Jump to content
Ansem

General US Politics

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

2. I'm in Texas, unless there's indication that a large number of White voters in Texas are sick of Trump and want him gone, the electoral college makes my vote in the General Election worthless. I'm definitely voting in the primary but I'm not making promises about voting in the General election unless the Democratic nominee is Bernie or Warren.

I've heard more than a few headlines that Texas is weening closer to being a swing state. And the results of 2016 were the closest they had been in 20 years. Complain about the electoral college all you like - I certainly do, but an upset victory requires participation - not waiting for Texas to change. It doesn't matter if your vote is the deciding one, it matters that people like you prove you give a shit. And try not to get caught up on demographic polls, the last general election proved nearly every one of them wrong.

Besides, don't you have a senate seat up for re-election this year? Doesn't that alone have you looking at the ballot? Surely somebody who wants investigations into this administration is also interested in voting out the folks involved in that sham impeachment trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tryhard said:

By the way, what has happened with this whole impeachment thing? He was acquitted as expected because the documents were sent to the Senate, and Trump's approval is now the highest since winning the election... exactly as expected. He also got a similar bump in after he was not charged after the Mueller report. Evidently, the two stories that the Democrats have pushed the most have not worked out no matter what you think of them.

75-80% of Americans wanted to at least see documents and additional information in the trump impeachment trial. That doesn't seem like the democrat messaging not being on point to me. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Not to mention that every major news network, bar fox, broadcast the impeachment trial live.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Glennstavos said:

I've heard more than a few headlines that Texas is weening closer to being a swing state. And the results of 2016 were the closest they had been in 20 years. Complain about the electoral college all you like - I certainly do, but an upset victory requires participation - not waiting for Texas to change. It doesn't matter if your vote is the deciding one, it matters that people like you prove you give a shit. And try not to get caught up on demographic polls, the last general election proved nearly every one of them wrong.

Besides, don't you have a senate seat up for re-election this year? Doesn't that alone have you looking at the ballot? Surely somebody who wants investigations into this administration is also interested in voting out the folks involved in that sham impeachment trial.

I did say I would vote for the Democratic nominee regardless of who it is, I'm simply keeping it real and telling the truth that I'm not promising I will vote for just any of them. Recall that Election Day is currently not a holiday and so all of us have to take time out of our work day to go out and vote. In my case, I am sometimes required to travel in my job so for me to promise that I will vote on November, I'd have to spend a PTO day and request that I remain in Austin Texas during that week or just prioritize the matter over my duties. Coupled with the nature of the Electoral College, Texas' voting history in Presidential elections and the voter purges for Republican advantage (which happened in 2018), making such a commitment is simply not worth it for me unless I truly believe in the candidate.

We do and like I'm implying above, I will vote if I'm around, I'm just not going to make a promise to do so. The Senator in question is supposed to be John Cornyn but given that this is on the same year where Trump is on the ballot, the Senator in question might as well be this. 2018 had Ted Cruz on the chopping block, one of the most well known and detested Senators even in Texas but he still managed to win despite Beto turning out more voters. I'd love nothing more than to see John Cornyn removed as everyone who regularly sees this thread knows how much I detest the current Republican party but there's just more evidence to my vote being worthless compared to folks in Swing states. It sucks but that's just how it is.

22 hours ago, Excellen Browning said:

75-80% of Americans wanted to at least see documents and additional information in the trump impeachment trial. That doesn't seem like the democrat messaging not being on point to me. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Not to mention that every major news network, bar fox, broadcast the impeachment trial live.

The Republican Senators that just acquitted him supposedly know that he's unfit for office but they acquitted him anyway with only 1 Republican breaking from party line on 1/2 Articles of Impeachment. Saying yes to "Should there be witnesses in the trial" unfortunately does not equate to "Trump should be removed as a result". Republican voters know that Trump's a liar and a douchebag but they back him anyway because to quote them "he's our guy". Many folks will be upset about the lack of witnesses now but many will not hold on to this when it's time to vote. Yes, it was absolutely necessary to carry out the impeachment procedure to expose Republican senators but we need to remember:

Do not expect Republican voters to punish Republican politicians for breaking the precedent of witnesses in a trial, Trump has been breaking precedent left and right and the voters acknowledge it but support him anyway.

Do not expect voters who feel betrayed by Trump to just automatically for his opponent in the general election.

The key to winning is to get more people to vote against Trump in the Swing states because that's what matters for winning the Electoral college and the Democratic candidates need to keep that in mind. For example, they'll definitely want to push policy that improves the economic situation for common people in those Swing states... all the Democratic candidates but Bernie support the Carbon Tax. The Carbon Tax will negatively affect everyone in the country and so anyone pushing for it will be in an uphill battle to convince people to accept more economic burden to deal with something many regular folks in the country don't really understand (or don't care about because they'll be dead by then), specially in Swing states that have been suffering due to declining industries.

Edited by Dr. Tarrasque

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

I did say I would vote for the Democratic nominee regardless of who it is, I'm simply keeping it real and telling the truth that I'm not promising I will vote for just any of them. Recall that Election Day is currently not a holiday and so all of us have to take time out of our work day to go out and vote. In my case, I am sometimes required to travel in my job so for me to promise that I will vote on November, I'd have to spend a PTO day and request that I remain in Austin Texas during that week or just prioritize the matter over my duties. Coupled with the nature of the Electoral College, Texas' voting history in Presidential elections and the voter purges for Republican advantage (which happened in 2018), making such a commitment is simply not worth it for me unless I truly believe in the candidate.

While I'm glad to hear of your commitments, there's a clear difference between "I can't promise to vote for just any nominee against Trump" and "something out of my control would have to keep me from voting, because I intend to do it". Very different levels of commitment.

But please excuse me for not knowing about Texas' exclusion of mail-in ballots. Based on where I live, it can be easy to forget not everywhere in the US allows for absentee voting with no excuse. They send me my ballot in the mail, and I send it back long before Election Day. While I agree Election Day would be an extremely sensible choice for a holiday, I'd ultimately want Americans to have more than 24 hours to participate because work isn't the only commitment. There's no excuse for it to be just one day, especially at a point in history where it takes a few hours for states to declare a winner rather than a few months like it did in the 18th century. Turning Election Day into an Election Week sounds like the ideal solution, with the only problem I foresee being states choosing to post up "midterm results" that would encourage people who haven't voted yet to stay home and enjoy their "easy win" while supporters of another side rush for the upset victory.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn, Andrew Yang dropped out of the dems race. I hope most  of his supporters move to support Bernie, since he is the most similar candidate (while still being quite different). He still managed to stay an "issues" candidate and brought the right thing in the discussion. I hope for a cabinet position for him, since I beleive that's how we can get good change. It does put nuclear energy in a grim light though, since I don't think it'll ever come back in the discussion as things are currently. Which is a shame as I beleive it is required for a proper "green deal" providing carbon free base load energy. Anyway, I do hope he'll endoorse Bernie now, as the dems need unity this time over anything

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

Otherwise things are going on just as anticipated. Any favorites from this week? I imagine even folks outside of New York enjoyed watching Bloomberg getting dunked on.

Even though I am a moderate, I do not think Bloomberg has much chance. I do not mind Bloomberg, I am just not sure why he is trying to run now. His campaign just feels a little... not sure what is the right word... pointless? The money could have been better spent elsewhere or at another time?

We already have Biden and he already has some experience being in the White House.

He is getting old though, so when Biden hopefully finishes his 2 terms, Bloomberg would be like 80 something, so I guess now is the time for him to run if he really wants to run for president.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, XRay said:

Even though I am a moderate, I do not think Bloomberg has much chance. I do not mind Bloomberg, I am just not sure why he is trying to run now. His campaign just feels a little... not sure what is the right word... pointless? The money could have been better spent elsewhere or at another time?

Disrupt/Stop Bernie Sanders, he's literally said it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

Disrupt/Stop Bernie Sanders, he's literally said it.

We have Biden for that. Biden might not be the best debater, have the most flashy policy positions, nor the biggest warchest, but I am not sure that is what the moderates are looking for. I just want a return to normalcy and ideally a continuation of Obama.

I am not sure Bloomberg throwing money at himself is the right approach to disrupting the left wing of the party, at least not in the way I see him use the money. It just does not sound right. To combat the left wing, I think there needs to be a more bottom-up approach, which I am not sure if he is doing. I mostly just see and hear ads, and it is a very top-down approach with very little human interaction and it does not feel personal nor emotional enough. Having that human touch is crucial in my opinion since he is doing catch up with all the other candidates. Most people know Biden and Bernie well, and those two have a history with voters already. Bloomberg has that with New Yorkers, but he does not have that with the rest of the country.

For Bernie's campaign, at least I got a call from them asking me to support them, which I very much appreciate. Personal selling is extremely expensive, but if Bernie can afford it, I am sure Bloomberg's massive warchest can too. Bernie's campaign has built that "we are all in this together" vibe over the years, which Bloomberg's campaign does not have right now and he will not build that camaraderie experience in time with just impersonal ads alone.

As much as I dislike Trump, I think the Republicans pretty much nailed the personal experience without much actual human interaction. Lots of conservative ads I have seen lately features Trump and, more importantly, frequently uses the word "you," and that helps establish a connection between Trump and the voter. A lot of their ads also have a little bit of voter interaction, generally involving just a multiple choice question whether you think Trump is smarter than Obama or who the best president is amongst the last few presidents.

Edited by XRay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, XRay said:

We have Biden for that. Biden might not be the best debater, have the most flashy policy positions, nor the biggest warchest, but I am not sure that is what the moderates are looking for. I just want a return to normalcy and ideally a continuation of Obama.

"Disruption" doesn't necessarily mean "take votes away".  I think it's similar to Trump's campaign, where Bloomberg gets the media focused on him instead of Sanders.  I don't know if he wants to win, but I think he wants Bernie to lose.

Also, while Obama did a lot of good things, I think stuff like the covert drone strikes should stay dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, XRay said:

We have Biden for that. Biden might not be the best debater, have the most flashy policy positions, nor the biggest warchest, but I am not sure that is what the moderates are looking for. I just want a return to normalcy and ideally a continuation of Obama.

Evidently it's not enough since he still feels the need to buy his way into the primary election. The Iowa and New Hampshire results kind of validate his fears. Continuation of Obama isn't exactly the best thing to run on since Obama wasn't perfect and did engage in policies that we despise most of the politicians for (Tax cuts for the rich, money in politics, etc). Recall that some people turned to Trump after voting for Obama simply because they looked for someone to disrupt DC. Biden himself has run on the "continue the Obama" years and you've seen the results in states that are primarily white.

6 hours ago, XRay said:

I am not sure Bloomberg throwing money at himself is the right approach to disrupting the left wing of the party, at least not in the way I see him use the money. It just does not sound right. To combat the left wing, I think there needs to be a more bottom-up approach, which I am not sure if he is doing. I mostly just see and hear ads, and it is a very top-down approach with very little human interaction and it does not feel personal nor emotional enough. Having that human touch is crucial in my opinion since he is doing catch up with all the other candidates. Most people know Biden and Bernie well, and those two have a history with voters already. Bloomberg has that with New Yorkers, but he does not have that with the rest of the country.

Bloomberg's history with New Yorkers isn't even great and quite frankly, him spending on the election is just him throwing money away for achieving absolutely nothing unless the DNC is actually stupid enough to give him the nomination. If the DNC gives him the nomination, everyone involved in that decision should have their money and power stripped away and be forced to live as a working class citizen on minimum wage under Trump to truly realize the mistake they've made. Bloomberg is essentially a modern Republican: an old fart who's out of touch, has no interest in governance for the benefit of the common people of his country and just wants to profit off of our current Oligarchy with the man being an Oligarch himself.

6 hours ago, XRay said:

For Bernie's campaign, at least I got a call from them asking me to support them, which I very much appreciate. Personal selling is extremely expensive, but if Bernie can afford it, I am sure Bloomberg's massive warchest can too. Bernie's campaign has built that "we are all in this together" vibe over the years, which Bloomberg's campaign does not have right now and he will not build that camaraderie experience in time with just impersonal ads alone.

To the masses that don't follow our politics and haven't fallen for the Socialism fear-mongering, Bernie's biggest selling points are the endorsements from unions and lack of support from Billionaires. People were pissed about politicians being bought by donors back in 2016 and they're pissed off by the same thing this year. Everyone running in the Democratic Primary understands this but they also realize that without their Billionaire donors they would run out of money to continue their campaign and that's why you have folks like Pete Buttigieg trying to minimize the problem of his Billionaire donations and try to pass it off to the public as a "purity test that no human could pass".

6 hours ago, XRay said:

As much as I dislike Trump, I think the Republicans pretty much nailed the personal experience without much actual human interaction. Lots of conservative ads I have seen lately features Trump and, more importantly, frequently uses the word "you," and that helps establish a connection between Trump and the voter. A lot of their ads also have a little bit of voter interaction, generally involving just a multiple choice question whether you think Trump is smarter than Obama or who the best president is amongst the last few presidents.

It does and the Southern Strategy has always been that way: it speaks directly to the woes of the white voters and points them to a possible solution, "the immigrants, black people are the problem"" even though behind the scenes, they admit that the country could use immigrants to do the jobs that Americans don't want to do. We can go on and on about why we suddenly went from Obama who to some people seems like a saint compared to Trump but at the end of the day, the answer just boils down to 2 things...

1. The Electoral College giving disproportionate voting power for the Presidency. Only the Swing states matter.

2. Cost and problems with our Education system which results in our less educated people opening the door to Demagogues like Trump.

 

Edited by Dr. Tarrasque

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, eclipse said:

"Disruption" doesn't necessarily mean "take votes away".  I think it's similar to Trump's campaign, where Bloomberg gets the media focused on him instead of Sanders.  I don't know if he wants to win, but I think he wants Bernie to lose.

Also, while Obama did a lot of good things, I think stuff like the covert drone strikes should stay dead.

I have not thought about it that way before, but I guess it sort of makes sense? He does not have a lot of time to do it though and it is not like Bernie is completely off the news either.

I am not expecting perfection from a candidate. With how much Trump lowered the bar, as long as the candidate wants what is best for America and is not a complete idiot, they would have my backing. I would not even mind Mitt Romney at this point, and I will even take Rubio and Kasich.

3 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

Bloomberg's history with New Yorkers isn't even great and quite frankly, him spending on the election is just him throwing money away for achieving absolutely nothing unless the DNC is actually stupid enough to give him the nomination

Yeah. Spending his way into the playing field does not exactly put up a great image.

3 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

It does and the Southern Strategy has always been that way: it speaks directly to the woes of the white voters and points them to a possible solution,

I think that is something Democrats and the left can learn from. We need to speak to voters more directly and appeal to their values.

Just putting something like "Do you believe in the government's separation of powers?" or "Uncle Sam wants YOU to save America from corruption!" or something along those lines will help remind voters of what Republicans have blatantly ignored for the past few years. It does not have to be anything fancy, but it needs to address the voter and connect them the idea that Democrats right now are the ones trying to uphold American values and our Constitution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw Chris Matthews' comparing Sanders performance in Nevada to the Nazi invasion of France for some reason. Just nice. And this, of course.

 
It's becoming more certain in my mind that there is going to be sizable portion of Democrat politicians or media figures that talk a lot about hating Trump but would prefer him getting four more years to Sanders winning the general. For people like Bloomberg this makes sense because they stand to lose more if Sanders wins over Trump (because he and others aren't the victims at the end of Trump's policies, after all)
 
Edited by Tryhard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Sanders might not be able to grab the swing states. Not to mention attempting to bring America to 100% renewable energy in 10 years is impossible.
  • Biden hasn't put together a strong campaign.
  • Warren has lost the leftist vote to Sanders.
  • Klobuchar and Buttigieg are too white and unappealing to rally the African-American and Latino votes.
  • Bloomberg just lost his debate credibility and is trying to buy a nomination.
  • And for some reason, Gabbard and Steyer are still in it?

 

:facepalm: We're doomed. Thats how I feel. I'd still toss my ballot to Sanders and encourage others to do the same. But the global far right wave will last another four years in this country. So much for the "blue wave" two years prior, it was a ripple, destined to ebb.

Edited by Interdimensional Observer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being the incumbent is usually a huge advantage regardless of the strength of the opposition. I cant say what will happen but I raise my eyebrow at people who say Klobuchar, Buttigieg, Biden or Bloomberg (???) could do any better vs Trump.

 

Edited by Tryhard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tryhard said:

I saw Chris Matthews' comparing Sanders performance in Nevada to the Nazi invasion of France for some reason. Just nice. And this, of course.

 
It's becoming more certain in my mind that there is going to be sizable portion of Democrat politicians or media figures that talk a lot about hating Trump but would prefer him getting four more years to Sanders winning the general. For people like Bloomberg this makes sense because they stand to lose more if Sanders wins over Trump (because he and others aren't the victims at the end of Trump's policies, after all)
 

Chris Matthews said Bernie would have communist death squads executing people like him in Time Square like, a week and a half ago.

The guy is absolutely losing his marbles. Even my parents, who almost exclusively watch MSNBC for news, are fucking scared of how insane he comes off when he talks about Sanders.

Also, in case anyone doesn't remember, he said Hillary Clinton and John Kasich was his dream ticket in 2016. Not as in, like, Hillary vs. Kasich for the White House. He meant that he wanted to see those two run together. He's always passed himself off as the "sensible moderate", and he's probably starting to see how a large portion of the democratic base is rejecting the stances moderates take.

Edited by Slumber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Tryhard said:

It's becoming more certain in my mind that there is going to be sizable portion of Democrat politicians or media figures that talk a lot about hating Trump but would prefer him getting four more years to Sanders winning the general. For people like Bloomberg this makes sense because they stand to lose more if Sanders wins over Trump (because he and others aren't the victims at the end of Trump's policies, after all)

Bernie's changes are scary, because they're a giant shift away from what has become the norm in America (no matter how screwed up that norm is).  Big changes in a short amount of time are scary, and in some cases, ill-advised.  Much as I want Bernie's policies to go through, I predict that there will be a huge resurgence in Republican Senate/House seats, meaning that the amount of change he will be able to do will be heavily limited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea of Sanders having creepy communist death squads is almost silly. 

With Trump you're allowed to say he might eventually end up with creepy facist death squads because he went as close as he legally could to saying he wanted the Whistleblower shot and tends to call everyone who opposes him a traitor. 

But what exactly has Sanders done to make some loonie argue he wants death squads?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

But what exactly has Sanders done to make some loonie argue he wants death squads?

Propose policy that the rich don't like and having won the popular vote in the states that have participated in the primaries so far. Really, they're just trying so hard to not say the quiet parts out loud and end up saying asinine shit like this instead.

"I don't care what the people want, I'll take having Trump over Bernie in power because I'm rich and I don't want my taxes to go up" is probably what he would like to say and it would be less ridiculous than what he's said so far.

5 hours ago, eclipse said:

Bernie's changes are scary, because they're a giant shift away from what has become the norm in America (no matter how screwed up that norm is).  Big changes in a short amount of time are scary, and in some cases, ill-advised.  Much as I want Bernie's policies to go through, I predict that there will be a huge resurgence in Republican Senate/House seats, meaning that the amount of change he will be able to do will be heavily limited.

I love how the fear-mongering of changes from Sanders' policies evokes more emotion than the fact that the Republican party would be disproportionately hurt by the removal of lies and misinformation on social media.

Ignorance must really be quite bliss indeed.

Edited by Dr. Tarrasque

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disgusted by how many Democrat commentators/analysts are just ripping on Bernie and doing the same kind of fear mongering that Fox and co love to do.  The 60 minutes with Anderson Cooper tonight was appalling.  They were way nicer to Trump when he was on. 

However maybe that 'outsider/anti establishment' thing will get him even more supporters.  

Yang was who I supported, but since he dropped out, I am all in with Bernie.  Firstly he is the only one that can beat Trump, and it is for a simple reason that doesn't have to do with his policies.  He is an inspiration speaker, charismatic, and he delivers short easy to grasp messages.  Medicare for all, college debt cancellation, free public college, etc.  Most people don't pay attention to politics, so simple 'slogans' are incredibly effective.  Secondly regardless of how difficult it may be for him to pass these policies and all the countless details and thing to account for, I think the most important thing is to have a person who wants what is best for the people and who is a human being of high moral value.  Bernie has been fighting for the people his whole life, all the way back in college Chicago, fighting against segregation of schools and racism in real estate, to environment battling.  He's got a heart of gold and is what we need after the no heart narcissistic scum that is sitting in the white house presently.  

As for why Bernie bros (or supporters, many of them females BTW) may not vote if Bernie doesn't win the candidacy.  Can you really blame them?  With what happened with the DNC 2016, and how they are treating him thusfar, all trust is lost.  Many are disgusted with the Democrat party and they have plenty of reason to be.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

But what exactly has Sanders done to make some loonie argue he wants death squads?

It's playing on the fears of the uneducated, and those that fear change.

3 hours ago, Dr. Tarrasque said:

I love how the fear-mongering of changes from Sanders' policies evokes more emotion than the fact that the Republican party would be disproportionately hurt by the removal of lies and misinformation on social media.

Ignorance must really be quite bliss indeed.

It's drastic change.  It's easier to stick with something that's comfortable than something that's different, even if "comfortable" isn't a good thing.

1 minute ago, Lewyn said:

As for why Bernie bros (or supporters, many of them females BTW) may not vote if Bernie doesn't win the candidacy.  Can you really blame them?  With what happened with the DNC 2016, and how they are treating him thusfar, all trust is lost.  Many are disgusted with the Democrat party and they have plenty of reason to be.

I'd think their dislike of Trump would outweigh whatever bitterness they had for the DNC.  But alas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully we all keep in mind that winning the presidency does not result in rapid systematic change, and we're gonna get neither the death squads or the amazing socialist revolution.

Our government really, really doesn't work that way. Never has and never will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Crysta said:

Hopefully we all keep in mind that winning the presidency does not result in rapid systematic change, and we're gonna get neither the death squads or the amazing socialist revolution.

Our government really, really doesn't work that way. Never has and never will.

I'm far more afraid of the Republicans taking over the Senate/House.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Crysta said:

Hopefully we all keep in mind that winning the presidency does not result in rapid systematic change, and we're gonna get neither the death squads or the amazing socialist revolution.

Our government really, really doesn't work that way. Never has and never will.

Depends on the type of change. In terms of foreign relations, the White House has enormous influence. Our hard and soft power diminished significantly under Trump.

The biggest blow to our hard power in my opinion is backing out of the TPP and the disruption to trade with allies which blunts our economic influence, and disruption to NATO which decreases our coordination and effectiveness when responding to threats like Russia and China.

Trump also significantly destroyed much of the soft power the last few presidents built up. We lost influence by backing out of the Paris Agreement, which I think even North Korea signed and did not back out. The way Trump acts towards allies also generated a huge amount of personal ill will, and it is bad that it went on the news that foreign leaders actively made fun of Trump behind his back and Trump caught wind of it and sulked and flew back to mommy crying like a total wuss. While no children died (I think), Trump has no excuse in how he is treating refugees and separating families at the border.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, eclipse said:

 

I'd think their dislike of Trump would outweigh whatever bitterness they had for the DNC.  But alas.

Bernie supporters are not like supporters of many of the other Dem candidates.  They aren't necessarily Democrats, so they aren't looking at what is best for the 'party', they just love Bernie.  Just like Trump supporters love him rather than the Republican party necessarily.  Hey if Biden or whoever actually wins the majority legit or whatever, I don't think they will not vote.  However if Sanders has a big lead but it goes to brokered convention and then someone else gets the nomination that is a different story.  

Trump re election along with House and Senate under Republican party control would be horrifying and this is a large part of Dem party fear of Bernie.   I think they are being paranoid though, and just hurting their party's chances overall.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...