You know what, we just might actually get a repeat of 1972 after all. The potential record low turnout from POC just might result in states like California and New York turning temporarily red again.

Trump is not going to get more than if 50% of the vote. But Stacey Abrams has the right formula. She says we need to turn out in droves and overwhelm Republican efforts to suppress the POC vote.

I think we need to worry a little bit less about avoiding 1972 and worry a little bit more about how to repeat 2018

He's got SOOO much baggage. Racism AND sexism AND wallstreet elite ties.

As I said in another post - he's a smart (devious) version of trump.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bloombergs-sexist-remarks-fostered-company-culture-degraded-women/story?id=67744180
https://newsone.com/3902452/michael-bloomberg-racist-quotes-through-years/
https://www.ft.com/content/cb390bbe-07ed-11ea-a984-fbbacad9e7dd

forgive (not forget) WHOMEVER for whatever to get to that win. It's that simple and if that means Mike Bloomberg then that's who it will be.

I get that you, personally, might strongly oppose Sanders due to his being a SWP elector, among other reasons. I strongly doubt it will have more impact than the Obama “pals around” thing.

If you’re interested in the communist connections of candidates, you might consider looking up Bloomberg and Lenora Fulani.

I don't think that Democrats will make the same mistake in 2020. I think that any of our candidates could beat Donald Trump this year. I am more focused on turnout and coattails in the Senate.

-Laelth

the popular vote... the Electoral College must be our focus and while I get that Bernie is popular and energizes... I don't believe he will win over all those people with an irrational fearful of "socialism"

and, of course, we know how that ended.


Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

went for Stine.

No, the map won't look like Reagan '84 or Nixon '72 for the reasons you stated. But, it won't matter if Bernie wins California by ten points when he also loses Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, Iowa, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Florida, Arizona, and maybe Virginia and Minnesota. Think he won't? All the Trump people have to do is play video of him at a Castro rally, or supporting the Sandanistas, and every suburban soccer mom and midwestern farmer will go running back to Trump.

To make matters worse, Bernie's "me first, me only, go it alone" persona will result in Republican wins in competitive senate races from Arizona to Maine.

The extreme ends of both party lead lead to fascism.

Any of our candidates would be 1000x better than what currently infests the Oval Office.

If there's ANYONE capable of handing Trump this election in a landslide it's "Throw them against the wall and frisk them" Bloomberg. He's a big city former NY mayor with racist issues in his past, super anti-gun(trust me it will be an issue in the general), and he even wants to take away our sodas. Is this really what America is gonna wanna vote for? It's like people are willing to sell their souls thinking his money will somehow beat Trump.

Yep, that's exactly who we need.

We have to win and goodness gracious Bloomberg has issues he is no angel but selling our souls? Really dramatic.


So if you feel that way why not rally around Bloomberg's main competition which is Biden. People need to vote with their HEADS and if that ends up being Bloom then I for one will be going that way....but Biden IS STILL IN IT SO LET'S RALLY AROUND NOW!!!!!

Plenty of energy, smart, a proven winner, and I think she would destroy Trump in debates. I would support her in an instant if Bernie wasn't in this.

What do you think and would they do it?

reason she is out for me.

By my count that was 48 years ago. So let's look back 48 years from 1972, shall we? If results from 48 years ago are relevant today, then events of the 48 years that preceded the 1972 election were probably instructive also. So 48 years prior to Nixon's second election Calvin Coolidge was President and FDR had not yet run for and won the presidency 4 consecutive times. The Great Depression and World War II were closer to 1972 chronologically than McGovern's defeat is to 2020. Memories of the first TV's entering American homes were fresher back in 1972 than McGovern's defeat in 1972 is today.

You know what else happened in 1972? The Watergate break in.

One is moderate republican and other independent leaning to right both saying they hate Trump voting for Biden and Bloomberg but if Bernie wins they will vote for him in general.

Never thought I would hear that, shocked me but that is how strongly they want to get rid of Trump and they live in Texas.

When I hear that, that is definitely not McGovern like!

That was the year Ronald Reagan won every state in the union, including California, with the exceptions of Minnesota and DC. So it can happen.

But, obviously, that's still a blowout win for Trump.

He's polling #1 with most demographics. He's beating Trump nationally by 8 points. He's beating Trump in Wisconsin, MI, and PA. He has the highest independent vote margin. He's winning the youth vote by 32 points. He's winning the Latino vote. He's #2 with the black vote.

You all keep making this claim and yet you have zero evidence to support it.

Biden, by the way, is not my #1 candidate. But as soon as the Republican guns open up on Burnie, and people hear him supporting the Sandanistas, and supporting Fidel Castro (how will that little gem play in Miami) and find out he was on unemployment until age 35, Burnie will become more of a bogeyman than HRC ever was.

OH, and since you mentioned Wisconsin, it's not quite as you say. The last Marquette Law School (A rated) poll, the gold standard in Wisconsin politics, has sanders down one point to Trump whereas Biden is +1. This after months of sustained attacks on Biden, whereas the worst shot Burnie has taken from Trump so far is having been called "crazy Bernie." Hell, Trump is all but campaigning to run against Burnie. Why do you think that is?

that he's scared to go against Bernie. Democrats thought Trump would be the easiest for Hillary to beat, so Dems in open primary states were voting for him in the Republican primary to make sure Hillary fought him.

How did that work out?

Not sure what poll you're talking about, but the Marquette poll from January 15th, the most recent of that poll has Sanders beating Trump by +1.

The Fox poll, which is rated higher than the Marquette poll, on January 9th has Sanders winning by +4.

in Marquette poll. RCP averages Biden+3.5 Burnie +2. But again that’s with Biden under constant attack and Burnie getting a pass so far.

Listen to Bloomberg’s interview with Harvard business where he said that Sanders would’ve won in 2016 against Trump and was positive it would have happened if Clinton didn’t win the nomination

Not that Bloomberg thought that was a good thing for him to win.

We do not have 49 state landslides anymore. There is no way Bernie would end up like McGovern. He's polling too well among almost every demographic and California, NY, etc. would never vote for Trump.

Thus Spoke Kornacki

Now go iron your khakis

in the popular vote no matter who our candidate turns out to be. So given that. why not strive for the best possible president we can elect? The number one goal of course is defeating trump but that doesn't mean we need to abandon our principles in order to accomplish that.

It's sad that so many are willing to compromise everything the Democratic party has stood for decades. Makes you wonder how many people really believed in those principles all along that they're now seemingly so willing to dispose of?

Like you, I know we can win without selling out who we are and what we stand for. I just wish more people around here felt the same way.

sanders is a very weak candidate and would be easy for trump to destroy. In addition to the well written 101 page memorandum with oppo on sanders with a 1000 pages of backup from the Clinton campaign trump has his own oppo file on sanders that would destroy such a weak and divisive candidate like sanders.

Link to tweet

These were planned stunts of booing Congressmen John Lewis and Elijah Cummings. My whip warned me about these stunts 20 to 30 minutes before they occurred.

If sanders is the nominee, the GOP and Russians will use these stunts to suppress the vote of African American voters. There was a ton of real anger at the National Convention about these stunts

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet