Current Events > Bernie Sanders seems like the Democratic favorite in 2020 right now

(+) Yeah! (+)

People also still think he was about "free stuff"

Fucking delusional
---

Steve Nick posted...

Kolibri X posted...

r4X0r posted...

Bernie Sanders turned out to be just as much of a sellout as the rest of them. That, on top of "We're just going to make everything free!" not passing the sniff test with the intelligent voter, he's got no chance.

Credit where credit's due though, he's easily the best liar politics has ever seen because he lies by omission, instead of just throwing a lie out there and letting the media cover.

He really is a textbook definition of a champagne socialist who's only popular because he promises free shit for the gimme gimme me me generation.

I think it's more that people would like to give slightly less money to billion dollar corporations, and slightly more money to healthcare.

Oh that's right, corporations are evil leeches. Forgot that talking point too.
---

Trump has created thousands of jobs and put trillions back into the economy. Foreign leaders are enthusiastic to work with him to destroy globalism. It's so funny that the dnc wants to put forward the guy who why stabbed in the back during the previous election.
---

Suddenly, Hillary purchases the DNC again.
---

Doom_Art posted...

I always forget about Merkley, but he would be a good choice.

He looks like my dad though, which kinda creeps me out.

If not him I do think it's going to be someone outside of the "favorites" so far. People like to mention Warren, Bernie, and Biden all the time but I wouldn't be shocked if all 3 of them don't run, and I don't know how Warren or Biden end up doing against Trump anyway.

Sherrod Brown is an interesting one. He likely would have been picked over Kaine if the party thought she could have won Ohio instead of Virigina and he's proven he could win elections in Ohio. He's also been relatively scandal free also.
---

I don't think they'll try Warren. Trump already has an effective nickname locked and loaded on her. She'll be easy pickings.
---

Steve Nick posted...

I don't think they'll try Warren. Trump already has an effective nickname locked and loaded on her. She'll be easy pickings.

Yeah it'd be a mistake and likely a loss. Plus I'd rather have Warren in the Senate anyway.
---

Steve Nick posted...

I don't think they'll try Warren. Trump already has an effective nickname locked and loaded on her. She'll be easy pickings.

I believe a lot of the big dnc donors threatened to withhold funds if Warren was selected as VP. I don't see it happening.

Basically, I think the democrats' best bet is Biden.
---

southcoast09 posted...

Trump has created thousands of jobs and put trillions back into the economy. Foreign leaders are enthusiastic to work with him to destroy globalism. It's so funny that the dnc wants to put forward the guy who why stabbed in the back during the previous election.

None of those things exist in the false reality created by the propaganda media though. Every positive is spun into a negative to get the world hating him.
---

Also I can't shake the feeling that I'm doing a professional broadcast for a 4th grade class president election when I say things like, "Trump already has an effective nickname locked and loaded on her."
---

The Great Muta 22 posted...

If not him I do think it's going to be someone outside of the "favorites" so far. People like to mention Warren, Bernie, and Biden all the time but I wouldn't be shocked if all 3 of them don't run, and I don't know how Warren or Biden end up doing against Trump anyway.

Probably good. Let the right wing media stroke themselves out over Warren or Biden.

The Great Muta 22 posted...

Sherrod Brown is an interesting one. He likely would have been picked over Kaine if the party thought she could have won Ohio instead of Virigina and he's proven he could win elections in Ohio. He's also been relatively scandal free also.

If I were sure the Dems could hold his seat I'd say he should go for it.

The Great Muta 22 posted...

Plus I'd rather have Warren in the Senate anyway.

Or as a Treasury Secretary in a lefty Democratic administration

southcoast09 posted...

I believe a lot of the big dnc donors threatened to withhold funds if Warren was selected as VP.

source?
---

Doom_Art posted...

If I were sure the Dems could hold his seat I'd say he should go for it.

Very good point and something I didn't really consider. What's your thoughts on Deval Patrick that supposedly the Obama team has been pushing behind the scenes to get ready for a 2020 run? I think he'd do well but I worry the optics would be the DNC "trying to push another Obama". Same criticism I think Kamala Harris would face, on top of her issues with the Bernie wing of the electorate.
---

How about finding someone who isn't a dinosaur? Just a thought. A 79-80 year old candidate? And you guys go off on tangents about how Trump is senile already...

And your logic is to support someone even older lmao
---

It was about her wall street comments, @Doom_Art

https://www.discussionist.com/1015403466

"How about finding someone who isn't a dinosaur? Just a thought. A 79-80 year old candidate? And you guys go off on tangents about how Trump is senile already...

And your logic is to support someone even older lmao"

Also, this. I know Trump isn't 35, but the guy stays in touch with the modern world. Hillary and some of the other candidates are practically stuck in the era of newspapers and no internet. Like when Hillary talked shit about the coal industry and then said the opposite when she went there. They knew because it was all over the internet and social media.

Anyway, when you consider that the donors in question are so prominent, that's what leads me to believe that she's hit her peak in politics.
---

The Great Muta 22 posted...

Very good point and something I didn't really consider

In a political environment where Dems are over-performing in their elections I wouldn't be too worried about it though.

The Great Muta 22 posted...

What's your thoughts on Deval Patrick that supposedly the Obama team has been pushing behind the scenes to get ready for a 2020 run?

I've never really liked Patrick tbh. He was a decent governor from what I've heard, but the guy never really stood out to me.

Working at Bain Capital probably is going to make him unpopular with the lefty wing of the party though.

Basically "Obama but with more baggage and less charisma"
---

Sanders.
---

Caution998 posted...

How about finding someone who isn't a dinosaur?

gov. steve bullock - (D) Mont.
age: 51
---

Caution998 posted...

How about finding someone who isn't a dinosaur? Just a thought. A 79-80 year old candidate? And you guys go off on tangents about how Trump is senile already...

And your logic is to support someone even older lmao

The only people who feel it's going to be "All old, big name Democrats!" are either politically ignorant or trolls who don't bother to live in reality. Same people who go on about how Hillary is guaranteed to run again and will win the primary. Same for, really, the "celebrity" tickets people like to throw out.

While I think Bernie will easily win the ticket if he decides to run, I would almost guarantee you're going to see a multiperson field akin to the Republican ticket in 2016. Wouldn't be shocked if the first debate has up to 10 people on stage. Regardless if it's true or not, the DNC will go out of their way to make it appear as if the system isn't rigged, and having a plethora of candidates would give that image.
---

Anteaterking posted...

No reason to appoint Ellison. Then you have to appoint someone to Ellison's seat.

I mean, you can just...do that.
---

I'd gladly vote for The Rock, Trump, or anyone else over a filthy communist.
---

Putting up Bernie would be a mistake. He mobilized the younger democrats, but his campaign obviously created divisiveness in the democratic constituency that in the end was probably a key contributor to Hillary's loss against Trump.
---

Antifar posted...

Anteaterking posted...

No reason to appoint Ellison. Then you have to appoint someone to Ellison's seat.

I mean, you can just...do that.

Ellisons seat is in the metropolitan twin cities, no? Not exactly in danger of being lost to the GOP
---

Doom_Art posted...

Ellisons seat is in the metropolitan twin cities, no? Not exactly in danger of being lost to the GOP

If you're talking about political ramifications, it's not clear that Ellison can win a statewide election in Minnesota. That doesn't really matter to me though, I'm just saying.

Antifar posted...

I mean, you can just...do that.

I'm aware you can. I gave two reasons why I don't like this general practice.
---

COVxy posted...

Putting up Bernie would be a mistake. He mobilized the younger democrats, but his campaign obviously created divisiveness in the democratic constituency that in the end was probably a key contributor to Hillary's loss against Trump.

I agree with your conclusion but for the reverse reason.

6 - 12% of Bernie primary voters flipped to Trump in the 2016 general, compared to 24 - 25% of Hillary primary voters who flipped to McCain in the 2008 general. Bernie voters defected at a rate of 2 to 4x less than the previous benchmark set by Clinton voters in 2008.

Bernie supporters did not cost Clinton the election, but Clinton supporters could very well cost Bernie the election if he ran again. They didn't turn out for Obama and I question whether they'd turn out for Bernie.
---

Polycosm posted...

COVxy posted...

Putting up Bernie would be a mistake. He mobilized the younger democrats, but his campaign obviously created divisiveness in the democratic constituency that in the end was probably a key contributor to Hillary's loss against Trump.

I agree with your conclusion but for the reverse reason.

6 - 12% of Bernie primary voters flipped to Trump in the 2016 general, compared to 24 - 25% of Hillary primary voters who flipped to McCain in the 2008 general. Bernie voters defected at a rate of 2 to 4x less than the previous benchmark set by Clinton voters in 2008.

Bernie supporters did not cost Clinton the election, but Clinton supporters could very well cost Bernie the election if he ran again. They didn't turn out for Obama and I question whether they'd turn out for Bernie.

Where did you get 24-25%?

Also, the distinction you aren't drawing is that ideologically 1. Clinton 2. McCain 3. Obama could be consistent, whereas 1.Sanders 2. Trump 3. Clinton isn't, if you are trying to make an argument for leftists and not just general populists.
---

Are we assuming racism is the main reason that someone would vote for Clinton in the primary, and McCain in the general circa 2008?
---

Doom_Art posted...

Sherrod Brown should do it

So should Al Fra- oh right... never mind.

I agree with Brown. I liked him at the Senate reform thing. He was a senator I knew nothing about but seemed to be a very wise man.

And yeah, I really wanted Franken to run..... he's been my favorite senator, but he wouldn't make it now. Sure, Trump has more against him, but the democrats are harder on democrat abusers than the republicans are of republican abusers.
---

Bernie's gonna croak for sure. Pick someone else so the damage isn't that bad
---

I feel like Gillibrand is gonna start running as well
---

The next primary for the Democrats is going to look like this past primary for the Republicans. No clear frontrunner + the perception that it's a free win in the general = everyone and their mom attempting to run
---

Sayoria posted...

I agree with Brown. I liked him at the Senate reform thing. He was a senator I knew nothing about but seemed to be a very wise man.

Brown's a good egg

prince_leo posted...

I feel like Gillibrand is gonna start running as well

That woman does nothing for me. Just reading through her policies and having followed her career for the last few years, she just doesn't seem... Iunno. I can't put my finger on it. I just don't care about her.

s0nicfan posted...

The next primary for the Democrats is going to look like this past primary for the Republicans. No clear frontrunner + the perception that it's a free win in the general = everyone and their mom attempting to run

Oh it'll probably be a shit show, but it'll be fun to watch at least.
---

Doom_Art posted...

That woman does nothing for me. Just reading through her policies and having followed her career for the last few years, she just doesn't seem... Iunno. I can't put my finger on it. I just don't care about her.

I think it's cause she doesn't have any major legislation. like, nothing you can point to that has her mark on it. sorta like she's just there
or idk, I don't really know much about her and there's no real way we'll know who is gonna be president. I think it was Antifar who pointed out in another topic that in 2005 no one knew Obama would be president or in 2013 that Trump would be
---

How long until Hillary makes him have an accident and takes the primary for herself. It is her turn after all.
---

TheSextMachine posted...

How long until Hillary makes him have an accident and takes the primary for herself. It is her turn after all.

why are trump garglers so obsessed with this
---

Doom_Art posted...

Sayoria posted...

I agree with Brown. I liked him at the Senate reform thing. He was a senator I knew nothing about but seemed to be a very wise man.

Brown's a good egg

prince_leo posted...

I feel like Gillibrand is gonna start running as well

That woman does nothing for me. Just reading through her policies and having followed her career for the last few years, she just doesn't seem... Iunno. I can't put my finger on it. I just don't care about her.

s0nicfan posted...

The next primary for the Democrats is going to look like this past primary for the Republicans. No clear frontrunner + the perception that it's a free win in the general = everyone and their mom attempting to run

Oh it'll probably be a shit show, but it'll be fun to watch at least.

Might sound like an insult but it isn't. Seeing him just made me think "Democrat Rand Paul" for some reason. I think it is the chicken hair.
---

TheSextMachine posted...

How long until Hillary makes him have an accident and takes the primary for herself. It is her turn after all.

I don't know
A) If this is serious
B) how anyone could see the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign and think it was run by ruthless masterminds willing to call in hits to achieve their goals.
---

Sanders exists to make literally any other candidate look palatable. Suddenly Ben Carson becomes an attractive candidate.
---

s0nicfan posted...

The next primary for the Democrats is going to look like this past primary for the Republicans. No clear frontrunner + the perception that it's a free win in the general = everyone and their mom attempting to run

Probably, since Hillary might be done and there aren't *that* many nationally-known Democrats who could swing it. Granted, despite the "party of diversity"'s plethora of old white people on the stage last election, there are a number of relatively young, charismatic non-whites who could tap into that same Obama market. Cory Booker -- who iirc may be 51 or 52 by the next primaries -- could be among them.
---

Even Hillary would be infinitely superior to Bernie. Bernie would be a communist shit stain on the fabric of our nation.
---

Anteaterking posted...

Polycosm posted...

COVxy posted...

Putting up Bernie would be a mistake. He mobilized the younger democrats, but his campaign obviously created divisiveness in the democratic constituency that in the end was probably a key contributor to Hillary's loss against Trump.

I agree with your conclusion but for the reverse reason.

6 - 12% of Bernie primary voters flipped to Trump in the 2016 general, compared to 24 - 25% of Hillary primary voters who flipped to McCain in the 2008 general. Bernie voters defected at a rate of 2 to 4x less than the previous benchmark set by Clinton voters in 2008.

Bernie supporters did not cost Clinton the election, but Clinton supporters could very well cost Bernie the election if he ran again. They didn't turn out for Obama and I question whether they'd turn out for Bernie.

Where did you get 24-25%?

Also, the distinction you aren't drawing is that ideologically 1. Clinton 2. McCain 3. Obama could be consistent, whereas 1.Sanders 2. Trump 3. Clinton isn't, if you are trying to make an argument for leftists and not just general populists.

Here's a secondary source that's a bit more readable: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/24/did-enough-bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-for-trump-to-cost-clinton-the-election

The above article links to several primary sources which require some effort to use / extract the data. One of the two sources for the Sanders 12% figure is 404'd but both number ranges are still supported.

Here's a direct link to the upper end of the Clinton numbers: https://sites.duke.edu/hillygus/files/2014/06/hendersonhillygustompsonPOQ.pdf (see page 9, table 2)
---

Well the DNC already worked against Bernie behind the scenes once already, I really think they don't exactly want him to be the guy. Yes, he has a rabid base of yuppie supporters. He also is a really old white guy from Vermont that isn't really gonna invigorate some key Democratic bases, which could result in even lower turnout than Hillary's 'meh' turnout from some important strongholds (like Philadelphia, etc.). I think Biden's a better candidate for the rust belt but he has some of the same problems that Bernie has with image (if not worse depending on who you're asking) - I also think he's pretty much been repudiated by the DNC already, just more directly via Obama than Bernie was.
---

Zeus posted...

Sanders exists to make literally any other candidate look palatable. Suddenly Ben Carson becomes an attractive candidate.

Pretty eccentric theory ya got there, considering he's the most popular politician in Burgerfatclapistan
---

masticatingman posted...

Well the DNC already worked against Bernie behind the scenes once already, I really think they don't exactly want him to be the guy. Yes, he has a rabid base of yuppie supporters. He also is a really old white guy from Vermont that isn't really gonna invigorate some key Democratic bases, which could result in even lower turnout than Hillary's 'meh' turnout from some important strongholds (like Philadelphia, etc.). I think Biden's a better candidate for the rust belt but he has some of the same problems that Bernie has with image (if not worse depending on who you're asking) - I also think he's pretty much been repudiated by the DNC already, just more directly via Obama than Bernie was.

It's hard to say the DNC worked against Bernie, when what actually happened was Hillary bought the DNC, replaced all its staff, and then ordered them to destroy Bernie while promoting her.
---

The Great Muta 22 posted...

Caution998 posted...

How about finding someone who isn't a dinosaur? Just a thought. A 79-80 year old candidate? And you guys go off on tangents about how Trump is senile already...

And your logic is to support someone even older lmao

The only people who feel it's going to be "All old, big name Democrats!" are either politically ignorant or trolls who don't bother to live in reality. Same people who go on about how Hillary is guaranteed to run again and will win the primary. Same for, really, the "celebrity" tickets people like to throw out.

While I think Bernie will easily win the ticket if he decides to run, I would almost guarantee you're going to see a multiperson field akin to the Republican ticket in 2016. Wouldn't be shocked if the first debate has up to 10 people on stage. Regardless if it's true or not, the DNC will go out of their way to make it appear as if the system isn't rigged, and having a plethora of candidates would give that image.

I hope so. I hope they've learned their lesson from last time, and in fact, have ten candidates. It's a good thing when both parties are are as free from corruption as possible. The two party system works. It's always after 8 years when the current party in power starts to become corrupt, and the other party comes back out on top. It's a good system. Having one party control everything leads to Detroit Michigan. You need the other side to flush out the corruption every once in a while.
---

Pass, thanks, 2016 ensured I will never vote Democrat or Republican so long as I live. (And since lol 3rd parties, that means I'm not voting ever.)

You libs & cons proved once and for all that you're no ally of mine or the lower class as a whole. Go fuck yourselves.
---

No shit. Hed have beaten Trump, but they stuck with Haggery the Goblin-beast instead.
---

Inferno Dive Dragoon posted...

Pass, thanks, 2016 ensured I will never vote Democrat or Republican so long as I live. (And since lol 3rd parties, that means I'm not voting ever.)

You libs & cons proved once and for all that you're no ally of mine or the lower class as a whole. Go fuck yourselves.

"Both sides are the same" is a very lazy position to hold
---

Doom_Art posted...

"Both sides are the same" is a very lazy position to hold

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

Booker or Warren. I really hope sanders doesn't run
---

Bernie Sanders is going to like 80 in 2020 >_> I think he's too old to run at this point
---