Geoff > Status Update

Unfortunately I kind of agree with Paul - though I don't think it'll make any difference who the Dem candidate is. Was just talking about this with a friend, who hoped a centrist would be the candidate who'd be selected, inevitably lose to Trump this time, so that in 2024 when the Dems would have a stronger chance, there would be a left candidate. (On the assumption that there would be a backlash in the Dems against whichever side of the party a 2020 losing candidate came from.)

I already thought this (that Trump would probably be re-elected) before the 2019 election here.

It's been sad seeing some of the nicest Corbyn fans so miserable, like he was a family member. I'm too cynical to be such an idealist but it's still sad seeing young idealists facing disappointment. People have the same sort of attachment to Bernie too and I end up feeling this same sadness when I see stuff about him at the moment too, but more so as there is less ambiguity. (e.g. poor handling of anti-semitism was a real issue in Labour, whereas there isn't anything nearly as significant dogging Bernie looked at rationally - just people who just object to Bernie bros)

Antonomasia wrote: "Unfortunately I kind of agree with Paul - though I don't think it'll make any difference who the Dem candidate is. Was just talking about this with a friend, who hoped a centrist would be the candi..."

Comparing Bernie with Corbyn is kind of apples to oranges. To my understanding, Corbyn failed because he had no clear message on Brexit, and your recent election was basically another referendum on Brexit.

Sanders has a unique appeal which can't really be compared with traditional Democrat/Republican rubrics in the US. He has an insanely wide and massively deep well of individual donors--raising $25 million in January alone from more than 600,000 people, 219,000 of which were NEW donors last month. He's raised more than $121m this election cycle alone, more than any other Democrat. He also has a unique populist appeal to disaffected Trump voters who liked the populist message, but maybe have been disappointed in his socially backwards positions.

Sanders has an electrified base, similar in energy but different to Obama and even Trump.

Currently national polls show Sanders with a 3-4 point lead over Trump, but unclear how that would translate yet to electoral college votes.

A traditional Democrat who doesn't inspire people is going to lose. The only way Dems can win is with a groundswell of electrified support. Bernie has the most fervent fans.

I don't think he's a shoe-in by any means, but I do think he has the best chance to win out of any of the current candidates.

There was also a lot of personal animosity towards Corbyn which is in many accounts of doorstep campaigning.
Main reasons for the loss emerge as:
- voters wanting Brexit done
- people who strongly disliked Corbyn (often for the same reasons that made him very popular with young socialists, just viewed differently, such as unpatriotic versus internationalist)
- overcrowded manifesto made voters suspicious that Labour were promising too much or going to be irresponsible with the budget. (It was all carefully costed but the messaging didn't get through.)
- people in areas which have had Labour councils and MPs since the year dot blaming lack of improvement on Labour when really a lot of it was down to Tory policies of the last decade.

Antonomasia wrote: "There was also a lot of personal animosity towards Corbyn which is in many accounts of doorstep campaigning.
Main reasons for the loss emerge as:
- voters wanting Brexit done
- people who strongly..."

Thanks, this is interesting perspective. But it does also reaffirm my sense that Corbyn/Sanders aren't two sides of the same coin.

Bernie has a core message: Medicare for All, which has a plurality of support in the US now, and is steadily growing among democrats and independents.

The parallels between Brexit and Trump in 2016 can perhaps make it too easy to forget that whilst Britain was electing Tories, the US had Obama.

The Brexit trade negotiations with the US might be less awful if he got in, especially on stuff like food standards - though I'd guess American drug companies would be keen to squeeze as much money as they can out of the rest of the world if they took a massive hit at home.

Ian wrote: "Antonomasia wrote: "Unfortunately I kind of agree with Paul - though I don't think it'll make any difference who the Dem candidate is. Was just talking about this with a friend, who hoped a centris..."

Bernie does not inspire (enough) people and he will lost against Trump by wide margins. He has a loud base, but he's been in the Senate for decades and spearheaded precisely nothing. He went to Vermont and the first thing he did when he landed was insult Iowan Democrats. Seriously. He's unlikeable beyond words.

Sorry - editing to add the obligatory, "I respectfully disagree." : )

Ooh, them's fightin words here :D

Antonomasia wrote: "Ooh, them's fightin words here :D"

I fear so, but damn. I can't let my UK friends believe this happy view of our friend Mr. Sanders is widely-held. : ) 538's algorithm has nothing to go on right now but Iowa, btw. I'm a big fan, but it needs additional relevant primary data before party hats are ordered.

Carol,
Instead of the anecdotal, I'm going to point to several analyses from a variety of sources (below) highlighting the broad but unique appeal for Bernie--perhaps he's less appealing to old guard democrats, but he appeals more broadly to a different and unique coalition of voters.

As for the idea that Bernie has done nothing, that's unequivocally untrue: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_....

Bernie is more moderate/pragmatic than his rhetoric lets on:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politi... (also touches on what Sanders has "gotten done":

"The policy area in which Sanders has had the most practical influence is veterans-related issues, as he chaired the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee for a two-year span, during which Congress enacted substantive reform to the veterans’ health system.

Given the objective constellation of political forces at the time, this required bipartisan support, so Sanders (working mainly with Republican Sen. John McCain) produced a bipartisan bill that, in exchange for a substantial boost in funding, made some concessions to conservatives in creating “private options” for veterans to seek care outside of the publicly run Veterans Health Administration.")

Bernie appeals to disaffected voters who feel the system is rigged, and that centrism won't actually effect real change:
https://time.com/5776326/bernie-sande...

Conservative influencer Ben Shapiro sees how Bernie's message is clear and resonates:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/ben-sha...

The right is worried, even with the bad word "socialism"
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-p...

As almost always, I'm with Carol. I'm a die-hard liberal who doubts Bernie's electability, and doesn't really support him anyways. I had/do prefer one of the women.

Why is it no one tries a double ticket with a former hopeful as VP to consolidate bases?

Taking suggestions for other countries if He Who Must Not Be Named re-claims the Presidency.

538's algorithm isn't just based on Iowa, by the way, it also has polling data, historic precedents for primaries, Bernie's historic performance in states, etc.

Pretty disingenuous to say it's based only on Iowa's results.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...

I really don't want him re-elected but if it's anything like in the UK the Republicans and their friends in the media will brand Sanders as a hard left candidate, no matter what his message really is.
Although a woman candidate would be great I really fear whoever would be up against someone as intimidating as him, look how Hilary fared in TV debates with him prowling up and down in a predatory manner

Also, while national polls are probably worthless right now, Bernie has a 4 point spread on Trump across all polls in the past month, and a wider spread over the past few months:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...

Remember how we were told Trump was unelectable all of '15-'16? I find the "electability" argument against Sanders is often specious.

I've shared an array of data here to validate the pro-argument for Bernie--I'd be interested to see data and analysis from the Carols that contrasts this view.

Paul wrote: "I really don't want him re-elected but if it's anything like in the UK the Republicans and their friends in the media will brand Sanders as a hard left candidate, no matter what his message really ..."

Paul, even if the candidate is Joe Biden, the right in the US will use the "socialism" moniker as a scare word--it's built into their playbook for all democratic candidates. Bernie is uniquely positioned to own and explain the position, to share the real definition of democratic socialism. Further, "socialism" as a scare word is losing power while the youth become more receptive to social programs and ideas.

It's no longer accurate to position the argument in US politics as left v. right, it's populism vs neoliberalism.

Paul wrote: "Although a woman candidate would be great I really fear whoever would be up against someone as intimidating as him, look how Hilary fared in TV debates with him prowling up and down in a predatory manner."

I think that's a matter of screen/stage presence and off-the-cuff public speaking ability. A female candidate who was really strong on those could make him look stupid for it. But I think Warren seems too managerial for that.

Ian wrote: "It's no longer accurate to position the argument in US politics as left v. right, it's populism vs neoliberalism."

But there's also right populism versus left populism.
Which is what you've got if it's Trump v Sanders

Trump obviously is maintaining neoliberalism in various respects but his image and some of the stuff he does are populist

Ian wrote: "Also, while national polls are probably worthless right now, Bernie has a 4 point spread on Trump across all polls in the past month, and a wider spread over the past few months:
https://www.realcl..."

Their equivalent poll for Trump v Biden gives Biden a larger lead.
Of course it isn't looking good for him being the candidate after Iowa but not all states will vote the same.

I favour Sanders myself but I don't like to be overoptimistic about these things.

Antonomasia wrote: "Trump v Sanders"

One lesson of 2016 which I fear the Democrats have imperfectly learned (or learned not at all) is that centrist candidates, "safe" candidates, candidates we used to believe would have a "broad appeal", are hamstrung in politics these days. The dissatisfaction and resentment in middle & working class people and in the poor runs too deep. To my mind, the only hope is to counter the Right's china shop bull with one of our own.

It is probably also true of both parties at this point that they are too broad a church for the competing and mutually exclusive ideologies they claim. This is especially true of the Democrats and choosing a centrist candidate simply will not motivate the disparate factions of the left to coalesce.

Time for the old guard to awaken from their slumber.

Antonomasia wrote: "Ian wrote: "It's no longer accurate to position the argument in US politics as left v. right, it's populism vs neoliberalism."

But there's also right populism versus left populism.
Which is what y..."

I agree with you, but when you get to the distinction of right populism vs. left, you start generally boiling down to social issues, and, generally speaking, the US's momentum is behind left-leaning social positions.

Look, I'm not saying Sanders is a sure-win. No one could responsibly suggest that of any candidate, Trump included. I just believe that Sanders has a unique mix of message and appeal that directly addresses the threats of Trump in a way that someone like Joe Biden does not.

If we know one thing it is this: Half of America still loves the angry daddy who fights for his flock. Trump is this obviously. Bernie is this too. One is an unhinged, orange blubberkin; one is just an angry old guy who's stood for/on the correct side of so many movements for four decades and more.

The way to combat Trump in a debate is to match his daddy-as-protector/orange-back gorilla dickhead affectation with another one on the other side of the political spectrum. That's Bernie. Bernie would destroy Trump in a debate because even some Trumpers can (hopefully) identify with the old white man indignation, but understand Bernie has been doing it longer.

Probably not. But I still believe Bernie would clobber Trump in a national debate. Crazy Commie Bernie isn't nearly as devastating as an insult as Pocahontas Warren (Trump's term, not mine.)

There were people who voted for Trump last time who would have voted Sanders had he won the Dem nominations, and the stuff I read from the right had a disproportionate number of these voters, so I need no convincing about that.

I've not watched any Bernie debates tho, just short clips of speeches. In 2016 I thought that someone who could successfully take on Trump in public debates would have to be worthy of a second career as a standup. Can Bernie really deal with Trump's mockery and not look po-faced etc?

The thing about beating Trump, it required a massively entitled, incompetent campaign to lose to him last time. Sanders is 100% going to visit Wisconsin and Michigan.

Obviously don't know for sure, but I think he can do it. Regardless, he's the only candidate leading a movement to fundamentally transform American politics. Trump is not actually the primary reason American society is such a hellscape. Obama (& Biden) presided over the mortgage crisis, the opioid epidemic, etc. Sanders is the only one who understands how difficult change will actually be, but is still willing to fight for it.

David wrote: "willing to fight for it"

Portrait of the Young Candidate (getting arrested at a Civil Rights protest).

Love you guys. Keep the thread going. I won't be participating. I stand by my original statement, and will reiterate - if you support Trump you can go ahead and fuck right off. Fuck off right off the fucking planet. Hope Bernie wins. But I am officially Lenin in 1914-15 - when the world falls apart, go into exile and read your Hegel.

Geoff wrote: "Love you guys"

Miss you, Geoff <3

Also, I have a strong urge to go around post-impeachment USA like the Inglorious Basterds, carving Make America Great Again into the foreheads of all the Trumpists. Because when this is all over, you're going to want to take that hat off, and that is something I cannot abide.

ATJG wrote: "Geoff wrote: "Love you guys"

Miss you, Geoff <3"

Aww thanks. Miss all of you too but can't bring myself fully back. Not yet.

I think Sanders is the best option for 2020 for President. He will have a lot of power if he wins the presidency but there are limits to what anyone in the presidency can get done. Don't expect millennium if he makes it to the White House.

ATJG wrote: "Portrait of the Young Candidate (getting arrested at a Civil Rights protest)."

Thanks for posting that picture, ATJG. It's a strange feeling to know that I'm going to be able to vote for someone of integrity and moral clarity, and who demonstrated those qualities long before it was convenient.

Mike wrote: "ATJG wrote: "I'm going to be able to vote for someone of integrity and moral clarity."

Very odd feeling indeed.

Peter (Pete) wrote: "I think Sanders is the best option for 2020 for President. He will have a lot of power if he wins the presidency but there are limits to what anyone in the presidency can get done. Don't expect mil..."

Agreed. Winning the presidency is just one step along the way.

Johnson/Cummings are increasingly following the Trump playbook. The only remaining difference, for now, is that Johnson is not overtly anti NATO and UN etc.

I can only hope America will vote him out in November...otherwise...I don't even want to think about it.

Nocturnalux wrote: "I can only hope America will vote him out in November...otherwise...I don't even want to think about it."

The unthinkable is already here, my friend! which is why it’s insufficient to simply be against Trump

https://secure.actblue.com/donate/ads...

David, if I were an American citizen I would most definitely donate.

As it is I am entirely powerless and can only hope that those who was US citizens will vote Trump out of office.

Ian wrote: "Carol,
Instead of the anecdotal, I'm going to point to several analyses from a variety of sources (below) highlighting the broad but unique appeal for Bernie--perhaps he's less appealing to old gua..."

This is not about "old guard" Democrats vs. whatever the opposite of that is. I respect your right to hold these views, but multiple comments really just indicate your commitment as a fan.
I mean, good luck to you, but Bernie has lots of issues across all demographics for many factually supported reasons. Beating Trump and doing the right things with the power of the presidency are all of our shared priorities.

carol. wrote: "As almost always, I'm with Carol. I'm a die-hard liberal who doubts Bernie's electability, and doesn't really support him anyways. I had/do prefer one of the women.

Why is it no one tries a doubl..."

That's the spirit. Let's pick another country in the several months we have remaining, whilst there's still hope. My spouse volunteers for the local Democratic party and will start going door to door every weekend from mid-July on. That leaves me time for thoughts, prayers, throwing darts into a map of relocation options while consuming an adult beverage, and conferring with you on the most desirable options.

But more concrete examples?

The only one I have read about this time round is Biden's strong popularity among older black voters.

Carol wrote: "This is not about "old guard" Democrats vs. whatever the opposite of that is"

Carol, I submit to you, not as a fan, but as a calculating pragmatist reflecting icily: had the Democratic Party not put their thumb on the scale to ensure Hillary Clinton received the nomination in contravention of the will of the people expressed in raw votes, we might well have had a very different 2016-2020.

This to me screams "old guard Democrats vs. whatever the opposite of that is".

Lest you think I'm telling tales out of school, I furnish proof. One example among many:

In Colorado, the returns were as follows:

Bernie Sanders - 73,416 votes (equaling 59.44%)
Hillary Clinton - 49,219 votes (equaling 39.85%)

The above figures resulted in 39 delegates being awarded to Bernie Sanders, and 36 delegates being awarded to Hillary Clinton--meaning it took 1,882 people to cast their ballot for Bernie Sanders to achieve one delegate, while a mere 1,367 were required for Hillary Clinton.

Also, Bernard won every county of West Virgina last time and yet the state delegates went to Clinton.... Whatever you think of him, Bernie is now the clear front runner and it’s time to unite behind him to defeat Trump

https://secure.actblue.com/donate/ads...

My personal preference is Klobuchar, but she probably has a better shot at VP/running mate. Given that, I'll support whoever gets the DEM nomination, Bernie or otherwise. I have big reservations about his chances against Trump though.

How much of Sander's huge surge in support and fundraising in the past months is because of Warren's supporters jumping ship? Warren was running a fantastic ground game, and was on the up and up until sometime November when she, after much skirting around the issue of cost, finally released her detailed plan on Medicare-for-all. That came under intense scrutiny, and I think started her slippery slide down in the polls.

Sanders's plan on paying for Medicare- for-all is broad strokes about raising taxes but without a lot of details. If anything, it sounds like it'll cost even more than Warren's plan. If it looks like he's going to get the DEM nomination, his Medicare-for-all plan will be intensely scrutinized by both the DEM and the GOP. They'll tear it apart.
Also, taking this a step further, can Sanders even get 60 votes to advance the bill? Then there's also his shifting gun control stance, which so far hasn't been a central issue is debates, yet.

You know, I also won't rule out Bloomberg as a serious contender if he gets enough traction for Super Tuesday. He is rising in the polls in a relatively short time. He is a bonafide gazillionaire who can stroke a check to drown out all the DEM candidates combined, so money isn't an issue. And I think, psychologically, Trump is more worried about Bloomberg than Sanders, other DEM candidates.

Sorry, now just reading through up-thread. Ref the Vox.com link above in support of Bernie as the DEM unifier (with two embedded links making the same case for Warren and Biden!), these paragraphs below highlight why moderates, including myself, have a difficult time buying into Sanders as a viable challenger to Trump. I can't figure out his math. I'll still vote for him, of course, if he's the one.

(Not spoiler, just long) (view spoiler)["Much of Sanders’s campaign rhetoric appears to suggest a wildly naive or uninformed understanding of how the American political system operates. He says we’ll completely transform the health care system and pass a massive Green New Deal and eliminate all student debt, all while making college free, increasing the minimum wage, enormously boosting spending on K-12 education, and overhauling the immigration system — and there’s a sweeping housing plan in there to boot.

These stances animate Sanders’s hardcore supporters, who turn his rivals’ understandable reluctance to sign on to a patently unrealistic series of promises as a litmus test.

To veterans of Beltway politics, or simply folks who’ve been around long enough and watched cycles of exaggerated hopes followed by disappointments, this can be troubling. Would a President Sanders really think that if he just bangs the table loudly enough, a “political revolution” will allow for a top-to-bottom restructuring of the American health care system? Would he reject feasible paths in favor of insisting on ideas that can’t pass?"
(hide spoiler)]


**************
Carol.: "Why is it no one tries a double ticket with a former hopeful as VP to consolidate bases?

It's too early to announce a double ticket... These former hopefuls are "former" for a reason, and may be more a liability at this point. But yeah, I can see Harris or Booker bringing in the African American base. Though that African American base has probably already swung over to Biden.

Thanks for being dismissive, Carol. Great dialogue.

Ian wrote: "Thanks for being dismissive, Carol. Great dialogue."

Ian, my intent was not to be dismissive, but as someone who debates politics often online, there doesn’t appear to be a great deal of openness here to a position other than the one you are articulating with passionate detail. I have quite a few friends in this thread, want to keep it that way and I finished up a 13 hour workday a few minutes ago. Would it come across as collegial to respond with, “great dialogue to you , too”? I suspect not.

Carol wrote: "Ian wrote: "Thanks for being dismissive, Carol. Great dialogue."

Ian, my intent was not to be dismissive, but as someone who debates politics often online, there doesn’t appear to be a great deal ..."

Calling my use of sources, essentially, fanboy-ism is just derisive and condescending, so whether your intent or not, the effect is dismissiveness.

I contain within my multitudes. I'm happy to support any Dem candidate to remove Trump, but Bernie is ascendent, and so I'm rallying behind him.

Alfred wrote: "My personal preference is Klobuchar, but she probably has a better shot at VP/running mate. Given that, I'll support whoever gets the DEM nomination, Bernie or otherwise. I have big reservations ab..."

Bloomberg are you effing kidding me an oligarch who wants to buy his way into the white house.

Ian wrote: "Carol wrote: "Ian wrote: "Thanks for being dismissive, Carol. Great dialogue."

Ian, my intent was not to be dismissive, but as someone who debates politics often online, there doesn’t appear to be..."

Great dialogue to you, too, then.