The fact that's there's a not insignificant amount of Bernie supporters ready to basically disengage with the political process entirely if he doesn't win this primary is also off-putting. Most traditional Democrats are voting for the nominee whoever it is come November but the Sanders or bust folks for me further emphasize just how potentially risky a Sanders ticket can be. If you're so upset at the possibility of Sanders losing (because people are engaging in the coalitional politics that has happened since this nation was founded) that you're willing to sit at home then Trump as president has to be an acceptable enough result for you. That also tells me you're an unreliable voter.
So if those voters are unreliable and will only vote for Bernie, but other voters are more "rational" and will basically vote blue no matter who...by definition, doesn't that mean Bernie would get more votes, and he has a better case to be the nominee? He pulls in the unreliable voters, and the reliable voters will vote blue anyway?
Like, it seems like everyone looks at "Bust" voters and gets the completely wrong takeaway from it.
On the other hand, if the idea is that Bernie would somehow turn off tons of other voters, so that they suddenly won't vote blue anymore...then why pretend like Bernie supporters are the only "Bust" voters? Why does the majority of posts and the majority of news articles pretend like this is a Bernie-specific thing?
(of course, I think the likely answer is that Bernie voters are just more online than others, and don't care about "decorum" as much, so you're more likely to hear it vocalized, lol)