Then why didn't bernie even try to court his endorsement?
Remember when you thought Bernie might win Virginia last night?
US PoliEra 2020 |OT 3| "I think he's learned his lesson" says The Concerned Immoderate Darling Collins.
- Thread starter TheHunter
- Start date
- Status
Then why didn't bernie even try to court his endorsement?
Remember when you thought Bernie might win Virginia last night?
I wasn't hoping for a lead at all. Bernie being ahead by 50 in this stage of the race would have been a loss. As it stands it's a rout. I was hoping for Bernie +150, tbh.
What does Biden do to appeal to progressives?
Weed? Healthcare? Student debt? All milquetoast half measures.
I mean its important that Bernie has some longshot viable path for the next two weeks just so Florida Dems can get their chance to be the ones to dunk him for good. They've earned that coveted place at the table after the last weeks of Sanders' malarkey.
Hop off the conspiracy shit there, buddy. If Bernie wanted to destroy the Democratic party then he'd start his own party. Should he have had lunch with Clyburn or something? I guess, but if you've ever heard Clyburn speak you know he's terrified of the socialist label on top of the ticket and isn't a fan of a lot of Bernie's platform. The two of them are actually pretty good friends and have worked together a bunch of times but an endorsement was never happening.
What? lol
There are 36 contests left.
Of those 36 contests, Bernie won 10 of them in 2016. He is performing worse nearly everywhere than 2016. Next week the states that are going will make this game over. Bernie's team was expecting to come out of yesterday with a substantial lead. In the 100-200 range. There was no plan for them to come back from being down 65 or more delegates (and they all haven't been allocated). Like, in what world was yesterday not catastrophic for the Sander's campaign?
I didn't say Bernie would win Virginia. We had this conversation last night.
I said I was just having fun immediately after posting the laughable 45% number. Quit being dishonest.
My biggest crow is thinking he would still be ahead after last night.
He is not well liked by the old folk down here. Thats the kind version of it.
I don't think anyone isn't saying it's not fair politics. Totally go for it. It's too late, but give it a shot. It's basically the only path he has left.
(Seems like a weird play to be antagonistic to the thread that is basically a Warren fans safe haven)
i mean, it looks like biden got more progressives then bernie got moderates if the results so far are anything to go by
It was really bad. No question.
He's in a really bad way right now.
Biden had all but vanished two weeks ago.
Yep. While not impossible for Sanders to become competitive again, it is demographically and mathematically implausible. We're not talking "needs one or two good debates" we're talking "needs Biden to pull a John Edwards" here.
OP
OP
Yes, let's run a religious nutter in the suburbs.
What could possibly go wrong?
I honestly don't think anyone cares if Warren and Sanders combine forces and they likely wouldn't have cared if it was done in prior weeks either. That's very common in politics. I'd be careful what people wish for though since Warren supporters are VERY active on social media and the Sanders crowd on social media hasn't been too kind to Warren.
I don't think you're seeing the scenario where Biden goes into the convention with a weak plurality where things could get a lot more interesting. That article says Warren and Sanders are looking to push their liberal agenda, which can also mean forcing Biden into adopting parts of their platform.
( this would be great so I'm totally here for it)
Bernie's not dead, but he has to somehow survive next week to a draw to prevent it from getting out of hand. It arguably get even harder after that, but one thing at a time.
Are there any more scheduled debates yet? I honestly don't know. They'd have to been within the next week or so for it to potentially change anything.
it's gonna snarky 2016 boogaloo 2 remix edition for a bit here.
(Same.)
There's a lot of no brainers he could accept around the edges like weed.
I suppose, but it's not looking like Biden's gonna end up with a weak plurality here.
Still, it's Sanders and Warren's best bet at this point - wear Biden down until the convention to the point where he has to come to the negotiating table.
The bloomberg money about to kick into overdrive. I wonder though how the ads will be, if they will be Biden ads or just anti-Trump ads.
And Bloomberg getting Market St. at the waterfront.
Never change, SF.
It's just a bad take. I don't think she's saying this specifically because Bernie lost.
Well, the good thing is Bernie is on record saying whoever has the most delegates should be the nominee. If Biden has 1 more delegate than Bernie, Bernie will only get the concessions folks want to give him. He won't be able to force anything because the Supers will universally put Biden over the top (and rightfully so.) Now, before anyone gets upset, I think we should 100% give concessions to the Bernie/Warren wing, should Biden end up winning. No question in my mind that should happen. But I don't think Bernie is going to be able to force that, considering Warren has fewer delegates than Bloomberg.
The week after this one there is a debate, and the primaries that week are when Bernie's campaign will (probably) be 100% done.
538 has a great interview, and it wasn't so much the 'socialism', Clyburn said the Republicans will do that for everyone, but the 'we're going to give you all this free stuff' that didn't sit well with him and that his supporters thought was incredulous.
There's an underlying point here that's salient, I don't think Bernie ever really convinced people that his plans were actual policy vs. campaign promises outside of his base of support.
Caucuses benefitted Sanders in '16 tremendously. (It's not clear that's really a thing this time around though with how Iowa went.)
You seem to be in denial here. Biden had all but vanished two weeks ago when the Primary season had just started, and SC had yet to happen. There's a world of difference between a low delegate count before ST, and a mediocre count post ST.
Btw, I'm all for Bernie and Warren teaming up to push a left-wing agenda at the convention. But considering as recently as Sunday he was saying
I don't expect him to push a half-measure, which means his main policy isn't seeing daylight.
Edit:
You mean, people are wary of Magic Abs? Fuck me!
The fact that Bernie had this problem after 2016 says a lot about how he believes other people don't understand him, and if they just listened, it would be fine.
He did see a massive increase post-alignment in NV, but it didn't work out in his favor in IA because he was hemorrhaging rural whites to Pete.
I'd hope this is an area Warren could slap some sense into him, at least--she's been reviled for betraying progressivism by adding the intermediary step to her M4A plan, but she's clearly willing to compromise to see stuff get done.
I wouldn't mind Warren and Sanders teaming up, but only if she can get him to tone down the 'our revolution is under attack by THE ESTABLISHMENT' rhetoric. 2016 Sanders wasn't really willing to play the game like he had lost until the very, very end--if part of teaming up with Warren is him agreeing to back down sooner when (if, but probably when) the next set of states sinks him, in exchange for trying to negotiate out some concessions from Biden... not all bad.
Oh, he is.
Super Tuesday makes it very clear that Sanders hasn't managed to expand his coalition at all over 2016. To be fair, IIRC he lost a share of the vote pretty much everywhere. So expecting *better* results than 2016 doesn't make much sense at all.
Next Week is:
Idaho: 20 delegates (Sanders state, '16)
Michigan: 125 delegates (Sanders state, '16)
Mississippi: 36 delegates (Clinton state, '16)
Missouri: 68 delegates (Clinton state, '16)
North Dakota: 14 delegates (Sanders '16)
Washington: 89 delegates (Sanders '16)
Then March 17:
Arizona: 67 delegates (Clinton)
Florida: 219 delegates (Clinton)
Illinois: 155 delegates (Clinton)
Ohio: 136 delegates (Clinton)
Then March 24:
Georgia: 105 delegates (Clinton)
March 29:
Puerto Rico: 51 delegates (Clinton)
This is a murderer's row of states with large delegate counts that are going to be rather lopsided losses. No way to make this up. The story post Super Tuesday is that Earned Media is worth a hell of a lot, and a string of lopsided wins in swing states for Biden is going to be a LOT of earned media Sanders has no answer for. It will get worse after this.
Last edited:
Yeah, I'm hopeful of this too... But I just don't see it happening. I think Biden would probably be open to the intermediary step, as he could frame it as building on Obama's legacy, but Sanders... Ehhhh.
My question is, is Bernie viable in Mississippi this time. He barely made it in Alabama. And Mississippi was his worst state in 2016.
I also think this a good point.
Absolutely not. Biden seems to be doing much better than Clinton was, and that was before the super tuesday rout, and the endorsement from Bloomberg.
Had bloomberg not been in splitting the vote some of those states would have been a slaughter.
And that doesn't even get into Michigan which was a sanders state likely going Biden this year- by a LOT
David Nakamura @DavidNakamura
New: A former Secret Service agent tells me Biden's threat profile could be greater due to Trump's attacks on Hunter Biden and Ukraine. "They've now made him a target. It's all rhetoric, but rhetoric can transcend to physical harm." w/@CarolLeonnig https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/after-security-breach-at-rally-biden-campaign-considers-seeking-secret-service-protection/2020/03/04/f5dc599c-5e2e-11ea-b29b-9db42f7803a7_story.html …
7:28 PM - Mar 4, 2020
New: A former Secret Service agent tells me Biden's threat profile could be greater due to Trump's attacks on Hunter Biden and Ukraine. "They've now made him a target. It's all rhetoric, but rhetoric can transcend to physical harm." w/@CarolLeonnig https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/after-security-breach-at-rally-biden-campaign-considers-seeking-secret-service-protection/2020/03/04/f5dc599c-5e2e-11ea-b29b-9db42f7803a7_story.html …
7:28 PM - Mar 4, 2020
Joe Biden's presidential campaign on Wednesday began privately deliberating whether to formally request Secret Service protection for the candidate, according to a person with knowledge of the situation, a day after protesters rushed the stage at his event in Los Angeles in what experts called a major security breach.
Both Biden and fellow candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) rely on private security firms to handle their public appearances, which is unusual this late in a presidential campaign cycle in comparison with 2016, 2012 and 2008. But their emergence over the past week as the clear front-runners in the Democratic primaries has prompted calls for the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the U.S. Secret Service, to authorize full-time protection for both of them.
"Taking into consideration the remaining candidates' large campaign operations, high polling averages, as well as physical threats to their safety … I urge you to immediately initiate the consultation process to determine whether to provide USSS protection" to Biden and Sanders, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss), the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, wrote in a letter Wednesday to acting DHS secretary Chad Wolf.
------------------
The question over which presidential candidates deserve taxpayer-funded Secret Service protection, and when such protection should begin, can be a tricky calculation — for federal officials and the candidates themselves. Under federal guidelines, a candidate must meet minimum standards that include being a "major" candidate in his or her party — generally defined as a someone who is regularly appearing at rallies, conducting a national campaign and receiving at least 15 percent support in established polls. Biden and Sanders both meet such requirements.
Campaigns must request protection from the DHS, and a bipartisan congressional advisory committee — led by the Senate majority leader, currently Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) — helps review the request before the DHS secretary makes a decision.
Honestly, Clinton made a LOT of concessions to Sanders even though she didn't have to. What did she get in return? You can see in this very forum about how Bernie supporters have been trashing her for the past four years. Someone even addressed it in the other thread about how they never actually trusted her to fulfill her promises on that end. Would concessions really placate Sanders supporters? I'm not really convinced any amount of concessions will make a Sanders supporter that only sees Sanders as the correct choice able to be happy to vote for Biden. I think Biden should make concessions because that's just what people do in that situation, but I don't think it'll have any effect on his overall support whether he does or doesn't. He will still trashed by so-called "progressive leftists."
Seems silly to downplay the possibility of Bernie running off the back of an unexpectedly great news cycle to a huge resurgence given Biden just did exactly that. Who knows what can happen?
- Status