With the first 4 states (finally) accounted for - we head into Super Tuesday where ~34% of the delegates are at stake. This will be a make or break day for many candidates - and should serve to ultimately thin out the field.

One of the only things we all seem to agree on is that the first four states (Iowa, NH, Nevada & SC) should all vote on the same day. Super Tuesday is well designed to feature both demographic and geographic diversity - with multiple states having their respective say on a singular day. Easily the most exciting day of the primary thus far.

Not surprisingly, Sanders is winning the more progressive states - while Biden has a lead in some Southern, more moderate/conservative states. But Sanders has also polled quite well in Texas - and even has a puncher's chance at North Carolina. If he takes both California & Texas, he may very well build an insurmountable plurality as this race moves forward. If he picks off both Massachusetts (which would be embarrassing for Warren) and Virginia - that would really solidify a monstrous Super Tuesday for his campaign, where he'd essentially be lapping the field. He also has a strong chance to win both Utah and Colorado - proving that he can take more moderate states as well.

Bloomberg finally enters the fray - but can he get a win anywhere on the map? Warren still hasn't won a contest - nor has she been all that competitive - but with her admission that she's now pivoting to look for a brokered convention - she's essentially saying this is just a delegate collection exercise for her at this point, which is both strange and daunting for party prospects moving forward if we're bracing for an ugly, brokered convention. Will Pete stay in? Will this come down to a Sanders-Biden-Bloomberg three-way race? Two-person race?

We shall see very shortly.


-->

I’ll say it was more crowded than I’d seen it there in years. Not Nov 2008 crowded (that had a line around the block), but certainly more crowded than the 2016 primaries or even the 2018 midterms. And those years Californians had stuff to vote on down ballot.

I don’t know if you can project out from just Alameda County on a Saturday afternoon, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a pretty large turnout this time around.

>I’ll say it was more crowded than I’d seen it there in
>years. Not Nov 2008 crowded (that had a line around the
>block), but certainly more crowded than the 2016 primaries or
>even the 2018 midterms. And those years Californians had stuff
>to vote on down ballot.
>
>I don’t know if you can project out from just Alameda County
>on a Saturday afternoon, but I wouldn’t be surprised if
>there’s a pretty large turnout this time around.

Appreciate this on the ground reporting.


-->

Saturday, February 29, 2020
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/02/29/step-away-fascism-and-toward-brighter-more-just-future-100-black-writers-and


A Step Away From Fascism and 'Toward a Brighter More Just Future': 100+ Black Writers and Scholars Endorse Bernie Sanders


"When so much is at stake, not only for Black people but for all people, and all life on the planet, we feel it imperative that we step outside of our classrooms and go beyond our campuses, to speak out on the current presidential election."

by Jon Queally, staff writer


Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) marches with supporters to early vote on February 27, 2020 at Winston-Salem State University in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Sanders continues to seek support for the Democratic nomination ahead of Super Tuesday. (Photo: Brian Blanco/Getty Images)
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) marches with supporters to early vote on February 27, 2020 at Winston-Salem State University in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Sanders continues to seek support for the Democratic nomination ahead of Super Tuesday. (Photo: Brian Blanco/Getty Images)

As South Carolina voters headed to the primary polls and just three days before Super Tuesday, more than 100 black academics, writers, and educators issued a joint letter on Saturday endorsing Sen. Bernie Sanders as they argued the election of the next president "will determine the future trajectory of this country and the world."

"We live in perilous but promising times. What we do or don't do in 2020 in the electoral arena, and beyond, will determine the future trajectory of this country and the world. We invite you to stand with us and support the Bernie Sanders campaign, as one step away from the precipice of fascism and toward a brighter more just future."
"A Sanders presidency would go a long way toward creating a safer and more just world," the endorsment letter states. "The commitment to free college education, the elimination of student debt which so many of our students suffer under, and the enfranchisement of incarcerated citizens, are only some of the reasons we have come to this conclusion."

The academics—including Princeton University's Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, Temple University's Marc Lamont Hill, Harvard University's Elizabeth Hinton, and Darrick Hamilton of Ohio State University—also noted Sanders support of a commission to study reparations for slavery and heralded his "staunch commitment to the needs of poor and working people over the course of his career" as key reasons to back his candidacy.

"In this crucible year of 2020, when so much is at stake, not only for Black people but for all people, and all life on the planet," the letter states, "we feel it imperative that we step outside of our classrooms and go beyond our campuses, to speak out on the current presidential election."

"We invite you," it continued, "to stand with us and support the Bernie Sanders campaign, as one step away from the precipice of fascism and toward a brighter more just future."

The letter arrived as voters in South Carolina headed to the polls—a state with the largest population of black voters so far this primary season—and just three days before 14 states vote on Super Tuesday next week.

As Common Dreams reported Wednesday, the latest Reuters/Ipsos national poll showed Sanders leading the Democratic primary field among black voters, with 26% who said they support Sanders. That compared to 21% for Michael Bloomberg, 20% for Joe Biden, and 14% who said they were not sure.

Read the full letter and the list of signatories below:

We are Black scholars, writers and educators whose careers have been devoted to uncovering, analyzing, telling the stories, and uplifting the cultures of African Americans and peoples of the African Diaspora. We are also deeply invested in the freedom of our people and the subjects of our research. In this crucible year of 2020, when so much is at stake, not only for Black people but for all people, and all life on the planet, we feel it imperative that we step outside of our classrooms and go beyond our campuses, to speak out on the current presidential election.

After much research and reflection we have concluded that while imperfect, as we all are, Bernie Sanders, the politics he advocates, the consistent track record he demonstrates, and the powerful policy changes he has outlined, if elected, would make the most far-reaching and positive impact on the lives and condition of Black people, and all people in the United States. A Sanders presidency would go a long way toward creating a safer and more just world. The commitment to free college education, the elimination of student debt which so many of our students suffer under, and the enfranchisement of incarcerated citizens, are only some of the reasons we have come to this conclusion. His support of a commission to study reparations for slavery is another reason for our decision, as well as his staunch commitment to the needs of poor and working people over the course of his career.

At the same time we respect our friends and colleagues that have chosen the other progressive candidate in the race, Elizabeth Warren, and if she wins the primary, we will support her too. Still, we feel it is important to state flatly that we feel a Sanders campaign can win and a Sanders presidency would be a game changer for the people and communities of which we are a part.

While we are not all democratic socialists, we will not be red baited to reject and vilify Bernie Sanders' views. In fact there is a long and strong tradition of Black socialists in the United States and globally that have fought for racial and economic justice, from the great scholar and intellectual, W.E.B. DuBois to labor leader, A. Philip Randolph to legendary civil rights organizer, Ella Baker. So, we see Sanders’ commitment to challenging the ravages of racial capitalism as connected to an ongoing and ideologically diverse Black Freedom Movement.

We live in perilous but promising times. What we do or don't do in 2020 in the electoral arena, and beyond, will determine the future trajectory of this country and the world. We invite you to stand with us and support the Bernie Sanders campaign, as one step away from the precipice of fascism and toward a brighter more just future.

Note: Titles and institutional affiliations are listed for identification purposes only and in no way reflect any institutional endorsement whatsoever. Signers are acting in their capacity as private citizens.

Beatrice J. Adams, Doctoral candidate, History, Rutgers Unviersity
Nikol G. Alexander-Floyd, J.D., Ph.D., Associate Professor, Rutgers University
Laylah Ali, Professor of Art, Williams College
Abdul Alkalimat, Professor Emeritus, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Sam Anderson, Center for the Advancement of Black Education
Herman L. Bennett, Professor of History at the Graduate Center, City University of New York
Carwil Bjork-James, Associate Professor, Vanderbilt University
Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, Professor, Sociology, Duke University
Carole Boyce Davies, Professor of English and Africana Studies, Cornell University
Lisa Brock, Associate Professor of History, Kalamazoo College
Elsa Barkley Brown, Associate Professor of History and Women's Studies, University of Maryland College Park
Nicole A. Burrowes, Assistant Professor, African and African Diaspora Studies Department, University of Texas, Austin
Linda E. Carty, Associate Professor, African American Studies, Syracuse University
Rosa Clemente, Professor, Independent Journalist, Producer
Matthew Countryman, Associate Professor, Departments of History and American Culture University of Michigan
Dana-Ain Davis, Professor, City University of New York
Michael Dawson, John D. MacArthur Professor of Political Science and the College, University of Chicago
Frank Deale, Professor of Law, City University of New York Law School
Ajamu Amiri Dillahunt, Ph.D. Student, Michigan State University
James Counts Early, Former Assistant Secretary for Education and Public Service Smithsonian Institution
Erica R. Edwards, Associate Professor of English, Rutgers University-New Brunswick
Ashley D. Farmer Ph.D., Assistant Professor, History & African & African Diaspora Studies, University of Texas-Austin
Crystal N. Feimster, Professor, Yale University, African American Studies Department American Studies Program, History Department, and Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Program
Jonathan Fenderson, Assistant Professor of African & African-American Studies at Washington University in St. Louis and Associate Editor, The Black Scholar
Johanna Fernández, PhD, Department of History, Baruch College, City University of New York
Bill Fletcher Jr., Independent Scholar and Author, Executive Editor, Global African Worker
Tyrone Forman, Professor, African American Studies and Sociology, University of Illinois at Chicago
Paul Foster, MPA, Emerita Clinical Co-ordinator, Harlem Physician Assistant Program, Sophie Davis School of Biomedical Education, CCNY
Olubukola Gbadegesin, Associate Professor, African American Studies and Art History, Saint Louis University
Adom Getachew, Neubauer Family Assistant Professor of Political Science and the College, University of Chicago
Keedra Gibba, Teacher of History and Social Studies, Francis W. Parker School, Chicago
Dayo Gore, Professor, Ethnic Studies and Critical Gender Studies, University of California, San Diego
Cecilia A. Green, Associate Professor of Sociology, Syracuse University
Josh Guild, Associate Professor of History and African American Studies, Princeton University
Sarah Haley, Associate Professor, University of California, Los Angeles
Darrick Hamilton, Professor and Director, Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity at The Ohio State University
Michael G. Hanchard, Gustave C. Kuemmerle Professor and Chair of the Department of Africana Studies, University of Pennsylvania
Diane Harriford, Professor, Department of Sociology, Vassar College
Cheryl I. Harris, Professor, University of California, Los Angeles
Faye V. Harrison, Professor of African American Studies and Anthropology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Renee Camille Hatcher, Assistant Professor of Law, John Marshall, University of Illinois at Chicago
Kelly Lytle Hernandez, Professor and Thomas E. Lifka Chair in History, University of California, Los Angeles
Marc Lamont Hill, Professor and the Steve Charles Chair in Media, Cities and Solutions, College of Media and Education, Temple University
Elizabeth Hinton, Professor of History and African and African American Studies, Harvard University
Gerald Horne, Moores Professor of History and African American Studies, University of Houston
Zenzele Isoke, Gender, Women & Sexuality Studies, University of Minnesota
Lynette A. Jackson, Associate Professor, Gender and Women’s Studies and Black Studies, University of Illinois at Chicago
Joy James, Ebenzer Fitch Professor of the Humanities, Williams College
Destin Jenkins, Assistant Professor of History, University of Chicago
Ryan Cecil Jobson, Neubauer Family Assistant Professor, Anthropology, University of Chicago
Cheryl Johnson-Odim, Ph.D., Provost Emerita and Professor of History, Dominican University, Illinois
Tracey Johnson, Ph.D. candidate, Rutgers University
Robin D.G. Kelley, Distinguished Professor and Gary B. Nash Endowed Chair in U.S. History, University of California, Los Angeles
Ainsley LeSure, Assistant Professor of Politics, Black Studies Advisory Council, Occidental College
La TaSha Levy, Assistant Professor of American Ethnic Studies, University of Washington-Seattle
R. L’Heureux Lewis-McCoy, Associate Professor, New York University
Toussaint Losier, Assistant Professor, University of Massachusetts – Amherst
Sheldon Bernard Lyke, Assistant Professor at Northern Kentucky University Chase College of Law
Minkah Makalani, Director of the John L. Warfield Center for African and African American Studies, University of Texas at Austin
Austin McCoy, Assistant Professor of History, Auburn University
Deborah E. McDowell, Alice Griffin Professor of English, Director, Carter G. Woodson Institute, University of Virginia
Erik S. McDuffie, Associate Professor, Department of African American Studies, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Mireille Miller-Young, Associate Professor, Feminist Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara
Quincy T. Mills, Associate Professor of History, University of Maryland, College Park
Leith Mullings, Distinguished Professor of Anthropology Emerita, Graduate Center, City University of New York
Donna Murch, Associate Professor of History, Rutgers University
Linda Rae Murray, M.D., MPH, Adjunct Assistant Professor, School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago
Premilla Nadasen, Professor of History, Barnard College, and President of the National Women’s Studies Association (2018 -2020)
Celia E. Naylor, Associate Professor of History and Africana Studies, Barnard College, Columbia University
Rosemary Ndubuizu, Ph.D., Interdisciplinary Scholar, Washington, D.C.
Mark Anthony Neal, James B. Duke Distinguished Professor of African American Studies, Duke University
Prexy Rozell Nesbitt, Presidential Fellow, Chapman University
Margo Okazawa-Rey, Barbara Lee Distinguished Chair, Mills College & Professor Emerita, San Francisco State University
James Padilioni, Jr, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Fellow and Visiting Assistant Professor of Religion, Swarthmore College
Melina Pappademos, Associate Professor of History and Africana Studies, University of Connecticut
Kaneesha Cherelle Parsard, Provost’s Postdoctoral Fellow, English, University of Chicago
Tianna S. Paschel, Associate Professor, University of California, Berkeley
Earl Picard, Independent Scholar, Atlanta, Georgia
Steven C. Pitts, UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
Sherie M. Randolph, Associate Professor of History, Georgia Institute of Technology
Barbara Ransby, Distinguished Professor, African American Studies, Gender and Women’s Studies and History, University of Illinois at Chicago
Ismail Rashid, Professor of History, Vassar College
Aisha Ray, Professor Emerita, Erikson Institute
Shana L. Redmond, Professor, University of California, Los Angeles
Russell Rickford, Associate Professor of History, Cornell University
J. T. Roan, Assistant Professor of African American Studies, School of Transformation, Arizona State University
Francesca T. Royster, Professor, DePaul University
Tanya L. Saunders, Associate Professor, Center for Latin American Studies, University of Florida
Kesho Yvonne Scott, Professor Emerita, Grinnell College
Barbara Smith, Independent Scholar, Albany, New York
Lester Spence, Professor of Political Science and Africana Studies, Johns Hopkins University
Robyn C. Spencer, Associate Professor, Lehman College, City University of New York
David Stovall, Professor, Black Studies, University of Illinois at Chicago
Stacey Sutton, Assistant Professor, Urban Planning & Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago
Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, Assistant Professor, Department of African American Studies, Princeton University
Ula Y. Taylor, Professor of African American Studies, University of California, Berkeley
Alia R. Tyner-Mullings, Associate Professor, Sociology, Guttman Community College, City University of New York
Melissa M. Valle, Assistant Professor, Sociology and African American Studies, Rutgers University-Newark
Stephen Ward, Department of Afroamerican & African Studies (DAAS), Residential College, University of Michigan
Jakobi Williams, Ruth N. Halls Associate Professor, Indiana University
Naomi R. Williams, PhD, Assistant Professor, Rutgers University
Hazel Carby, Charles C & Dorathea S Dilley Professor of African American Studies & American Studies at Yale University.
George Yancy, Samuel Candler Dobbs Professor of Philosophy, Emory University
Jasmine K. Syedullah, Assistant Professor of Africana Studies, Vassar College

Really is great to see - especially with how thoughtfully presented the argument for Sanders is.

-->

If he comes out of Tuesday the clear front-runner and Warren is still in distant 4th, her supporters are going to have to stop lying to themselves.

The results. Yet here u are lol

And that still doesn't change the reality. So here we are.

Fuck with dude! And granny and dem vote errytime!

What’s he gonna do to bring Black ppl at large behind his banner? Deploying Nina Turner didn’t work

But polls aren’t the issue! How is he going to unit the party around him and where are these new voters he promised?

If I have to settle for Bernie as the nom I want him to win, yet 50-60 percent of dem voters so far have NOT chosen him

I still think she is the strongest presidential candidate on the field and if she's still on the ballot in MD, I still intend to vote for her.

but unless she performs really well on Tuesday, I am willing to accept that she really does not have a path to the nomination :o(
In that case then, I prefer Biden over Bernie.
But as with all things, we shall see.

I will say though, I am getting less and less excited about the nov election. I intend to vote because anyone but the idiot-in-charge
but from where we started? This process has been disappointing.

With Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina the popular vote total is:

Sanders: 233,989
Biden: 307,490


Those two numbers will appear small after polls close on Wednesday - actual states where people actually live are going to vote.

https://twitter.com/scottdetrow/status/1233541632915582977

Right now, commemoration events in Selma on Sunday are NOT on Bernie Sanders’ public schedule. Most other candidates will be there. Sanders has done these events in the past and has a packed cross-country schedule, but given his constant Civil Rights call-outs that’s notable.

He wrote the South off the last time he ran.

Last week, the Reuters-Ipsos poll found Sanders besting Biden by three points nationally among black voters. An NBC-Wall Street Journal poll found Biden up two among black voters, while the Hill/HarrisX poll had Sanders up nine. A Morning Consult survey recently found Sanders beating Biden by five among all black primary voters, and thumping him by a 3-1 margin among black voters under 45.

Also - Sanders got 30% of the Black vote in Nevada - finishing a very close second to Biden there. He is dominating the young Black vote and polls very well with Black voters from more progressive regions of the country.

-->

about Bernie.

>Last week, the Reuters-Ipsos poll found Sanders besting Biden
>by three points nationally among black voters. An NBC-Wall
>Street Journal poll found Biden up two among black voters,
>while the Hill/HarrisX poll had Sanders up nine. A Morning
>Consult survey recently found Sanders beating Biden by five
>among all black primary voters, and thumping him by a 3-1
>margin among black voters under 45.
>
>Also - Sanders got 30% of the Black vote in Nevada - finishing
>a very close second to Biden there. He is dominating the
>young Black vote and polls very well with Black voters from
>more progressive regions of the country.
>
>-->

Well Bernie should take it all tomorrow according to this, put out your prediction with specifics for Super Tuesday.

There are many competitive contests with tight races on Super Tuesday (Virginia, Mass., Minnesota, North Carolina, Texas to name a few) - but Alabama isn't one of them. It's a state that shares similar demography to South Carolina - and Biden's the inevitable victor there. Sanders should be spending as much time as possible in Virginia, Texas, Mass. & North Carolina.

>There are many competitive contests with tight races on Super
>Tuesday (Virginia, Mass., Minnesota, North Carolina, Texas to
>name a few) - but Alabama isn't one of them. It's a state
>that shares similar demography to South Carolina - and Biden's
>the inevitable victor there. Sanders should be spending as
>much time as possible in Virginia, Texas, Mass. & North
>Carolina.

The other candidates in the race need those states more than he does.

https://apnews.com/c5201196cdc5897e76e49a3352a2c8dd?fbclid=IwAR3eV9cOIH_NP3xsgO5Khyn4JqhFTAVNyPac25-vHjYFusnhMA3yGqql9FY

Sanders-linked group entered into racial discrimination NDA
By BRIAN SLODYSKO and WILL WEISSERT
February 28, 2020


WASHINGTON (AP) — A political advocacy group founded by Bernie Sanders entered into a nondisclosure agreement with an African American political consultant that bars her from discussing a lawsuit alleging racial discrimination at the organization and the Vermont senator’s 2016 presidential campaign.

The consultant, Tezlyn Figaro, confirmed the existence of the nondisclosure agreement to The Associated Press without providing additional details.

The deal is tied to a 2019 lawsuit in which Figaro said she was fired from the Sanders-created political group Our Revolution a year earlier due to her race and in “retaliation for complaining about the organization’s treatment towards her and African-Americans.” The lawsuit was settled out of court for an undisclosed amount of money. Though the lawsuit was aimed at Our Revolution, it included broad criticism of Sanders’ campaign, arguing an all-white leadership staff “was accused of racism” by black staffers and failed to engage black voters.

Nondisclosure agreements, or NDAs, have become common in presidential campaigns and political organizations in recent years as tools to guard against the release of private data, strategic conversations or other proprietary information. But such deals have become increasingly controversial as people alleging that they’re victims of sexual harassment and misconduct or, in Figaro’s case, racial discrimination have said they’re prevented from publicly sharing their stories.

Billionaire Mike Bloomberg, one of Sanders’ Democratic presidential race rivals, has faced criticism for the use of nondisclosure agreements at his company in cases related to sexual harassment. The former New York mayor has said he’s willing to release three women from nondisclosure agreements related to comments he was accused of making in the past.

Sanders has acknowledged the mistreatment of women and minorities who worked on his 2016 campaign, and his advisers say they’ve taken corrective measures for his second run. Now the front-runner for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, Sanders frequently says he is building a “multiracial, multi-generational movement” that will appeal to the broad coalition needed to win the primary and defeat President Donald Trump.

But legal experts say that argument could be undermined by a nondisclosure agreement that prevents a woman of color who has criticized Sanders’ record on race from talking about her experience.

“Anyone running for the presidency should be accountable to the electorate, and we should have access to the full set of information,” said Debra S. Katz, a prominent employment attorney in Washington who has donated to Elizabeth Warren’s campaign. “If the allegations are about his campaign and running a racist operation, he should direct this organization to let her out of those non-disparagement obligations and talk about it.”

Figaro was the director of racial justice for Sanders’ 2016 campaign, then worked on black outreach issues for Our Revolution. According to federal court records, her case against Our Revolution was settled in July 2019 for an undisclosed amount.

Figaro confirmed the existence of the NDA but declined to comment further. Her attorney, Anthony J. Hall, said he could not comment on the terms of the settlement.

A spokesman for Our Revolution did not respond to multiple requests for comment. The Sanders campaign said it couldn’t comment on the specifics of the case, arguing the campaign can’t legally have insight into the activities of Our Revolution.

In a statement, Sanders campaign spokeswoman Sarah Ford said, “We oppose using NDAs to silence the victims of toxic workplace issues.”

After his effort to win the 2016 Democratic nomination failed, Sanders founded Our Revolution to keep up the momentum from the campaign. The group has employed current and former Sanders presidential staffers but operates independently from his campaign, though it has raised millions of dollars to support his current bid.

Figaro’s roughly yearlong tenure at Our Revolution was tumultuous.

She was brought on by former Our Revolution President Nina Turner, a top Sanders surrogate who is now national co-chair of his 2020 campaign. When Turner tried to make Figaro Our Revolution’s chief of staff, board members objected.

Past comments Figaro made about immigration on Twitter and as a pundit on Fox News quickly surfaced and drew rebuke, with critics and some Our Revolution staffers saying that they were anti-immigrant.

“If AMERICAN black folks can go to jail when they break the law then certainly so can an illegal immigrant,” she said in one tweet.

“U r being distracted abt ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS meanwhile more blacks are under prison/parole control in in 2010 than were enslaved in 1850,” she wrote in another.

Figaro, who had long worked as a consultant to Turner, publicly apologized but was fired. Our Revolution was aware of her past comments when she was hired, according to her lawsuit. Turner didn’t respond to a request for comment.

In the past, Figaro defended herself by noting that her comments echoed what Sanders has previously said.

“If poverty is increasing and if wages are going down, I don’t know why we need millions of people to be coming into this country as guest workers who will work for lower wages than American workers and drive wages down even lower than they are now,” Sanders said in a 2007 television interview explaining why he opposed a bipartisan immigration bill.

Sanders’ campaign says its key to victory in the 2020 Democratic primary and general election is to dramatically grow the electorate, appealing to working-class Americans and minorities who have often felt disillusioned with the political system.

Sanders’ campaign manager, Faiz Shakir, is the first Muslim American to lead a presidential campaign. Sanders likens his movement to the civil rights struggle, and he often mentions his own activist past, including getting arrested during protests decrying racism while at the University of Chicago in the 1960s. He has worked hard to woo minority groups, which has energized many young voters.

But in 2016, black staffers who were hired by Sanders to conduct African American outreach say the campaign did not take them seriously. Minority staffers said they were sent to do other tasks, like driving people around, instead of courting the black voters Sanders said he wanted to win.

“People will say it’s not a racial issue,” said John Solomon, who was based in Atlanta for the 2016 campaign and said he was sometimes assigned responsibilities that were outside of his job description. “But if I’m hired to gain support from African Americans and you go direct me to do something other than reach out to the African American community, what are we doing?”

After the black outreach team booked several successful events, including a rally at historically black Morehouse College in Atlanta, resources dwindled and black outreach staffers say Sanders’ campaign began brushing them off.

His campaign has acknowledged Sanders’ past failings and said it is trying to right them now.

Sanders has invested heavily in Spanish-language television advertising and organized dozens of events meant to appeal to Hispanic voters, including soccer tournaments for volunteers in Iowa and Texas and a town hall in Spanish led by New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in Nevada. His backers affectionately call him “Tio” (Uncle) Bernie.

His campaign says that outreach helped him appeal to minorities who participated in satellite caucuses in Iowa and drove his win in Nevada decisively last weekend. He has said he can win Saturday’s Democratic primary in South Carolina, where the support of black voters is crucial.

But Solomon said the existence of Figaro’s nondisclosure agreement reinforces his experience on the 2016 campaign.

“I know he wants to move past this, but I feel that he still has some work to do,” Solomon said.

Nom. I’m ready for him to emerge as the clear front runner (not based on the minuscule amount of delegates from Iowa, NH and Nevada) so I can start seeing how he is going to unite the party Behind him and actually beat trump

So far his unchanging rhetoric doesn’t convince me he can do that, it may warm his nutzo supporters hearts but it’s not a message of consensus building

If he gets the nom we may as well gift wrap Trump another term.

If you want to win, he's the nominee.

Percent he got in three of the four first contest doesn’t exactly read as deep or broad to me, but ok! If u say so

Support. Deep maybe, as I said before many of u lunatics will follow him into a cauldron of acid if he convinces u it’s part of his purity test

But the majority of us remain unconvinced, convince us! Thanks

Saying they wouldn’t vote for him, some who voted for trump in 16 but said they regretted it but will vote for him again if it’s between him and sanders

I really hope he can, if he gets the nom(which looks likely) I want him to win

If he can’t win those ppl over I need to see all these new voters he is bringing to the table, I haven’t seen them yet...AT ALL

bc let's be honest...

none of the dems can unite the dems

it's too splintered...the divide between the far left and the moderates is basically not much different than the far left and the far right at this point

bernie can't unite, biden can't, none of the rest have the numbers to do more than them in that area...

the only person that can even do that at this point is...Trump

so yea, he does appeal across more demographics

bernie might not have all of the black vote but yts seem to have preferred Pete to Biden lol

Warren is still my fav and i think a lot of her missteps are good calculus but that she just never had a strong enough foundation to topple bernie...depending on how things look...i may still vote for warren so but her aiming for a brokered convention is basically not reading the writing on the wall...she may as well just endorse biden if that's the strategy she wants to take

Wow - pretty surprising. He had to miss some events because of illness - but he probably bowed out realizing he was not able to grow his base of support. Definitely overachieved and has a lot to be proud of. Wouldn’t be surprised if he worked a deal with Biden with the convention in mind.

-->

I guess I should respond lol

Yall hate him, I know. But imagine if MSM was reporting this about Bernie out of nowhere? You'd be taken aback and want a safe space to vent. So bear with me on this at minimum as a fellow politics junkie lol.


I'm... a bit shocked, heartbroken, but also angry.


-Shocked, because I was starting to worry this might happen.. but def after ST. Furthermore, this was released kind of shadily... like they're still actively hosting a fundraising drive, posted that memo detailing what they viewed as a path to the nom, and were promoting a rally in TX tonight plus one in MI on ST. PLUS no official word from his campaign or any comms staff about it on twitter.. like at least Steyer put up a tweet. It's just very, very, unlike the campaign and leads me to believe that this decision came from HIGH fucking up. Like, a call directly from Obama or perhaps through Carter, who Pete met with this morning (which I'll come back to later about why this angers me). It may have also been the Dem estab that leaked to the media ahead of the campaign too, to make it binding.

-Heartbroken.. largely because I truly do believe he was the best candidate in terms of his specific platform, character, and the fact that I don't think Boomers should be trusted to drive themselves long distances anymore talk more of holding elected office (lol). I was also excited for someone from my generation to finally step up and go for this level of leadership. Unlike many, I *don't* believe decades stewing in DC is necessarily a good thing, I think Biden and Bernie's obvious cognitive decline and cardiovascular issues (respectively) are disqualifying, and I just personally think our generation is a lot smarter and better adapted to modern times to forge a new path ahead. His messaging and platform resonated with me A LOT.

-Angry for 2 main reasons:
-1, I'm fucking sick of how the Dem establishment ALWAYS does him like this lol. When he ran for DNC chair, he got pressured from the left (directly from Bernie, for Keith Ellison) AND Center (directly from Obama, for Tom Perez) to drop out so those 2 could duke it out on the next ballot. He dropped out immediately. He spent time since helping out Dems in other races and, in general, has simply been a good Dem. The idea of them pulling that shit on him again disgusts me. I don't think they have a good read on shit (as per '16), and I'm not confident that either Biden or Bernie would win against 45 ( which I vent about here
https://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13367410&mesg_id=13367410&page=2#13368575).

-2, the level of homophobia and general dehumanization that was thrown at this man was truly disgusting. He received death threats, calls to be hung. The first response under one of the MSM tweets about this was someone calling him a fa**ot. It was a lot. And frustrating since he intentionally ran one of the most positive campaigns this cycle (https://peteforamerica.com/rules-of-the-road/). It was very disappointing/discouraging to see, but their ongoing moral leadership in that regard was another draw to the campaign.

So ya. End rant. Onward I guess. I'll still follow the blow by blow, but mostly just for the stats and the odd policy/politics critiques as I've been doing lol.

thanks reeq

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

he couldn't win statewide in indiana, the idea he could pull together people nationally was always bullshit.

his whole steez is fake, and because he was selling that "I'm a midwesterner, I know what's up in real america" bullshit it was fucking annoying


klobuchar is the same way, but I don't actually mind when a politician is openly a snake, because that's kinda what you need to be,

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

him dropping out definitely shocked me. i do think something happened behind the scenes. im guessing he lost some financial support to biden and was pretty much told he was on his own if he kept going.

it would have been good to see him pick up steam after iowa and new hampshire. im sure we havent heard the last of him though.

appreciate it

i kind of dont want her to get my hopes up tomorrow lol just bring on bernie vs biden

And he definitely has a future ahead of him and as gay man I’m proud of what he accomplished and relieved that he had significant support

For me, I was initially excited about him but once that presser with the family of the unarmed man who was murdered was shown and the subsequent info revealed about how the police force in south bend became more white under his leadership, I was turned off. If the Black folks that know you best aren’t sold then I can’t really get behind it.

But he had a good, pragmatic message and is obviously very politically savvy. He will be stronger in whatever he does next, and I did think he made a sincere (albeit late) effort to be more in tune with Black folks and our unique issues in this country.

the delegate leader from the 1st 2 states is largely nonviable and finished after the next 2.

poll spiking and general incomptence. death knell of caucusing.

the order don't matter.

not sure why youre splitting hairs here but...

lets say pete wasnt the leader and was just a close top 2. does that make the early state dissonance any less damning?

candidates pour millions of dollars into airwaves, ground game, and party building in a state with very little electoral/delegate consequence...but a ton of narrative/momentum consequence. and the winner or 2nd place finisher might be completely out of the race after only 2 states with actual non white populations start voting.

how does a self-styled black progressive defend giving a 90% white state undue influence over the nomination process for a party thats 40% non white?

>how does a self-styled black progressive defend giving a 90%
>white state undue influence over the nomination process for a
>party thats 40% non white?

because being progressive means that you don't get sucked into vacuous check box diversity "politics" at the cost of undoing democracy. might as well have California go first if we're really playing those games. then motherfuckers would be like "YOU LET THOSE OVERPOPULATED STATES ON THE COAST..."

getting rid of undemocratic norms like the caucus method, and the electoral college are more relevant than the racial makeup of a state voting. votes > all.

Iowa at least has a chance (in current day) of voting Democratic in the general (they have in winning Democratic contests). not true for those states in the deep South where most of the Democratic voters are Black, somehow. 2008 was the only time that happened.

move to eliminate the electoral college and it becomes a moot point.

>because being progressive means that you don't get sucked into
>vacuous check box diversity "politics" at the cost of undoing
>democracy. might as well have California go first if we're
>really playing those games. then motherfuckers would be like
>"YOU LET THOSE OVERPOPULATED STATES ON THE COAST..."

yeah the same motherfuckers who relegate/reduce things to 'check box diversity politics'. im honestly surprised to see you take that approach. are you gonna blame cancel culture and woke sjw's next?

we are talking about simply moving other states on to the same day. not getting rid of iowa entirely. why is that so threatening to you and how is democracy being undone? clue me in.


>Iowa at least has a chance (in current day) of voting
>Democratic in the general (they have in winning Democratic
>contests). not true for those states in the deep South where
>most of the Democratic voters are Black, somehow. 2008 was the
>only time that happened.
>
>move to eliminate the electoral college and it becomes a moot
>point.

i mean...youre advocating for the very effect/intent of the electoral college tho. giving undue political representation to a rural/white minority.

dems cant change the electoral college. they can change their nomination process to better reflect the reality of their party tho.

youre also ignoring the effect that the nominee has on downballot races/candidates in those deep south states. the top of the ticket is consequential to governor, senate, house, state legislature, etc wins/loses in a lot of them. im not sure why you would choose to minimize the black voices in those states simply because a dem prez wouldnt likely win.

the proposed alternative is just doing IA, NH, NV, SC all on the same day so you can get a broader swath all at once and therefore minimize the noise of very specific demographics...we'd have weeks free now if Pete, Klo, Steyer, and friends all got out the way sooner than super tuesday and they won't get that unsustainable media bump that really only serves to confuse voters on down the line

that's Federal Government central. you would think someone ostensibly campaigning on more federal government would run away with it, but Biden represents the old guard that's become associated with the federal government pre-Trump.

they're gonna John Kerry this shit.

who would actually keep the lights on and make the federal govt work?

someone with a history of actually getting legislation through both chambers of congress and signed, negotiating difficult compromises, reaching consensus agreements on spending/appropriations, etc?

just a possibility.

i have no idea why yall always assign ulterior/unscrupulous motives to people supporting candidates other than bernie.

but its getting borderline 'deep state'-ish.

>i have no idea why yall always assign ulterior/unscrupulous
>motives to people supporting candidates other than bernie.

these motherfuckers in major publications and cable news have been doing it repeatedly this election cycle.

it doesn't have to be "deep state" when it happens in plain sight.

has to do with federal govt *workers* in nova (keyword: workers)...who are mostly the type of folks who had their entire lives upended after missing a few checks during the govt shutdown.

ordinary americans...just trying to pay their bills and feed their families...who vote for people they believe will help them with that.

why are they a part of your anti-bernie conspiracy/collusion theory?

I'd be pleased to imagine that I taught some of the nerds that put a socialist in the state legislature in Manassas. I realize that's beyond the beltway, but it's close enough.

Sanders was polling a wee bit ahead there recently, so we'll see. But I've been really nervous too because the folks with money in that area are, maybe the best way to say this is - not interested in the using the power of the Democratic party for objectives that I'd like to see.

>I'd be pleased to imagine that I taught some of the nerds
>that put a socialist in the state legislature in Manassas. I
>realize that's beyond the beltway, but it's close enough.
>
>Sanders was polling a wee bit ahead there recently, so we'll
>see. But I've been really nervous too because the folks with
>money in that area are, maybe the best way to say this is -
>not interested in the using the power of the Democratic party
>for objectives that I'd like to see.

and Lee Carter is that dude.
the one thing I'll always remember him for is not for what he actually did, but Democrats in the House of Delegates around him did trying to be cute: hold up signs with the Soviet Union flag.

>I'd be pleased to imagine that I taught some of the nerds
>that put a socialist in the state legislature in Manassas. I
>realize that's beyond the beltway, but it's close enough.
>
>Sanders was polling a wee bit ahead there recently, so we'll
>see. But I've been really nervous too because the folks with
>money in that area are, maybe the best way to say this is -
>not interested in the using the power of the Democratic party
>for objectives that I'd like to see.

while still meaning the same thing. many well to do white liberals are fine with diversity and all that....as long as it doesn't stain their clothing.

from 2016 where their turnout was already pretty dismal.

obviously not just limited to bernie. but this young voter 'revolution' promised by sanders and his supporters just isnt materializing so far.

mind you...this is all following record youth turnout in the 2018 midterms. so the potential energy has been shown to be there by other candidates/campaigns.

this was written before sc but sc continued the same trend.

https://twitter.com/nytpolitics/status/1232296208837771265
-----
The first three nominating contests reveal a fundamental challenge for Bernie Sanders’s political revolution: He may be winning, but not because of his longstanding pledge to expand the Democratic base

https://t.co/qgeMBYive1
-----

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/24/us/politics/bernie-sanders-democratic-voters.html
-----
The share of the electorate made up of first-time Democratic voters also decreased in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada compared with 2016. And unlike four years ago, when Mr. Sanders mobilized far more first-time voters than Hillary Clinton did (averaging a 30-point lead over Mrs. Clinton across the three states), he had only a modest 10-point edge over his closest rival, Mr. Buttigieg, in that metric this time around.
-----

so sanders was barely beating out p booty in turning out 1st time voters? yikes.

anyone wanna try to spin this or can we all just accept this as a red flag that needs to be addressed asap?

No need to focus on polls and trends in states that aren’t in play or solid Dem territory.

Won’t be enuff.

Convos and out of political posts lol. This ain’t for u

and insults

Lmao.

that was pretty big. it would be nice to see higher turn out but is it realistic?

its only 4 states. lets see what happens tomorrow. i think looking at states that haven grown and battle ground states turn out might be more important. maybe not.

https://twitter.com/thepopcornreel/status/1234267651192418304?s=20

Yes - that same Abby Phillip whom CNN weaponized against Sanders in that horribly choreographed CNN "debate":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAxxtRHAtro

As it turns out - Pete wasn't running against Donald Trump. He was running to thwart Sanders? lol.

-->

-->

Trump.

There’s no way around it.

The second Sanders is the nominee it’s an instant win for Trump.

I don’t want my country falling apart even more than it already is so no Sanders simply cannot be the nominee.

You’re a white man I don’t expect you to understand this since you reap all the benefits here and people of color are having it horrible.

All of the available data shows Sanders being a very strong general election candidate to beat Trump.

You actually think Bloomberg is going to beat Trump? Pete? Biden? Make the case.

The people who often lecture about vanity politics are the very ones engaging in the most egregious form of vanity politics.
-->

in 2016:

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/jun/08/georgians-bernie-sanders-president/pro-sanders-group-target-about-their-candidates-po/

So again - who do you think is the strongest candidate to defeat Trump?


-->

And your response was to show me another poll for that time period to support your point?

Makes no sense.

To answer your question I don’t think any of the current crop can beat Trump, we are better off having a brokered convention and finding someone else to try.

Who that person is, I don’t know, but whoever it is the rest of the candidates should team of rivals it and become surrogates for that candidate so everyone wins (Biden for Secretary of State, Kamala for AG, Bernie for HHS, Warren for Treasury, etc).

And pushing for a brokered convention where the candidate with the plurality of delegates is denied in favor of a "unity candidate" selected by Super Delegates?

This is how we beat Trump in 2020?

Yikes.



-->

which I've been suspecting, since they were so wrong in '16 and continue to be way off this cycle.

Edit: I've seen value looking at other proxies... like votes cast, fundraising, organizational infrastructure, enthusiasm/crowd sizes, etc.

Other thing is, a plurality of delegates isn't a majority, right? So, tbf, a nominating the candidate with only a plurality of delegates on first ballot would actually be going against the *majority* of voters. It shouldn't really be viewed as "denying" the plurality holder anything. Viewing a plurality as an "advantage" in further deliberations seems fair tho. Just no guarantee *shrug*


>And pushing for a brokered convention where the candidate
>with the plurality of delegates is denied

and their strength in a prospective head to head matchup vs. Trump?

Polls? Grassroots support? Campaign infrastructure? Ability to build a coalition? Resources on hand? None of the above?

How do you assess who is the strongest candidate vs. Trump - and who do you surmise has the best chance against him in a general election?

Pointing out that polls are wrong is definitely fair. They certainly can be wrong - but now we're compiling up actual data points (from voter trends in the primary). Should we ignore that too?

>Other thing is, a plurality of delegates isn't a majority,
>right? So, tbf, a nominating the candidate with only a
>plurality of delegates on first ballot would actually be going
>against the *majority* of voters. It shouldn't really be
>viewed as "denying" the plurality holder anything. Viewing a
>plurality as an "advantage" in further deliberations seems
>fair tho. Just no guarantee *shrug*

Think about what you're suggesting here - and whether this would be a productive process.

There is historical precedent for such a scenario in modern political history: the infamous 1968 Chicago Democratic National Convention, where Hubert Humphrey was awarded the nomination despite not competing in any primary elections.

The fiasco resulted in bloodshed, as angry, predominately young protesters were attacked by Chicago police officers. Humphrey went on to be defeated handily by Richard Nixon.

A repeat of that is going to unify the party and defeat Trump?



-->

I don’t think so...

best bet is to stop being scared and try the guy who can also pull independents.

If Dems aren’t petty like the Bro’s... totem Bernie will have the bigger draw.

>Trump.
>
>There’s no way around it.

Oh?

https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/fox-news-poll-shows-top-democratic-candidates-beating-trump


>I don’t want my country falling apart even more than it
>already is so no Sanders simply cannot be the nominee.

Not yours, ours

>Not yours, ours
>
>

https://twitter.com/USA_Polling/status/1233024837729296386?s=20

I doubt he got in initially just to "thwart" Sanders. But at this point he probably realizes that he doesn't have a realistic path to victory.


Maybe he doesn't like Sanders (or he likes Biden). Or maybe he doesn't think Sanders has a good chance to win against Trump. By stepping out, it increases the likelihood of his next best alternative.

Should he stay in just to get his handful of delegates in each state? All at the expense of someone else that he would prefer to win the nomination.
Do you have a problem with endorsements too?

lol

Didn't Warren's camp come right out and say it recently also??


It's super obvious and not controversial. Sanders is also running to pull delegates from the Dem establishment (which, in his view, comprises all the actual Dem candidates)

At least Pete got out.

Amy and Warren need to go too. They aren’t winning anything significant.

Just go

-->

i do think biden gets a bump from his sc win. pete might be getting a lot of the news right now but i think about half his support goes to biden. maybe warren gets most of the rest followed by bernie. more than tom dropping out, pete will help some candidates get over 15% in a few states. this is bad for bernie but i dont know how significant in the end.

after sc amy should have dropped out too. warren is projected to pick up a decent amount of delegates tomorrow and raised a lot of money in feb but i find it hard to say she shouldnt drop out either. before pete dropped out i expected her to underperform the projections. maybe she does meet them now.

i dont know how it turns into anything besides bernie vs biden at this point. would need some pretty surprising results tomorrow.

>i do think biden gets a bump from his sc win. pete might be
>getting a lot of the news right now but i think about half his
>support goes to biden.

half? Where did you see that? All of the data I've seen shows this:

"21% of Buttigieg’s supporters said their second choice was Sen. Bernie Sanders; 19% picked former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and 17% chose former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg." Source: Morning Consult

I've seen similar polls showing more/less the same information. I think we always need to be careful about assuming where voters may ferry over to. It's never as cut/dry as it seems.

But I do agree that Pete dropping out *should* help moderate candidates - but it'll be interesting to see how that plays out.

>after sc amy should have dropped out too. warren is projected
>to pick up a decent amount of delegates tomorrow and raised a
>lot of money in feb but i find it hard to say she shouldnt
>drop out either.

If both Amy and Warren dropped out - Sanders would decisively win both Minnesota & Massachusetts - so it seems them staying in the race serves to stave off Sanders. It's becoming a delegate collection exercise, it seems.


-->

if you were about to vote for pete tomorrow who would you switch your vote to? i dont think that many pete supporters were very high on bernie anymore. i think many of those had already switched.

its mostly become pro-bernie vs anti-bernie at this point. i would guess most of petes oldest supporters would switch to biden. i think a lot of them switch to warren because they see her as the next chance to "unify" the party.

in the end its less than 10% of the vote. not sure that will matter much to bernie or biden. it might be enough to get warren over 15% though.

amy has to just be in it to get the win at home. i dont see her sticking around. maybe if biden bombs tomorrow but i doubt that happens.

if warren doesnt come out of tomorrow with a realistic chance at second in overall delegates i dont think it makes sense for her to stick around.

the "wine cave Pete" attack from Warren pissed off a lot of his supporters. His rivalry with Klobuchar was very real and heated as well. Pete seemed to go the softest on Biden & Bloomberg (no surprise there) - but I don't know that his supporters will go overwhelmingly for either of those. Pete's supporters mainly rocked w/ the "turn the page" motto - and favored him as a fresh face that drew upon obama level nostalgia in terms of the rhetoric and presence he tried to emulate.

>its mostly become pro-bernie vs anti-bernie at this point.

Regrettably - it seems to be shaping up that way - but I think that's more the case for the party power brokers than it is the voters. Obviously the gravy train stops and the party experiences real, structural change if Sanders gets in. There are a lot of people whose careers would be in jeopardy if that were to happen.



-->

during the last debate really did not sit well with older LGBTQ voters that were very pro-Pete. His total lack of understanding that his run could never have happened if it wasn't for progressives willing to stand against the status quo during that time just further spoke to his manufactured persona.

>>its mostly become pro-bernie vs anti-bernie at this point.

On this website at least, the anti-bernie crowd were super quiet a week ago. Good to see them back on the boards with Biden's win in SC

... an event that occurs without any exercise of persuasion or power, and then we vote for it and it happens, right?

I don't see what people are getting wound up about. Seems like Buttigieg has a pretty clear understanding of 20th century history.

his Wikipedia page. Calibrating the risk factor of holding certain unpopular opinions. How to mitigate otherness by folding in the lardiest bits of American Pie.

It's cool to fight in wars when you're a Warrior of Light.

>How to mitigate otherness by
>folding in the lardiest bits of American Pie.

Incredibly well-constructed. Like watching Lawrence O'Donnell turn, mid-sentence toward a mirror so the entire second half of the utterance was being delivered as he stared, in slack-jawed horror, at his own insect reflection.

>>How to mitigate otherness by
>>folding in the lardiest bits of American Pie.
>
>Incredibly well-constructed. Like watching Lawrence O'Donnell
>turn, mid-sentence toward a mirror so the entire second half
>of the utterance was being delivered as he stared, in
>slack-jawed horror, at his own insect reflection.

LMAO

-->

One you could only really put your finger on with some poetic license

I wouldn’t be surprised if she drops out after Super Tuesday.

>
>"21% of Buttigieg’s supporters said their second choice was
>Sen. Bernie Sanders; 19% picked former Vice President Joe
>Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and 17% chose former New York
>City Mayor Michael Bloomberg." Source: Morning Consult
>
>I've seen similar polls showing more/less the same
>information. I think we always need to be careful about
>assuming where voters may ferry over to. It's never as
>cut/dry as it seems.
>

and if he loses

It's everyone else's fault he lost!


www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

I thought he was supposed to bring people together??

https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/music/flavor-flav-fired-public-enemy-following-fight-over-sanders-rally-n1146821

>I thought he was supposed to bring people together??
>

i was there at the rally and he brought HELLA people together.

many thousands of diverse people chanting classic PUBLIC ENEMY hooks together against this fascist regime was the definition of unity yesterday.

I thought Bernie was supposed to bring MFA to the people. Instead, he's bringing us pandemics!!!

-->

Don't believe the hype.

"Get ready....for your blessing....."
"Bury me by my Grand-Grand and when you can come follow me"

Yikes @ Bernie supporters

Nah it wasn't Bernie, the media is hyping that up.

https://twitter.com/BreeNewsome/status/1234514772516888583?s=20

I decided I’m voting for Sanders in NC tomorrow not only because I believe we need sweeping reforms, including universal healthcare and policies that specifically address poverty & the wealth divide, but also to challenge what I consider extremely dangerous messaging from Biden.

The whole thread is worth reading.

that's great news. we need something big.

Following your posts - you seem to have been one of the more neutral posters here. What ultimately made you decide to vote for Sanders?

-->

my theory is the Dems will vote for the Dem regardless of candidate so why not pick the democratic socialist who can bring in more independent voters and 3rd party voters?

My belief when this all started was Biden would have the best chance because of name recognition. Wasn’t really my preference but I thought he could get it down. Joe is slow tho...

I was off Bernie and with Warren after his heart attack but she ain’t the move. She flip flops too easily based on pressure. Bernie is the only one with a consistent message.

Also indicative of Sanders being a fairly strong 2nd/3rd choice for a lot of voters.

I think the "war" with Sanders is not really about him vs. the voters (who hold a very favorable view of him overall) - but it's clearly against him and the party power brokers (who are doing their best to stoke up division among voters to align with anyone but Sanders).


-->

that are threatening to not vote for bernie, or even end up voting for trump if bernie gets the nomination. for whatever that's worth.

i think there are some democratic voters that right now feel they wouldnt vote for a "socialist" but if bernie does get the nomination would come around to him.

i think there is a higher risk in turning away die hard bernie supporters versus these supposed republican voters.

and their answers to policy...

If you vote for Trump because Bernie is a socialist you are an idiot.

if you play with this 538 model texas flips who gets the plurality of delegates overall between bernie and biden

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/super-tuesday/

polling was starting to look good for bernie there but seems like biden is coming back.

If Sanders carries both California and Texas - that's going to be a huge statement. Sanders also looks very competitive in N. Carolina and Virginia. If he can also take one (or both) of those southern states - he'll have the most demographically and geographically diverse coalition, by far.
-->

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-buttigieg-dropped-out/

Relatedly, I miss Paul Wellstone.

https://theintercept.com/2020/03/02/coronavirus-vaccine-price-gouging-senate/

HOW THE SENATE PAVED THE WAY FOR CORONAVIRUS PROFITEERING, AND HOW CONGRESS COULD UNDO IT
Ryan Grim, Aída Chávez
March 2 2020, 12:30 p.m.

BEFORE A VACCINE to combat the coronavirus pandemic is within view, the Trump administration has already walked back its initial refusal to promise that any remedy would be affordable to the general public. “We can’t control that price because we need the private sector to invest,” Alex Azar, Health and Human Services secretary and a former drug industry executive, told Congress.

After extraordinary blowback, the administration insisted that in the end, any treatment would indeed be affordable. President Donald Trump on Monday morning tweeted that he would be meeting with “the major pharmaceutical companies today at the White House about progress on a vaccine and cure. Progress being made!” The federal government, though, under the Clinton administration, traded away one of the key tools it could use to make good on the promise of affordability.

Gilead Sciences, a drugmaker known for price gouging, has been working with Chinese health authorities to see if the experimental drug remdesivir can treat coronavirus symptoms. World Health Organization officials say it’s the “only one drug right now that we think may have real efficacy.” But remdesivir, which was previously tested to treat Ebola virus, was developed through research conducted at the University of Alabama at Birmingham with funding from the federal government.

That’s how much of the pharmaceutical industry’s research and development is funded. The public puts in the money, and private companies keep whatever profits they can command. But it wasn’t always that way. Before 1995, drug companies were required to sell drugs funded with public money at a reasonable price. Under the Clinton administration, that changed.

In the 1994 midterms, the Republican Revolution, built largely around a reaction to Bill Clinton’s attempt to reform the health care system, swept Democrats out of Congress. On its heels, in April 1995, the Clinton administration capitulated to pharmaceutical industry pressure and rescinded the longstanding “reasonable pricing” rule.

“An extensive review of this matter over the past year indicated that the pricing clause has driven industry away from potentially beneficial scientific collaborations with scientists without providing an offsetting benefit to the public,” the National Institutes of Health said in a 1995 statement announcing the change. “Eliminating the clause will promote research that can enhance the health of the American people.”

The move was controversial, and a House member from Vermont, independent Bernie Sanders, offered an amendment to reinstate the rule. It failed on a largely party-line vote, 242-180.

Then in 2000, Sanders authored and passed a bipartisan amendment in the House to reimpose the “reasonable pricing” rule. In the Senate, a similar measure was pushed by the late Paul Wellstone of Minnesota.

“Many in Congress find it hard to argue with Sanders’ line that ‘Americans must pay twice for life-saving drugs, first as taxpayers to develop the drug and then as consumers to pad pharmaceutical profits,’” Nature wrote at the time.

Then-Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware voted to table Wellstone’s amendment, and it was defeated 56-39.

“Our amendment requires that the NIH abide by current law and ensure that a company that receives federally owned research or a federally owned drug provide that product to the American public on reasonable terms,” Sanders said in a floor speech. “This is not a new issue. During the Bush administration, the NIH insisted that co-operative research agreements contain, quote, a reasonable pricing clause that would protect consumers from exorbitant prices of products developed from federally funded research.”

A related effort from Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., made it into the final Senate bill, watered down to say that the director of the NIH should offer “a proposal to require a reasonable rate of return on both intramural and extramural research by March 31st, 2001.”

The two measures were hashed out in a conference committee, and Sanders’s tougher House language was stripped out. The conference report included this language: “The conferees have been made aware of the public interest in securing an appropriate return on the NIH investment in basic research. The conferees are also aware of the mounting concern over the cost to patients of therapeutic drugs. By July 2001, based on a list of such therapeutic drugs which are FDA approved, have reached $500,000,000 per year in sales in the United States, and have received NIH funding, NIH will prepare a plan to ensure that taxpayers’ interests are protected.”

That plan has never been implemented, while the federal government has continued to fund research that leads to private gain. The Antiviral Drug Discovery and Development Center at the University of Alabama in 2019 received a five-year, $37.5 million grant from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases — one of the 27 institutes that make up the NIH.

Democratic presidential candidates have pledged to use authority they say is inherent in a federal law already on the books, known as Bayh-Dole, to force reasonable prices, and have pledged to go even further with new legislation. But the public might not need to wait for Election Day. With Congress set to contemplate a round of funding to mitigate the pandemic, the Sanders-Wellstone amendment could make a comeback.

She's going to lose MN and didn't want to be embarrased. Plus they all hate Bernie and want to unify against him.

I like this take that I saw:

we have a bit of democracy. the game is slanted by the propaganda machine working overtime, but still this is a moment where the people can shape their fate. In this context, it isn't about Warren taking votes from Bernie. People who have been calling themselves progressives gotta decide. no more, Warren fooled me. If she is still fooling you now, she could fool you into anything. If she fools you now, it's because you want to be fooled. You want the economic hierarchy to stay like it is. You like your place in it.

https://twitter.com/alexbillwinter/status/1234547226749407232

Thank you for your service. I'll never forget being able to smell your hatred for Pete Buttigieg through my television.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/02/politics/amy-klobuchar-ends-2020-campaign/index.html


She's backing Biden. Man this is coming to a close faster than I thought

i doubt bloomberg is considering dropping out.

amy backing biden is meaningful.

i wonder what voters in minn do. not sure here 3% everywhere else will mean much.

Bloomberg ain't going anywhere, his money is what's going to keep him end til the end.

I'm not sure how powerful Amy backing Biden is but it's showing that there may be a trend and with what Mayor Pete had to say on his way out it's looking like the stance will be Biden over Sanders.

I'm just burnt out and want this ugly mess over

i think it makes sense for her to stick around for tomorrow. then evaluate. im legit shook now. weird.

if you are not already decided for bernie or biden how do you chose.

why pick bloomberg over biden?

why pick warren over biden? over bernie?

why pick tulsi if youre not related to her?

i think only warren has a legit claim for voters from those 3. are there enough voters that are not in denial about how senile (calm down eminem) joe is that will chose warren over him? can she become something other than a spoiler? will she drop out before i hit post message?

Because for all the fuck shit I feel about Beto ... at least he didn’t carry his vanity run to the point where it affected outcomes.

You’re gonna take up air and stage time AND drop out after early voting but before Super Tuesday

Assholes. Selfish assholes.

This really pisses me off. It subverts they process for selfish gain. If your whole goal is to get concessions you stay in to convention. If it’s to influence then be a surrogate

But when you’re effectively stealing votes that have been cast then you’re just a fucking asshole

Warren refusing to drop out means that the Progressive vote will be split.

Voting is strategic at this point - and it's very clear as to how this taking shape: It's a race between Sanders & Biden.

If you're voting for Warren - it's a vote for Biden.

-->

im not sure that most warren voters would go to bernie. i think its closer to 50/50

i would definitely prefer bernie.

either way, these drop outs definitely change the game.

>im not sure that most warren voters would go to bernie. i
>think its closer to 50/50
>

>im not sure that most warren voters would go to bernie. i
>think its closer to 50/50

According to all the data - Warren supporters clearly favor Sanders as their second choice:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voters-second-choice-candidates-show-a-race-that-is-still-fluid/

This has not been the case with other voters (Pete/Amy for example are more mixed bags when it comes to their voters' 2nd preference).

With Warren it makes sense: both her and Sanders are very closely matched on ideology and policy prescriptions, for the most part.

-->

a lot of people are put off by bernie. in my head i would think 100% go to bernie strictly on policy. i dont think voters are going strictly on policy though. if biden was the one that dropped and pete remained i think 50/50 would make the most sense but i think its still more evenly split than pro-bernie. lets say 55 bernie 45 biden.


edit: i also think a lot of people already fled her for bernie since that whole fiasco. im not sure many of her remaining supporters still have bernie second. i think im in the minority.

FWIW anyone who even mildly criticizes Warren on that sub is swiftly banned or their posts deleted as I and many others can attest to :)

Yea right @ "mildly" lol

>mildly criticizes Warren on that sub is
>swiftly banned or their posts deleted as I and many others can
>attest to :)

Here is my last comment to get deleted of only a handful I've made on there, it was less than mild. In the thread "Warren defends Democratic primary rules requirng a majority at the convention" I said in full

"If anyone wants the real story behind what happened in 2016 this Twitter thread does a great job explaining it https://twitter.com/RespectableLaw/status/1232908574931722241?s=20

The ensuing thread used Warren herself as the primary source, this was the response.

Removed rule seven. Provide an unbiased source. Twitter isn't one.

Made for great conversation!

what was your experience doing the same in petes or amys sub?

>what was your experience doing the same in petes or amys
>sub?

I haven't posted on those personally but I know that Warren's sub does have a reputation as being the most locked down and authoritarian.

and apply them as they see fit.


if youre not a supporter of the candidate its kind of weird to post in their sub. browse as you like but not exactly the place to debate.

>and apply them as they see fit.
>
>
>if youre not a supporter of the candidate its kind of weird to
>post in their sub. browse as you like but not exactly the
>place to debate.

Sure, that's one way to look at it but my experience with r/sandersforpresident and especially r/wayofbern is that there is a lot of discussion, oftentimes from other candidate's supporters and it makes both places much more lively and educational.

She had a huge cash haul in February while every campaign except Sanders was hemorrhaging money ... including Biden
She’s killed on the debate stages
Was the first candidate to announce they were running
And consistently ... consistently polled better than anyone except the last two that are in.

But from a politics point alone, dropping out after early voting but before Super Tuesday is so insanely selfish and self serving that it feels like sabotage.
There’s no good will extended to Klobachur, Buttigieg, or Steyer ... none.

>She had a huge cash haul in February while every campaign
>except Sanders was hemorrhaging money ... including Biden
>She’s killed on the debate stages
>Was the first candidate to announce they were running
>And consistently ... consistently polled better than anyone
>except the last two that are in.
>
>But from a politics point alone, dropping out after early
>voting but before Super Tuesday is so insanely selfish and
>self serving that it feels like sabotage.
>There’s no good will extended to Klobachur, Buttigieg, or
>Steyer ... none.


Dude has been dancing around "warren needs to drop out!" pretty much since Bernie announced.

Nothing but dear leader will do.

even though she said she never would do that.

I'm a Warren fan - but she simply hasn't performed. Both Pete & Amy outperformed her - yet both are dropping out with the clear purpose of coalescing behind the moderate wing (Biden) to stop Sanders from getting the nomination.

And that's fine - this is politics.

In poll after poll, most Warren voters cite Sanders as their second option. That's a critical feature on Super Tuesday as she stays in - but the moderate base attempts to coalesce around Biden.



-->

it was solely their decision tho.

Pete literally did an interview *yesterday morning* on MTP telling Chuck Todd he intended to stay in the race.

Something definitely happened in between when they filmed that and the announcement later on. It just didn't make any sense with how his campaign has been rolling thus far.

I think certain ppl were under tremendous pressure to drop out, but Warren gets a pass because her coalition overlaps Bernie's so much.

I don't entirely think Warren's February cash haul was due to her Nevada performance, either. I think the establishment/donor class also see her as a very practical foil against Bernie and after learning of her financial issues rallied to keep her campaign infrastructure afloat for that purpose (25m in 3 days but doing worse than Pete in SC, even with her higher polling among black voters). If she dropped Bernie would presumably get a huge boost and they don't want that.

Selfishness at play but not with the dropouts imho. Maybe Biden tho. He really fucking wants this and would prefer everybody ignore his red flags lol

edit: and to be clear, I think I also would have favored they all take it to the convention over this staggered coronation bs lol

>
>But from a politics point alone, dropping out after early
>voting but before Super Tuesday is so insanely selfish and
>self serving that it feels like sabotage.
>There’s no good will extended to Klobachur, Buttigieg, or
>Steyer ... none.

Fuck all of them.
It’s not about any operation or consultants or party leaders
You let the ballot box make the decision once you’re in this long
Even if your candidacy isn’t viable
Otherwise what you’ve done is negated votes, negated the work of people that worked to get those votes, shit on the early vote process, etc
If you’re going to play politics with other people’s votes then you don’t deserve to be a candidate.

I definitely think the Dem establishment/donor class pulled/is pulling strings behind the scenes. It's basically the Dem way at this point *shrug*


>Fuck all of them.
>It’s not about any operation or consultants or party
>leaders
>You let the ballot box make the decision once you’re in this
>long
>Even if your candidacy isn’t viable
>Otherwise what you’ve done is negated votes, negated the
>work of people that worked to get those votes, shit on the
>early vote process, etc
>If you’re going to play politics with other people’s votes
>then you don’t deserve to be a candidate.

These are humans with full autonomy. You’re overlooking that for whatever pressures they may be feeling. At the end of the day these are their actions and should be attributed as such.

This is vote suppression.

“ This really pisses me off. It subverts they process for selfish gain. If your whole goal is to get concessions you stay in to convention. If it’s to influence then be a surrogate

But when you’re effectively stealing votes that have been cast then you’re just a fucking asshole”

folks' funding (or in Warren's case, turning the taps on) and other tricks were probably used to apply pressure. More than anyone, I think Pete very much wanted to stay in til the end. His campaign published an entire memo mapping out their delegate strategy, even.

I also think that the actual Dems were obviously more exposed to being pressured out, because they actually care about their political futures within the party. Bernie's obviously immune to that as is somebody like Bloomberg.

Basically, I get your anger I just think the candidate's might deserve less of it lol

>This is vote suppression.
>
>“ This really pisses me off. It subverts they process for
>selfish gain. If your whole goal is to get concessions you
>stay in to convention. If it’s to influence then be a
>surrogate
>
>But when you’re effectively stealing votes that have been
>cast then you’re just a fucking asshole”

.

You literally posted up above that Pete's voters wouldn't necessarily go to Biden.

You posted that YOURSELF.

Just because someone is in a particular lane doesn't guarantee their voters go to someone else in that lane.

By your own numbers, something like 40% of Pete's voters will go to Warren or Bernie.

https://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13369593&mesg_id=13369593&page=#13369679

Yet, Warren needs to drop out to pave the way for dear leader...?


Who is to say a good portion of Warren voters wouldn't go to Biden? My guess is more than you think- and my guess is a big reason is the Bro behavior has pushed many away.

Not to mention, does her playing the delegate game give the progressive movement more influence over a potential Biden run?

She got Hillary to make major concessions without even running...imagine what she could get out of Biden by holding out?

Oh wait, this isn't about a progressive movement or policies its about winning a Bernie agenda.


You guys have been itching to get the progressive woman to drop out since day one. These bitches keep getting in your guy's way, huh? Ungrateful sell outs.

Its been incredibly frustrating and disappointing to watch you prove the Bernie Bro stereotype on a daily basis.


I'm telling you, if guys like you want to help Bernie get more votes you should shut the fuck up for a while because you are terrible at this.

I'm being 100% real- if Bernie is going to win, you guys have to change the bro behavior.


Not to mention, she is probably waiting to see how Super Tuesday shakes out. Some of these drop outs are premature, yet cutting it too close. Amy and Pete should have let Tuesday play out.

Oh also, have you called for Tulsi to drop out and I missed it?

Telling people not to support their guy because it hurts their guy is dumb as hell.

Everyone is using the spin to justify how their pick will benefit.

Vex ain’t no worse than Reeq.

Both are spinning the fuck out of these articles, polls, etc.

You make claims/predictions/assessments and use polling/data to try and back up your argument/preference - and advocate for your candidate of choice.

Not sure why people get so upset at this lol.

kfine did a fine job of advocating for Pete - and often proffered available data to bolster well-thought out arguments. Just because I disagree doesn't mean I'm gonna cry about it and be like 'omg you're so ridiculous! how dare you competently advocate for your candidate of choice!' lol


-->

People just scared to admit they are more comfortable with the safe pick.

Exactly. Especially since it all comes from the Hillary camp who initiated the smear in 2008 with Obama Boys, then resurrected it in 2016 for Bernie and now people are doing it again. Is there nothing that the mainstream media spews that the majority of OKP political posters won't eat up?

https://medium.com/@StealYoRedBull/before-bernie-bros-there-were-obama-boys-2327bc941e06

but every camp has them.

My frustration is the “if they just chilled more people would vote for Bernie”

FOH.

What they really want is for Bernie supporters to stfu so people can shit all over him.

What happened in SC?
I thought he was growing the base?
Why isn’t there more enthusiasm?

What a team.

-->

or else people are potentially wasting their votes. Half the field has dropped out in the time I received my mail in ballot. I haven't dropped it off yet but I would be annoyed if I voted for someone only for them to drop out the next day.

(figurativley) his victories tomorrow. They'll be able to imply his victories aren't real because alot of voters would have picked Biden instead of Buttigieg or Klobuchar or Steyere or whoever.

"Get ready....for your blessing....."
"Bury me by my Grand-Grand and when you can come follow me"

I didn’t even know who Nader was at the time.

I was just looking for a gig and the girl who I interviewed me was fine as hell.

Wasted a whole day.

knocking on doors for Ralph Nader in Republican as hell Staten Island.

I'm hoping folks didn't get too belligerent with you.


I also hope the dollars were worth it, but seeing as I'm sure that campaign was probably pinching its collective pennies, I highly doubt it.

I was basically shadowing her to see how it was done. I was young and dumb.

My balls made all the decisions that day.

and no one said shit to me... but we definitely got some hard no’s and some looks. All I remember was Staten Island smelled like shit.

yet it does little to no political harm and earns endorsements.

what kind of privilege and groupthink is that?

segregationists are his friends, supporting a crime bill that locked up practically every black man in the 90s, and wanted to freeze/cut SS....I'm not understanding how a 55-60 year old black man can ignore these factors and just be like "i'mma vote for Biden".

make it make sense

Lying about old shit is bad but he is basically Obama endorsed since he was his VP so that’s helpful

Also Trump is a fucking idiot who is destroying our country so it’s between him and someone who lied about stuff from a few decades ago but recovered enough to be VP to a legend then guess who most people are correctly picking?

of lying as if he was shoulder to shoulder risking his life with civil rights movement activists.

he also just apologized this weekend for being a liar about being arrested when supposedly going to see mandela, who then he said embraced him and thanked him being arrested to see him. this is CURRENT.

Joe Biden drops claim he was arrested seeing Mandela
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51648166

yes his presidential campaign fell apart in '87 due to lies, and he was VP after his mass incarceration drive.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/25/bidens-ridiculous-claim-he-was-arrested-trying-see-mandela/

“After he got free and became president, he came to Washington and came to my office. He threw his arms around me and said, ‘I want to say thank you.’ I said, ‘What are you thanking me for, Mr. President?’ He said: ‘You tried to see me. You got arrested trying to see me.’”



https://shaunking.substack.com/p/2-truths-and-31-lies-joe-biden-has

"From 2014 until early 2019, Joe Biden would not again repeat the false claim that he was an activist and organizer in the Civil Rights Movement. But once he began running again, he could not resist himself. It’s as if he is not fully clear on how the Internet works.

In Waterloo, Iowa on this past December 5th, 2019 Biden began telling falsehoods again about being an activist and organizer, and then added new color to the lie from 2014 that he was being trained as an activist in Black churches on Sunday mornings, saying,

“I got involved, most of you don’t know me well, I got involved in public life, because when I was about the age of the guy standing over there (points to teenage boy), I got involved in the civil rights movement….

Well, I got my education, Reverend Doc... in the Black church. Not a joke -- because when we used to get organized on Sundays to go out and desegregate movie theaters and things like that, we'd do it through the Black church. I got to admit to you I'd go to my Catholic Mass at 7:30 first, and then I'd show up in the Black church."

Apparently itching for another scandal to end yet another presidential campaign, Biden continued his lies again - this time at a special service at Bethlehem Baptist Church in Columbia, South Carolina on this past January 20th, 2020. Each time he tells these lies he appears to be abandoning his script and adding new layers of lies on top of the old ones.

“You know, when I was a teenager in Delaware, for real, I got involved in the Civil Rights Movement. We have the 8th largest Black population in America, most people don’t know that. And, uh, I’d go to 8 o’clock mass, then I’d go to Reverend Herring’s church, where we’d meet, in order to organize and figure where we were going to go, whether we were going to desegregate the Rialto movie theater or what we were going to do. I got my education. For real. In the Black Church. And that’s not hyperbole. It’s a fact.”"

No, I did not know that Joe

Considering some cities have almost as many black residents as the total population of Delaware

I find that very hard to believe

Does he think chester and philly are part of Delaware?

>Lying about old shit is bad but he is basically Obama
>endorsed since he was his VP so that’s helpful

He is not "Obama endorsed" - like - not at all.

-->

Obama could endorse Bernie tomorrow and people will still look Joe to Obama even tho Joe was O’s pick to make white voters comfortable.

with me lol)

according to many reports. Obama also had the bulk of his alumni move to Warren's camp - and was sending not so subtle signals that he thought Warren was the best candidate.

Obama hasn't done anything remotely close to endorsing Biden.

Saying Biden is the beneficiary of residual Obama brand favorability is one thing (and he certainly is - that Obama brand is strong) - saying that Obama basically endorsed Biden is an entirely different (and wrong) assertion.

-->

and they don't have the power to take it over b/c the "Clinton and Co." side is too strong.

political capital H.E.A.V.Y. Like.. does he even have an ad that doesn't feature BO? lol. It's blatant. I think BO (correctly) has stayed out of it (and even politely trolled a bit, making comments about women leaders, new generation leaders etc during speaking engagements), but by and large.. folks that don't follow politics closely view Biden as part of the Obama-Biden package and a known entity.

But you're right in that a peculiarly significant number of Obama alums have either endorsed or joined the campaigns of others. Correct on Warren. Pete also had a number of Obama alums (BO's top economic advisor, Reggie Love, staffers from past campaigns, etc), and BO namechecked him as one to watch in an old article towards the end of BOs presidency. Basically, the "let's go back to the Obama-Biden" years has been almost exclusively a one-sided push (and not by BO lol)


>according to many reports. Obama also had the bulk of his
>alumni move to Warren's camp - and was sending not so subtle
>signals that he thought Warren was the best candidate.
>
>Obama hasn't done anything remotely close to endorsing Biden.
>
>Saying Biden is the beneficiary of residual Obama brand
>favorability is one thing (and he certainly is - that Obama
>brand is strong) - saying that Obama basically endorsed Biden
>is an entirely different (and wrong) assertion.
>
>-->

They probably feel bad for him because he's run (unsuccessfully) so many times + all the tragedies that have happened with his family while he was giving so much to the party. Which is sad, and I'll bet he made some fiery phone calls recently. But it's not democratic.

In his interview on MTP yesterday he mentioned something about folks "stepping up" to help deliver on SC smh

This is pretty much about the Dem establishment being there for Joe, not voters (other than black voters in the south, who clearly ride for him).

not because he can’t win..

because he CAN win and he’ll fuck up the money.

Yeah and some people still won't admit there's any such thing as the "establishment" when within an hour Amy drops out says she's going to endorse Biden, Pete announces he's endorsing Biden and Harry Reid endorses Biden. All less than 24 hours after Pete admitted he dropped to stop Bernie. Just the millionth and one coincidence I guess.

What gets me the most is that so many people are more than ready to help the establishment with these games and then feign like they want to see progressive accomplishments, FOH.

and clown people for admitting they are conservative in certain arenas...

but once it’s time to vote progressive they do the Adrienne/Rocky scream... “he can’t WIN!!!”

It's wild to me that there is so much hesitation on Bernie in this place. I don't get it but gotta bear in mind the actual number of people arguing back and forth in here is relatively small.

Let's not get this confused:

This race is now Biden v. Sanders.

Choose wisely.

-->

Fuck this patriarchal patronizing shit. Klobachur and Buttigieg were presidential candidates, they’re not now, and their supporters are free to make their own choices

Nobody was saying this shit when Beto, Kamala, Castro, or Booker dropped out

>Nobody was saying this shit when Beto, Kamala, Castro, or
>Booker dropped out

We're in March. This ain't August of 2019 where everything is speculative and free-flowing. The field is defined and it's clear what this race is shaping up to be.

Vote for whomever you want - that's what primaries are for.

But this race ain't between Bloomberg v. Warren.


-->

just with more characters this time

>
>just with more characters this time

LOL.

Are we having fun yet?

-->

and real talk... those people dropped out because they couldn’t get enough support

So no one really would care who Beto or Kamala endorsed back then.

how many votes Doomberg will siphon away from Biden and potentially ruin his Super Tuesday results and in turn make things easier for Saunders.

-Reddit

not technically true yet they're not really wrong lol

coming from the same people who said you should vote for the green party in 2016 is fucking rich

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

https://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13344033&mesg_id=13344033&listing_type=search#13363203

She needs to lose MA to dropout?

If she loses Massachusetts it’s an embarrassing L.

but she hasn’t been embarrassed by her performance this far so fuck it.

chances. she has a lot of funding and is now basically the compromise candidate.

what happens if she gets the same amount of delegates as biden does tomorrow?

She’s earned 0 delegates since IA

0.

You can’t seriously think she has a path to the nomination

?

95%

i think odds are very low that she has a path but these drop outs did increase the chances that she could find a path. compared to biden i think she has a 30% chance to bidens 70%. if SC was biden's peak and he comes back to recent polling tomorrow where do the rest of the votes go?

maybe there was too much early voting and both biden and warren stay around 15%. maybe a lot of pete/amy/tom (lol) voters decide to stay home.

we dont know.

= when everyone else drops out

LOL

her coalition overlaps the most with Bernie's.

If she were to drop, even a small boost in his support could make up the difference for him overtaking the moderate outright.

So the Dem establishment/donor class seems to be financially supporting her campaign infrastructure to keep it going for literally just that purpose. Any votes going to her instead of Bernie helps the moderate. They set up a nice little SuperPAC for her and everything lol. She raised 25M in 3 days this past month.

She's only won one county so far, scraping by 0.3 above Bernie in Johnson County, IA. It would take a miracle for her to become competitive again, but we'll see I guess.

i keed

why do you always have facts?

you could be 100% right. is there data to back this up? i think it would be pretty simple to prove no? if she was averaging $20 or whatever per donation before Jan and now shes getting people maxing out then thats pretty obvious.

getting such a big jump is definitely odd especially when the votes arent there. last i saw she was claiming 1,250,000 plus donors. i think thats a big amount, only comparable to bernie (which is higher) right? i think in an email or on her sub i had seen that her donor count in feb was like 250k. i dont know if that was only for the debate week or if it was actually donation counts instead of donor count. that would still give an average donation amount of over $100 so it would be odd.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/25/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-debate.html

says she raised 9M in the 3 days after the debate, and had raised 21M by the date of the article's publication (last month).

I think I first saw someone talking about her haul on twitter, so maybe they misquoted the amounts or I misread (I probably misread, lol. My bad :( I'm usually more careful tho bc I *hate misinfo/disinfo).

Here's an article about her SuperPAC too tho. And I always have facts bc I'm a policy/politics junkie (For multiple countries too. But American politics is the most interesting/far-reaching lol):

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/elizabeth-warren-now-has-the-largest-super-pac-in-the-democratic-field_n_5e593d56c5b6beedb4ea7d0f


>i keed
>
>why do you always have facts?
>
>you could be 100% right. is there data to back this up? i
>think it would be pretty simple to prove no? if she was
>averaging $20 or whatever per donation before Jan and now shes
>getting people maxing out then thats pretty obvious.
>
>getting such a big jump is definitely odd especially when the
>votes arent there. last i saw she was claiming 1,250,000 plus
>donors. i think thats a big amount, only comparable to bernie
>(which is higher) right? i think in an email or on her sub i
>had seen that her donor count in feb was like 250k. i dont
>know if that was only for the debate week or if it was
>actually donation counts instead of donor count. that would
>still give an average donation amount of over $100 so it would
>be odd.

but yeah it was $9 million after the debate and they closed at $29 million for feb.

actually per her email

$29.3 million for feb. avg "gift" $31 (not sure why they used the word gift).
$2.8 million the day of the nevada debate
$9.5 million wed - fri that week
250k NEW donors in feb
1,250,000 total donors for the campaign, half donating more than once.

im not a fan of the super pac. they can or cant donate to the campaign? i think not right? just run ads and spend as much money without coordinating with the campaign? either way i think it does open her up to legit criticism.



edit: typed 13 instead of 31 for avg gift

lol

I should stick to my mundane lanes like healthcare

Regardless of the exact breakdowns tho, it's clear at least that she a) got a funding bump and b) they definitely want her to stay in to help a moderate beat Bernie

>
>super pac. they can or cant donate to the
>campaign? i think not right? just run ads and spend as much
>money without coordinating with the campaign? either way i
>think it does open her up to legit criticism.

Which she won’t want to do which I don’t want her to do either.

#AnythingToStopBernie

https://twitter.com/WinWithJMC/status/1234585148592721920?s=20

If he doesn't do well, they might regret not just letting this shit go to brokered scenario and do what they wanted to there

damn

it seems that it has been decided that it is now bernie 40% - biden 40% and lets see who earns the rest.

watch it be more 35% bernie and 25% biden.

Bernie has Cali on lock. He’s going to have a lead but it would be much larger if voters were splitting between Pete and Amy...

and then their is Bloomberg’s stank ass also clipping Biden’s votes.

Establishment definitely stored in and told some of these candidates to step down or pay the price.

But Bloomberg may fuck up his groove.

Regardless they know they are in for a fight with Bernie.

Will definitely be interesting to see how Texas and California numbers play out.

granted, i'm not following this as closely as most in here, but I don't feel like that's a given just because she's the other progressive left.

she did endorse Hillary over him last go around.

or is there no assumption of this at all? i'm mostly going off shit i'm seeing on social media today and a couple headlines.

if she wasnt running. that might be true if she never ran. im not convinced thats true now. it could be enough support to push bernie into majority territory though.

I think people who would be geared towards Bernie are already Bernie supporters, and more Liz supporters might move towards the moderate, even if they're to the right of them.

but maybe i'm wrong. The Bernie campaign is where the energy is.

my feeling is its 50/50, as i said in a different reply. it really could be anything though.

But this mix-up today is unpredictable. Many things could happen. Some Amy supporters could move to Warren. Some Warren supporters could see the writing on the wall and vote for Sanders being that he's the only viable Progressive - or they all could stay put.

-->

Would have been great to see Biden and Sanders go at it, especially now that it's been narrowed down. If the main worry is electability (which it's not) I can see the hesitancy to back a democratic socialist but I can't take seriously anybody who has watched the debates and think Biden can win against Trump. The man is clearly incoherent and confused and besides that has no platform other than being a moderate and VP to Obama.

Really seems like the DNC would rather have four more years than Trump than lose their party identity and have four years of Bernie. Hence the pressure on Buttigeg and Klobuchar to drop out right before ST and for Warren to stay in. Biden stands no chance and this loss will be a bigger embarrassment to the DNC than 2016 and alienate tons of voters.

>Would have been great to see Biden and Sanders go at it,
>especially now that it's been narrowed down. If the main worry
>is electability (which it's not) I can see the hesitancy to
>back a democratic socialist but I can't take seriously anybody
>who has watched the debates and think Biden can win against
>Trump. The man is clearly incoherent and confused and besides
>that has no platform other than being a moderate and VP to
>Obama.
>
>Really seems like the DNC would rather have four more years
>than Trump than lose their party identity and have four years
>of Bernie. Hence the pressure on Buttigeg and Klobuchar to
>drop out right before ST and for Warren to stay in. Biden
>stands no chance and this loss will be a bigger embarrassment
>to the DNC than 2016 and alienate tons of voters.

Next debate March 15

because why not

California
Bernie - 40%
Biden - 25%
Warren - 18%
Bloomberg - 8%
LOL tulsi - 2%
dropped out - 7%

Texas
Bernie - 33%
Biden - 28%
Warren - 16%
Bloomberg - 15%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 7%

North Carolina
Bernie - 20%
Biden - 35%
Warren - 13%
Bloomberg - 15%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 16%

Virginia
Bernie - 26%
Biden - 30%
Warren - 12%
Bloomberg - 18%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 13%

Massachusetts
Bernie - 40%
Biden - 8%
Warren - 36%
Bloomberg - 5%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 10%

Minnesota
Bernie - 33%
Biden - 13%
Warren - 20%
Bloomberg - 3%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 30%

Colorado
Bernie - 38%
Biden - 12%
Warren - 19%
Bloomberg - 8%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 12%

Tennessee
Bernie - 20%
Biden - 40%
Warren - 10%
Bloomberg - 14%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 15%

Alabama
Bernie - 18%
Biden - 45%
Warren - 8%
Bloomberg - 16%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 12%

Oklahoma
Bernie - 16%
Biden - 35%
Warren - 16%
Bloomberg - 20%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 12%

Alabama
Bernie - 28%
Biden - 38%
Warren - 8%
Bloomberg - 18%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 7%

Utah
Bernie - 45%
Biden - 5%
Warren - 19%
Bloomberg - 8%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 12%

Maine
Bernie - 36%
Biden - 14%
Warren - 19%
Bloomberg - 12%
LOL tulsi - 1%
dropped out - 18%

Vermont
Bernie - 69%
Biden - 5%
Warren - 8%
Bloomberg - 4%
LOL tulsi - 2%
dropped out - 12%

American Samoa
Bernie - 30%
Biden - 32%
Warren - 15%
Bloomberg - 13%
LOL tulsi - 2%
dropped out - 8%

This election cycle lit like a muhfucka

video:
https://twitter.com/keithboykin/status/1234633920362184705

There has to be some sort of metoo angle to this. He announced he's retiring, spoke for about 2 minutes, then there was a commercial. After the commercial Steve Kornacki was filling in.

https://www.gq.com/story/chris-matthews-experience



>There has to be some sort of metoo angle to this. He
>announced he's retiring, spoke for about 2 minutes, then there
>was a commercial. After the commercial Steve Kornacki was
>filling in.

>There has to be some sort of metoo angle to this. He
>announced he's retiring, spoke for about 2 minutes, then there
>was a commercial. After the commercial Steve Kornacki was
>filling in.

even when he wasnt saying offensive stuff he added no value. his interviews were horrible. he would basically just rant. he would pose a question then answer it himself then move on to another topic.

....and predict this order, re total delegates won on Super Tuesday:‬

‪1. Biden‬
‪2. Bernie‬
‪3. Bloomberg ‬
‪4. Warren ‬

>....and predict this order, re total delegates won on Super
>Tuesday:‬
>
>‪1. Biden‬
>‪2. Bernie‬
>‪3. Bloomberg ‬
>‪4. Warren ‬

I said lol

Bummer. But he sucks real bad.

Joe Biden voted for the Iraq War. He doesn't deserve a continued voice in American politics, much less becoming president. Being that wrong about something that big should have consequences, and I think "don't elect him to office anymore" is a pretty light one, all told.

Bernie’s rhetoric and proposals don’t make him any less old

*we* are.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/super-tuesday-03-02#beto-orourke-plans-to-endorse-biden-tonight

Beto O’Rourke plans to endorse Biden tonight.
Former Representative Beto O’Rourke of Texas, who became a progressive star in his spirited race against Senator Ted Cruz before mounting a less-successful presidential campaign, will endorse Joseph R. Biden Jr. and appear with him in Dallas Monday night, according to two Democratic officials familiar with his plans.

Mr. O’Rourke, who dropped out of the primary last fall, has returned to his native El Paso and largely stayed out of the campaign.

But one night before the Texas primary, he will line up with his fellow former candidates, Pete Buttigieg and Amy Klobuchar, in their effort to coalesce behind Mr. Biden and slow the momentum of Bernie Sanders.

with the tx house in dems sights to give them a voice in redistricting...he knows a far lefty like sanders would jeopardize those suburban districts he carried in 2018.

something about hes voting for biden i scrolled right to the end and it said he would support whoever gets the nomination blah blah. i was tempted to hit unsubscribe.

dudes been putting work to support texan elections so eh

https://www.kxan.com/news/your-local-election-hq/tulsi-gabbard-to-hold-austin-town-hall-on-monday/

AUSTIN (KXAN) — On Monday, presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard will hold a town hall event in Austin ahead of Super Tuesday voting.

The event will be held from 7 to 10 p.m. at Springdale Station, 979 Springdale Road, Suite 160.

political gambits in modern history.

he has no shot at winning. just 25% of dem primary voters in sc had a favorable view of him (will be worse in more left leaning states). and dude is swooping into the race at a time when moderates are trying to coalesce around their best candidate.

what was the point of all this?

I ain't voting for him.

really whites without a college degree. in places like the rust belt and florida.

that def aint bloombergs audience lol.

>political gambits in modern history.
>
>he has no shot at winning. just 25% of dem primary voters in
>sc had a favorable view of him (will be worse in more left
>leaning states). and dude is swooping into the race at a time
>when moderates are trying to coalesce around their best
>candidate.
>
>what was the point of all this?


In addition to the fact he probably has zero confidence in Biden and clearly he's opposed to Saunders getting into the White House, he saw how Trump won the Republican nomination when seemingly no one took him seriously and thinks he can win the Democratic nomination in the same fashion.

there is no magic dust, even the "not Hillary dust", that will make up the votes that Hillary lost. The turnout is going to be even more depressed than 2016 if he's the nominee.

The Democratic Party puts up more of a fight toward Bernie Sanders than they ever will Donald Trump and the GOP.


Y'all waited to long to get around Warren, fuckin' around with the K-Hive. And note the same forces that are fighting Sanders can't even stand /her/ being the nominee.

The reason being?
They're on the same billionaire teat and oppose the working class tooth and nail.

Claw said it.
This time around, y'all niggas fuck around and let that senile man get the nom, and Trump wins?

Y'all's fault. and you will deserve all that follows.

https://twitter.com/johnrobertgage/status/1234577398521323528?s=21

“We hold these truths to be self evident, That all men and women are... you know, the thing”

The fact that he's so inept and so senile and people still want to vote for him is just unimaginable.

...

Biden will *not* win back any of the states Trump took from Hillary (no, not even PA).

Alot of those Obama-Obama-Trump voters are satisfied enough with Trump that they'll come out and vote for him again - definitely if Biden is the other choice.

No one has any GENUINE enthusiasm for Biden. "He's not Trump" is not close to being enough to beat Trump.

But he seems to struggle with them in early states.

Still not sure if he can win the middle of PA. He’s terrible at these speeches. Dude really sounds like he is going senile.

All these people who tirelessly trashed Sanders (who is clearly the strongest candidate against Trump in a head to head) have blood on their hands - as the party seems very poised for the coronation of Joe Biden - the Democratic version of Mitt Romney (without the intellectualism).

Hope it was worth it -- because Biden gets trounced and America will get 4 more years of what it deserves: Donald Trump


-->

Base of support. Why on earth are y’all worried lol. If Bernie is going to win the presidency he has to win the nom first

It should be no problem for him to get above the 1900 whatever delegates needed, if the support is as strong as y’all say it is.

-->

-->

And we can’t remember what hasn’t happened yet, Biden is untested, saying he won’t win PA, wisc and Michigan is a bit premature

Why do you think Trump keeps tweeting pro Bernie stuff?

trump and repubs clearly want to run against bernie for a reason.

>Why do you think Trump keeps tweeting pro Bernie stuff?

To play up the moderate vs. progressive dissension within the Democratic party, and in the hopes that a significant number of Sanders' supporters will feel disenfranchised enough to sit out the election, which helps Trump.


_______________________________
gamblers and masturbators.

http://twitter.com/urkelmoedee

https://www.albumism.com/search?q=Marcus%20Willis

Return To Zero: A rap radio show hosted by mrhood75 (Spider Jerusalem) and me (UrkelMoeDee)
https://mixcloud.com

causing dissension themselves, are they trying to help Trump too? Do you think Trump illegally pressured a foreign government into opening a fake investigation into Biden's son to help Biden?

>causing dissension themselves, are they trying to help Trump
>too?

No.

>Do you think Trump illegally pressured a foreign
>government into opening a fake investigation into Biden's son
>to help Biden?

No.

_______________________________
gamblers and masturbators.

http://twitter.com/urkelmoedee

https://www.albumism.com/search?q=Marcus%20Willis

Return To Zero: A rap radio show hosted by mrhood75 (Spider Jerusalem) and me (UrkelMoeDee)
https://mixcloud.com

https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1234787876031823873
-----
Ahead of Super Tuesday, @TheBeatWithAri calculated the estimated dollars spent per vote by Democratic presidential candidates.

Tom Steyer spent the most of any candidate at $3,370 per vote.

Joe Biden invested the least at $190 per vote.
-----

steyer spent all that money and didnt net a single delegate smh.

if biden comes out of super tuesday in good shape with this barebones operation (nytimes story)...i cant even call it mayne.

heres total ad spend for everyone:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ESHUa-eXUAAZa9L?format=png&name=small

bloomberg has already spent half a billion! dude coulda bought out the senate with that.

and he didn’t really have to spend money to win it.

I think Bernie’s may come down significantly if he wins big in Cali.

but then again, Biden is also going to win southern states like Bama, Tenn and Arkansas without spending money.

When they get to the battleground states I think you see the cost rise for both candidates.

where people are actually allowed/encouraged to vote and not forced into a low turnout caucus that just rewards an ardent core base.

i wonder if its just noise or itll be a continuous trend signifying some weakness turning out a segment of his voters.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/

i wonder how this works. dude won 1 state and is still in 2nd place in delegates.

Buttigieg and Klobuchar and possibly Steyer dropped out too late to actually be removed from the ballot in a lot of the states that will vote today, didn't they?

If that's true (I genuinely don't know - but assume somebody here does and googling it has been kind of a pain so I got bored) then I assume a lot of the models about what's going to happen today depend on some understanding of how neat and clean the big drop-out-and-endorse move went last night.

Or, to put it another way - the majority of voters are low-info voters. Which means there could be thousands of people who go to the polls today and see Amy Klobuchar on the ballot (again, please correct if I'm wrong about this) and think about something they heard about her and go "sure, she'll do." And if that's right, there must be some good way to predict what that process is going to look like. But it sounds, uh, delightfully messy if you're a stats nerd and horrifyingly messy if you have a result that you're really in the tank for.

if I'm understanding what your original post was referencing. Here's a link: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/03/super-tuesday-early-voting-delegates-buttigieg-klobuchar-steyer.html

This is precisely what I'm looking for. I appreciate it.

An early reaction to this makes me pleased that I used the right word: messy.

>This is precisely what I'm looking for. I appreciate it.
>
>An early reaction to this makes me pleased that I used the
>right word: messy.


This could be misguided and conspiratorial on my part, but I don't think this will be messy at all. I know the article said ultimately it'll be up to the delegates in terms of who they'll vote for, but I would be shocked if the DNC isn't working on a local level to galvanize all that prior Klobuchar and Buttigieg delegate support towards Biden since it appears that's who the DNC wants at the moment.

the ballots are set months ago.

John K. Delaney (5)
Julián Castro (6)
Robby Wells (7)
Pete Buttigieg (8)
Tom Steyer (9)
Andrew Yang (10)
Michael R. Bloomberg (11)
Deval Patrick (12)
Michael Bennet (13)
Amy Klobuchar (14)
Roque "Rocky" De La Fuente (15)
Tulsi Gabbard (16)
Cory Booker (17)
Bernie Sanders (18)
Elizabeth Warren (19)
Joseph R. Biden (20)
Marianne Williamson (21)

This is incredible

>John K. Delaney (5)
>Julián Castro (6)
>Robby Wells (7)
>Pete Buttigieg (8)
>Tom Steyer (9)
>Andrew Yang (10)
>Michael R. Bloomberg (11)
>Deval Patrick (12)
>Michael Bennet (13)
>Amy Klobuchar (14)
>Roque "Rocky" De La Fuente (15)
>Tulsi Gabbard (16)
>Cory Booker (17)
>Bernie Sanders (18)
>Elizabeth Warren (19)
>Joseph R. Biden (20)
>Marianne Williamson (21)

Williamson, Patrick, Booker, Castro, Yang, Bennet, etc.

>Buttigieg and Klobuchar and possibly Steyer dropped out too
>late to actually be removed from the ballot in a lot of the
>states that will vote today, didn't they?

_______________________________
gamblers and masturbators.

http://twitter.com/urkelmoedee

https://www.albumism.com/search?q=Marcus%20Willis

Return To Zero: A rap radio show hosted by mrhood75 (Spider Jerusalem) and me (UrkelMoeDee)
https://mixcloud.com

Every day our politic is presented in winning, losing, and trending narratives and people follow suit
If a poll came out tonight that an overwhelming number of people like raspberries on their toast, raspberry and bread sales would shoot through the roof tomorrow.
There would be vlogs about best ways to apply raspberries, an up spike in toaster searches, trends on all platforms, memes, toast trying videos, counter toasters, etc ... but everyone would suddenly be shaped around toast.

it is true that she and Sanders offer similar visions of the future. Hers is without the grassroots organizing that IMO, is required of any Democratic candidate to win in the modern age.

it is true that personality-wise, she may be more palatable by people who are not extremely online.

but you know what else is true?

Regardless of how much she tries to play nice with the Neoliberal Dem establishment/donor class, opting to identify as "capitalist" (big mistake because with the 40 and under set, that term isn't as positive as you think), and such... THEY don't like her, nor do they trust her.

She got outpaced by Pete FUCKIN Buttigieg. A rookie mayor from South Bend. the first real gay candidate (no cap, that really is impressive to see, cheating aside, how long he hung in there). In South Carolina!!!

if she just realized who was really against her.
Not the Bernie Bros. Not sexists. The folks who are ironically throwing their money in SuperPACs behind her to keep the real threat out would use them against her if she were the lone "progressive".

The same people the "Bros" are maligning actually wanted her to fail, TOO.

To watch her (and some of her supporters) hide behind the shield of gender essentialism really pisses me off. It ain't about that.

Her POLITICAL decisions have been negative toward the people she should be courting the most. And to keep it 100, I have been Cuban B'ing a lot of unsavory things in her past to give her a chance.

At least it appears she might be responsible for not making it a "No Vote" situation for me, by killing the Bloomberg charade.

I don't care if she doesn't drop out. If they're really going to back Biden on some bullshit, it doesn't matter.

But under Trump term 2 I hope there is some reflection.

She isn’t nearly as progressive as her supporters claim.

she didnt endorse in the primary (something sanders fans famously cried about).

then she endorsed hillary when she became the presumptive nominee (just like sanders did).

Of course everyone will back the eventual nominee.

only *5* endorsed bernie (plus tulsi).

the real question isnt why didnt lizzy endorse the progressive.

the real question is why the progressive hadnt really forged any relationships/alliances with other progressives that would compel an endorsement after 30 years in congress.

She herself may be more of the centrist model
But her platform was extensively progressive
She centered it around race, gender, and explicitly talked about inequality baked into the system and how it affects the most vulnerable demographics

-->

But her record as a Senator is not the platform that she ran for president on.

you know details dont matter tho.

it is kinda funny that bernie supporters praised bernie for getting the most progressive party platform in history...then blamed everyone else when that platform lost.

words, says a lot more about us than them.

because she was lazy or sick or who knows what but she was MIA and mailed it in the last month.

Combined with a campaign that openly and secretly coordinated with foreign influence (Russia, Israel, etc)
Alongside systems vulnerable to hacking (Georgia, Florida)
And then wide scale disenfranchisement (Wisconsin, Michigan)
Allowed a candidate that won the popular vote by millions of people to lose the electoral college by fewer humans than would fit inside The Horseshoe in Colombus (fewer than 80k people)

But go off chief.

it was unprecedented the type of material fuckery she was up against.

who felt she went too far *left* right?

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1098651547129573376

a lot of folks felt trump was more centrist/moderate.

https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/883742412279078912

so yes. the further left platform cost her some votes (along with various other factors).

i remember the Bernie crowd complaining because they seemed to expect her endorsement, but i had thought she straight up picked Hillary before the primary was over.

>she didnt endorse in the primary (something sanders fans
>famously cried about).
>
>then she endorsed hillary when she became the presumptive
>nominee (just like sanders did).
>
>

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/02/politics/bernie-sanders-joe-biden-super-tuesday/index.html

(CNN)In the last 24 hours, the following things have happened in the Democratic presidential race:
1) Former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg ended his campaign and he's endorsing former Vice President Joe Biden in a Texas rally tonight.
2) Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar decided to drop from the race and endorse Biden. She'll also be at that Biden Texas rally.
3) Former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nevada) announced his endorsement of Biden, citing the former vice president's ability to "assemble the largest, most diverse coalition possible to defeat Trump and lead our country following the trauma of Trump's presidency."

4) Illinois Sen. Tammy Duckworth, as well as a slew of other House members, former senators and former governors who represent states set to vote either on Tuesday or later this month, endorsed Biden.
This is what it looks like when the party establishment, deeply concerned about the prospect of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders as the Democratic nominee against President Donald Trump, starts putting the necessary pieces in place to try to keep the Vermont democratic socialist from winning.

THE POINT -- NOW ON YOUTUBE!

In each episode of his weekly YouTube show, Chris Cillizza will delve a little deeper into the surreal world of politics. Click to subscribe!
How large are their concerns? Within 72 hours of Biden winning his first state in the nomination fight -- a larger-than-expected victory in South Carolina -- the entire field of pragmatic/moderate/establishment types have left the race, with the exception of free-spending billionaire Mike Bloomberg.
And you can bet that if Bloomberg doesn't wind up with more delegates than Biden after tomorrow, the former New York City mayor will come under huge pressure to put his ego aside and get behind Biden too.
(Now that doesn't mean that Trump's Twitter claims implying that Democrats are trying to "take it away" from Sanders are accurate. There is nothing nefarious about endorsements and drop-outs, this is just Politics 101).
Asked about the movement on Monday, Sanders told reporters, "Look, it is no secret ... that there is a massive effort trying to stop Bernie Sanders, that's not a secret to anybody in this room. ... The corporate establishment is coming together. The political establishment is coming together and they will do everything. They are really getting nervous that working people are standing up."
Still, it's not at all clear to me that the Democratic establishment can actually stop Sanders. The Vermont senator looks headed for victories in California and, to a lesser extent, Texas on Tuesday. And there's virtually no scenario I can imagine where Sanders doesn't end Super Tuesday with a clear delegate lead over Biden and everyone else.
The actual goal for the establishment may well to simply keep Sanders away from the 1,991 pledged delegates number that would formally make him the party's nominee.

Even if successful, of course, that effort would likely require superdelegates to decide the nomination -- in Biden's favor -- on a second ballot. Which, well, could be problematic.

in that scenario. never mind Donald Trump.

Terrible optics from the party...for the 2nd potus primary in a row

Literally everything Bern has been saying about the establishment...is now on full display

SMH, you would think they would be better at this.

John Brennan defended our torture program under Bush. He should be on trial in the Hague.

The father of neoconservatism. LOL.
These are the "allies" we have.

I don't think it's an exaggeration at all to say that Bill Kristol will never, ever back any presidential candidate that he doesn't think can be convinced to start a war in Iran.

He's never going to rest until he gets a bite at that apple and if he says Joe Biden is his guy, that should be terrifying to anybody who thinks World War Three would be suboptimal.

he could EASILY be run by a Cheney type

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1231759660031627264
-----
Clint Eastwood distances himself from President Trump: "The best thing we could do is just get Mike Bloomberg in there."

https://t.co/NSBIRo8LD8
-----

that was pretty surprising to me. i thought clint was a hardcore trumpkin for some reason.

Clint Eastwood did at the Republican National Convention is tattooed in my brain.

That is a pretty random endorsement, which leads me to one question; how many greenbacks did it cost for Doomberg to get that nod?

Looks like he's been meddling behind the scenes again just like in 2016 to stop any progress that would overshadow his "legacy". F the millions of young people and activists and people of color giving their blood, sweat and tears to get Bernie's movement in, we'll just make some last minute phone calls and stack the whole deck, democracy!

https://www.msnbc.com/hardball/watch/looking-for-obama-s-hidden-hand-in-candidates-coalescing-around-biden-79849541823

Mike Gravel gets it:

The entirety of the "centrist ghoul caucus" coming out of the woodwork to make sure you don't get healthcare is telling you in no uncertain terms: they hate you, they think you're a peasant, and you should hate them right back.

https://twitter.com/GravelInstitute/status/1234850587365314560

We need right now, I understand their are deep wounds that are resurfacing for Bernie supporters from 16, but let’s get thru Super Tuesday first.

And just becuz someone doesn’t want sanders as the nom doesn’t mean they hate the poor...sheesh

they ignore/overlook the people supporting those politicians.

those votes dont come from nowhere.

those are real folks responding to a message that resonates with them.

niggas demonize the top 2 vote getters in the entire history of the country like they were fringe candidates who were completely repulsive to the american people.

An asshole. Saying fuck the establishment but besides the Bernie bros(who will str8 up attack anyone like they did those WOC execs in the Nevada culinary union), u won’t outright say fuck y’all that support moderate, Washington insider candidates, becuz y’all are low information voters....

It’s similar to how I feel about M4A ( I support a public option or at least a transition period with a public option), my insurance provider (which I do actually like), all the doctors, nurses, admins all work directly for the provider, I think how disrupted all those ppls lives would be if u just cram thru M4A, his vagueness about transition jobs and what not just wouldn’t calm nerves if I were them.

All that "big tent" talk was bullshit, because they never made room for anyone who would disagree or question their revolution.

Bernie's short time as the front runner was a HUGE opportunity for him to show he could lead/unite the party, and for his supporters to prove the stereotypes wrong.


Yeah that didn't happen. Emails of us against them. Calls for the snake to drop out. Etc Etc.


Its like it never occured to most of them that, as other candidates dropped out, they would want their voters.


Its been crazy to watch them turn into stereotypical Hillary supporters. Entitled. Downplaying/ignoring weak spots. Insults if you disagreed/questioned.

They turned into things they hated.


And the incompetent party that they love to trash (so do I of course lets be real) is going to beat them.


How are you going to change the country if you can't change a party led by Tom Perez? lol



And now we are staring down the barrel of Hillary 2.0 with a side of senile tendencies and very little enthusiasm from voters.


Now, if we could stuff Biden in a room somewhere and just run on the idea of Joe Biden I'd be a little more comfortable.


But this dude is going to have to debate, give speeches, interviews, etc.


I trust Bernie more but goddamn he and his movement just aren't ready.


>they ignore/overlook the people supporting those
>politicians.
>
>those votes dont come from nowhere.
>
>those are real folks responding to a message that resonates
>with them.
>
>niggas demonize the top 2 vote getters in the entire history
>of the country like they were fringe candidates who were
>completely repulsive to the american people.
>
>
>
>

Honestly I have never in my life seen the Democratic Party muster up anywhere near the energy or political savvy to fight the Republicans that it's exhibiting right now to snuff out a grassroots progressive movement. Hard to believe it's the same organization.

https://twitter.com/dwdavison/status/1234643956803215362?s=20

They finally have a common enemy and it's the working class people. They're not doing this because they are afraid of Trump, all data shows Bernie has the best chance against Trump, they're doing it because they are afraid of us ending their power and grift.

https://theintercept.com/2020/03/02/democrats-craving-a-brokered-convention-including-elizabeth-warren-should-learn-the-lessons-of-1968/

Was the establishment, the DCCC is about as establishment as it gets. There was tom of grassroots energy, a ton of first time candidates, supporters and voters but it was buttressed by a concerted effort of the party in the general.

if it was progressives flipping red seats and winning purple/swing elections during the midterm wave instead of 'establishment' moderates...they wouldnt be so quick to memory hole it and act like it never happened. shit theyd prolly give bernie all the credit for the midterm 'revolution'.

bernie isnt even bringing out 1st time voters and young voters like beto and stacey abrams did. is it unprecedented grassroots energy when others did it better than you a year and a half ago?

by a lot of parties to stop Sanders from winning the Pres, and from passing M4A.


If you guys are this upset about some people endorsing Joe Biden, you're in for a long fucking few years if Bernie pulls this out.

I feel like Carlton at the Frat house

We’re running the same race so brotha why you tripping me up?

The moderates aren't tripping anything- they are just trying to win.

If the Democratic party can beat Bernie and his movement, how in the world do they expect the movement to change the country and shit?

Tom Perez has your crew shook, but I'm supposed to believe you are ready to take on an entire industry, etc?


All that's happened is that some folks came out for Biden after he won SC.

I think its a bonehead move because Biden is a fucking mess.


The point is all this crying about endorsements has me scratching my head.


How the fuck were you going to beat Trump, pass M4A, etc...when a few Biden endorsements has your entire movement shook.

And why wasn't the movement better positioned in SC? How Bernie not expanded his support there? He knew black folks, particularly older black folks, were a weakness. He try to bring people into the tent or nah?


If Bernie is the candidate they think he is, if he has built a broader coalition this time like they claim, and if his movement is as strong as they say...this shouldn't be THIS big of an issue.

This is what frustrates me about this process.

Another election and SC votes for the old head Dem and everyone says this is why Bernie can’t win.

Who will Black voters vote for in the GE? The Dem... regardless.

Now PA, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin. Those are the states you need to worry about Bernie’s support. If he can’t win those he’s toast. But the whole reason everyone dropped out last night was because they know if Bernie get it popping today they prolly can’t catch him.

But Bernie is fighting to beat a Dem establishment that wants no parts of him winning. That’s tough shit.

But don’t let that cloud the actual fact that Biden looks like shit and sounds even worse when he has a mic in his hand.

not so much because biden picks up many more but because you now have bloomberg and warren looking at hitting 15% in pretty much every state.

warren was projected to leave pete way behind after tonight, she would still be way behind bernie and biden. amy probably would have tied pete with not much hope after tonight. i think that did play into dropping out. did they really want to be behind bernie, biden, bloomber AND warren? so they save face and help keep bernie from running away with it tonight.

im sure there was pressure put on them as well but the above is enough reason.

bloomberg and warren could be the only thing keeping biden from winning tonight.

how can it win over the entire country? Or at least enough to win and pass shit?


Look, I"m fucking frustrated because Biden aint it. The idea of Biden is a lot better than the actual guy. He's a fucking mess.


I prefer Bernie. I'm scared for both in the general, but gun to my head I like Bern's chances more.

But


How strong is this movement if you can't beat Biden, or hell, Hillary?


Democrats are (obviously) going to be a much more Bernie-friendly audience than the general.


Theres no dirty tricks here. Just some big names throwing their weight behind Biden.

I think its the wrong call, but if you guys can't overcome it...how are you going to win the general?

Pass M4A? etc


This isn't the hardest fight your movement would face- it is by far the easiest.

>Theres no dirty tricks here. Just some big names throwing
>their weight behind Biden.
>
>I think its the wrong call, but if you guys can't overcome
>it...how are you going to win the general?
>
>Pass M4A? etc
>
>
>This isn't the hardest fight your movement would face- it is
>by far the easiest.

nothing happening here is out of the ordinary or dirty. people drop out of races and endorse another candidate all the time.

the problem with positioning yourself as a fighter against the establishment...the establishment can fight back too. and it usually wins.

*you* drew the line in the sand and placed everyone else on the other side of it.

maybe bernie can win. maybe he cant. but he isnt entitled to the nomination. and candidates throwing their weight behind another candidate (for any reason) isnt stealing/rigging anything.

i give trump a lot of credit on this one aspect. he went up against the republican party establishment *and* fox news. and won. thats a 'movement'. took the entire party from its gatekeepers and it wasnt even close.

i do have a genuine question about bernie. what does it say about your ability to lead a party that you never really took the time/effort to develop these important political relationships in? where are your loyal allies and beneficiaries of your political capital and good will?

who have you bailed out in a tough race? whose legislation have you took the torch on and dragged across the finish line? who are your long time friends in congress that you have old drinking stories with?

if bernie does indeed win...im not sure people are just gonna stick their necks out for him because hes the president. why would these folks trust that you have their best interests at heart too?

>>Theres no dirty tricks here. Just some big names throwing
>>their weight behind Biden.
>>
>>I think its the wrong call, but if you guys can't overcome
>>it...how are you going to win the general?
>>
>>Pass M4A? etc
>>
>>
>>This isn't the hardest fight your movement would face- it is
>>by far the easiest.
>
>nothing happening here is out of the ordinary or dirty.
>people drop out of races and endorse another candidate all the
>time.

Right. If anything, why isn't it more concerning that no candidate has dropped out and endorsed Bernie? If the winds were really blowing Bernie's way, you'd think someone would endorse.


Warren might not even endorse him. Of course *they* will torch her if that happens, but when will they stop and ask why he hasn't fostered more support, etc?

And regardless of why he doesn't have support, how is he going to pass his agenda with so little support *in his own party*?


the only answer I ever got was he'll hold rallies in Manchins backyard. lol


>
>the problem with positioning yourself as a fighter against the
>establishment...the establishment can fight back too. and it
>usually wins.
>
>*you* drew the line in the sand and placed everyone else on
>the other side of it.

Exactly. Even Warren, the 2nd most progressive candidate in the race who is a lot closer to Bernie than say Pete...is a snake, etc.

There is no room to move that line in the sand an inch.

>
>maybe bernie can win. maybe he cant. but he isnt entitled to
>the nomination. and candidates throwing their weight behind
>another candidate (for any reason) isnt stealing/rigging
>anything.

I think that has been the most shocking aspect of his run this time- the sense of entitlement which a lot of Bernie supporters (and myself) were disgusted by in Hillary and her supporters last time.



>
>i give trump a lot of credit on this one aspect. he went up
>against the republican party establishment *and* fox news.
>and won. thats a 'movement'. took the entire party from its
>gatekeepers and it wasnt even close.

Yeah I'm trying to remember if the party rallied around Ted or whoever but I can't remember. Seems like it was 15 years ago at this point.

>
>i do have a genuine question about bernie. what does it say
>about your ability to lead a party that you never really took
>the time/effort to develop these important political
>relationships in? where are your loyal allies and
>beneficiaries of your political capital and good will?

Dog, I've never gotten an answer.

He's running like an outsider, but hes been in congress for 30 fucking years or whatever.

Why doesn't he have more support/friends? Why wasn't he able to accomplish more? Why did it take so long for him to build a movement? If he loses, will he still hold rallies in Manchin's back yard for the cause?

And more importantly, what will he/they do if/when these questions are posed in the general.


>
>who have you bailed out in a tough race? whose legislation
>have you took the torch on and dragged across the finish line?
> who are your long time friends in congress that you have old
>drinking stories with?


>if bernie does indeed win...im not sure people are just gonna
>stick their necks out for him because hes the president. why
>would these folks trust that you have their best interests at
>heart too?
>

Right. How will he pass M4A when he will have a hard enough time getting support from Dems, let alone the GOP?

AND he won't nuke the filibuster?

The answer is the movement will hold rallies, but I don't see why that still can't happen then.

I not sure the party will be reshaped or cowed like the GOP has been by trump and the MAGAS, the old guard of the dem party (Nancy, steny, chuck, clyburn) is a lot less pliable than the cowards and helpless in the GOP

I think Bernie is a good and principled person for the most part, but I don’t understand his thought process in making everyone you will need to work with your enemies.

If you know from get the GOP is gonna block everything you do, then you have alienated and antagonized ur own party and ur movement has a ceiling, where do u go from there? What do you do as president?

primarying the Black man back in 2011

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnBhtwKRFhA

lmao.

-->

https://twitter.com/donttrythis/status/1234617441264832512

myth busted!



or something

Significant bounces going Biden's way. I know, shocking.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/485660-polls-show-big-bounce-to-biden-ahead-of-super-tuesday

-->

https://twitter.com/JoshNBCNews/status/1234864174712446979
-----
JUST IN: @MikeBloomberg here in Miami describes the state is the race this way: “Joe’s taking votes away from me.”
-----

man if yall dont come get your boy.

And he just goes away.

oh you mean bloomberg.



yes to both.

he has no place in this election except to atone for painting the Senate red and turning that money toward Democratic Senate races.

If she does endorse this morning I wonder if even though it’s day of Super Tuesday if it’ll be seen at “too late”.

In a fair and just world my kink would be reading horrible political takes and I’d spend my days just squirming in my seat on the edge of explosion.

That just needs to go away

Why would a man that worked for an agency that is typically nonpartisan feel the need to endorse anyone?

Fuck James Comey

These huge shifts never happen this early.

*beyond who you want to win i.e.*


1. what are some of the things you are looking at -vis a vis turnout -to give you hope for nov 2020?
- for me: i'd like to see a higher percentage of voters overall
- and especially younger people. its crucial they get involved in the political sphere
- there's probably other demographic breakdowns i should look at (race, e.g.), but my priority is turn out and young folk

2. how will the results affect how you vote down-ballot in nov
- are you voting for an all dems ticket or are you... being selective (i am thinking congressional seats here, tbh)
- are you thinking about the local elections as well - e.g. i voted for the primary for cummings seat here (MD) and i think there's a mayoral election too that is pivotal. i am definitely very much focused on the local level

3. are you planning on campaigning, canvassing, getting out the vote, etc. regardless of the nominee
- i think this one is interesting. for me, i am kind of unsure.
i have canvassed before... I lean on yes, because that idiot in the white house, his cabinet needs to go - as do most republicans
but i guess this question really should be is your political activism based on who the eventual nominee will be or are you aware of the threat that a 2nd 45 term carries and its all hands on deck.

or
4. are you one of those who think in *some* cases (e.g. if your preferred nominee does not win) then you can live with a 2nd term for trump? this i am curious about.
(full disclosure: i felt that way about bloomberg - like if he won i'd be like fuck it not voting. but then.... when i think of the judiciary (not just SC - what mcconnell as been doing with these lifetime appointments)... and i will vote for a toothpick before i sit out nov 2020.

other questions?

> - and especially younger people. its crucial they get
>involved in the political sphere

looks like the trend is continuing today:
https://twitter.com/spettypi/status/1234969189321973760
-----
Breaking news: young people still don't vote. In NBC News exit poll, 13 percent of voters were between 18-29
-----

even tho turnout was up generally in concluded states so far in terms of raw numbers (not sure about percentage wise like you indicated)...young voter and 1st time voter participation has been lagging.

>even tho turnout was up generally in concluded states so far
>in terms of raw numbers (not sure about percentage wise like
>you indicated)...young voter and 1st time voter participation
>has been lagging.

and, again, really makes the argument that Bernie will bring in young voters...uh, shaky at best.


https://apps.npr.org/liveblogs/20200303-super-tuesday/share/youth-vote-not-keeping-pace-55.html


More importantly, its scary as we go into the general. What WOULD scare the kids enough to vote?

this is reminding me of the last election in australia.

the liberal (lower case) party over there (labor) decided to make climate change a centerpiece to their election strategy expecting to energize young voters.

the conservative party (named the liberal party) trailed in polls the entire time and then ended up pulling off a surprise victory that nobody thought they would win (sound familiar?). young voters didnt turn out like that (among other issues).

people's enthusiasm.

are the same (even tho one party cares about climate change...an issue the overwhelmingly resonates with young people) is suppressing their vote.

i mean...young voters arent even turning out for bernie (who is supposedly going to upend the establishment).

>*beyond who you want to win i.e.*
>
>
>1. what are some of the things you are looking at -vis a vis
>turnout -to give you hope for nov 2020?
> - for me: i'd like to see a higher percentage of voters
>overall
> - and especially younger people. its crucial they get
>involved in the political sphere
> - there's probably other demographic breakdowns i should look
>at (race, e.g.), but my priority is turn out and young folk
>
the latinx vote could be key in the general and might be something that we see signs of tonight in california and texas. did trump succeed in scaring them/us or will we see a surge?

>2. how will the results affect how you vote down-ballot in
>nov
> - are you voting for an all dems ticket or are you... being
>selective (i am thinking congressional seats here, tbh)
> - are you thinking about the local elections as well - e.g. i
>voted for the primary for cummings seat here (MD) and i think
>there's a mayoral election too that is pivotal. i am
>definitely very much focused on the local level
im pretty much vote D all the way come general. not sure i have any other option besides R or libertarian. i was overwhelmed at how many options i had with local and state offices. i am definitely interested to see what happens in the senate, as a texan i need to see a democrat unseat cornyn. this race kind of mimics whats happening in the general. the likely outcome of tonight is a runoff between a "moderate" and a "liberal".

>
>3. are you planning on campaigning, canvassing, getting out
>the vote, etc. regardless of the nominee
> - i think this one is interesting. for me, i am kind of
>unsure.
>i have canvassed before... I lean on yes, because that idiot
>in the white house, his cabinet needs to go - as do most
>republicans
>but i guess this question really should be is your political
>activism based on who the eventual nominee will be or are you
>aware of the threat that a 2nd 45 term carries and its all
>hands on deck.
this might depend on the candidate. its going to be hard to get myself to push people to vote for bloomberg. i wouldnt be excited to do so for biden either. maybe for the senate race. because of trump i do feel the urgency to do what i can.

>
>or
>4. are you one of those who think in *some* cases (e.g. if
>your preferred nominee does not win) then you can live with a
>2nd term for trump? this i am curious about.
>(full disclosure: i felt that way about bloomberg - like if he
>won i'd be like fuck it not voting. but then.... when i think
>of the judiciary (not just SC - what mcconnell as been doing
>with these lifetime appointments)... and i will vote for a
>toothpick before i sit out nov 2020.
i think im getting over bloomberg, IF he is the choice somehow then i will vote for him over trump. lets just hope thats not the case.

>
>other questions?
ive noticed in most of the elections so far theres a pundit on cnn (i think) that seems to be calling the shots. he urged amy to come out and act positive before the iowa results and she did it and had that big bump in NH. really early on saturday he was demanding that the moderates drop out and unify. ill definitely be looking to see what he says tonight. im curious to see what the overall narrative is tonight.

> i am definitely interested to see what happens in the
>senate, as a texan i need to see a democrat unseat cornyn.
>this race kind of mimics whats happening in the general. the
>likely outcome of tonight is a runoff between a "moderate" and
>a "liberal".

that i am hoping will lose in november.
corryn is mos def on that list.
as is lindsey and collins
i need to look at who else is up
but tbh, i am hoping all republican senators up for reelection lose their seats
hoping that will send a message to that useless party to get its act together
and find some goddamn principals

*which is very welcome and should be a bigger focus than just the presidency
without the senate we are going nowhere

specifically this in NC

Sen Murphy
https://twitter.com/ChrisMurphyCT/status/1235026688699817989
"Army veteran Cal Cunningham won the North Carolina Senate primary tonight.

Polls show him LEADING in the general, and if he wins, then Democrats win the Senate.

Liu
https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1235026341495332864
"In a recent NBC/Marist poll, Army Veteran Cal Cunningham beats @realDonaldTrump enabler Thom Tillis 48% to 43%."


i'd like to see more of this.
without the house and senate we are wasting time and space

over 40% more than the next candidate (sanders)

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1234993629321519104
-----
Black voters in Virginia via preliminary @CNN exit polls:

Biden 63% (!)
Sanders 18%
Bloomberg 10%
Warren 7%
Klobuchar 1%
Steyer 1%
-----

biden actually outperformed the exit polls in sc among black voters and might do that here too.

so biden is putting up these massive margins with black voters in the region where the majority of black voters live...but bernie is supposed to be polling ahead of biden with black voters nationally?

where is vex with his 'the data shows' ass?

*and maybe elite*
there may be some *low information voters* thrown in there too

in much the same way they did with SC

i cant wait for this shit to be over

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Virginia_Democratic_primary

so he increased his support by 2%.

this is even worse when you consider biden most likely lost some small degree of black support to bloomberg too (weird to type out). bidens margins could conceivably be even bigger.

red rose twitter told me bernie was making inroads with black voters and had the broadest most diverse coalition known to man.

>
>red rose twitter told me bernie was making inroads with black
>voters and had the broadest most diverse coalition known to
>man.

1,344 delegates are at stake tonight. Here's how they break down:

CA = 415
TX = 228
NC = 110
VA = 99
MA = 91
MN = 75
CO = 67
TN = 64
AL = 52
OK = 37
AR = 31
UT = 29
ME = 24
VT = 16
American Samoa = 6

He finally found a spot where luxury fascism was a winning message. Proud of our boy. He earned this.

what a strange country.

who are these people?

Unlike Warren, she's an actual Indigenous person.
-->

There lol. Must be nice to have money to blow

And they went for the soda banning guy...

I can just smell the Biden/Amy bumper stickers being printed.
-->

That place affirms its status as the absolute worst. Sure, there are horrifying ghouls elsewhere, but riding lawnmower dads who are (reasonably) suspicious that their wife is having an affair with their yoga instructor *love* Joe Biden.

>That place affirms its status as the absolute worst. Sure,
>there are horrifying ghouls elsewhere, but riding lawnmower
>dads who are (reasonably) suspicious that their wife is having
>an affair with their yoga instructor *love* Joe Biden.

Somehow, this couldn't be more accurate lol.

-->

Just beautiful, quaint and tasteful homes on huge plots of land for people who trundle off to work to do morally shocking things in service of American capitalism and return home to whatever the 2020's version of pot roast is. Like a kale salad with shrimp or what the fuck ever.

I actually still work at that spot. I just changed my route because I wanted to not start my day in despair. And also because of a speedtrap.

moving cali up in the calendar really helped him because he had a shit ton more money than everyone else (besides mike/tom) and could run a more robust campaign operation in the state.

candidates used to go through the calendar...raise money as they gained momentum and the field narrowed down...then made their play in ca.

so bernie *should* do really well there (with the lion share of their massive 400 delegates). especially with much of the early vote already banked before biden got that post-sc momentum.

but if bernie underperforms and biden (with his 1 padlocked state field office lol) overperforms...then houston we have a problem.

He sweeps the south - looks competitive in Mass and Maine early on. That alone may neutralize a lot of the Cali gains for Sanders.

Sanders has to have a strong plurality (if not a majority) to win the nomination. Sanders needs breakout wins in both California *and* Texas to hold a substantial lead.


-->

obviously still early and anything can happen.

but with all of the chaos/disorder/abnormality of the last few years...its pretty remarkable how much broader historical trends have held up.

since 1988 (jesse jackson).

and sc has picked the dem nominee every election since 1980 except for 2004 (john edwards...from sc).

and that was with an incumbent with post-9/11 60% approval at election time.

but this is an entirely different convo.

Bernie and Biden are both old white men lol

-->

but given where we started at the beginning of this thing
its really disappointing that *this* is where we end
from quite a broad and refreshing field to basically this.


so no. that's not what my statement meant at all.

our diversity at the presidential level has basically been old white guy or young white guy lol. then that 1 muslim lol.

that would be a contrast to the idiot-in-chief
i think back to the broad field we started with
and its down to this, lol


i don't know if this is evidence of a broken primary system
or the fund-raising challenges of campaigning
or... shit i don't know

but overall its disappointing.

here's hoping we have enough to beat 45

no dream candidates available this go round and i borderline hate everyone still left in the race lol.

its gonna be a tough haul come november. hopefully president obama got some juice left in him.

is wild.

that nytimes story had me thinking buzzards were circling his lifeless campaign and now dude is rolling like john kerry post iowa.

But I'll never, ever understand for the life of me how people think Joe Biden can beat Trump in a general election.

What a shitshow the DNC is.

>But I'll never, ever understand for the life of me how people
>think Joe Biden can beat Trump in a general election.
>
>What a shitshow the DNC is.

...but this primary is just as much about stopping Sanders as it is anything else for a lot of Dem party power brokers.

Biden will get W A S H E D in a general.


-->

somehow the inept and largely useless dnc is also some omnipresent mind control operation.

what if the majority of democratic party voters just arent enamored with the politics of senator sanders (and his campaign/surrogates)?

why do bernie supporters have such difficulty believing that?

a lot of people just like someone else more. its not a sin.

plus pissing off the establishment is also pissing off real people who put that establishment in office.

i mean...if i constantly insult and demonize the dallas cowboys...i wouldnt be surprised if most of their fans turn against me!

-->

It’s over.

We are so fucked.

If she doesnt drop out after tonight....

Him right now, shoulda let the GOP primary play out and let Sanford and weld get beat so he could hear his name as a winner

Racking up a handful of delagates here and there.

Looking like a contested convention is in the works

But if you can't see that Warren is actively harming him at this point, I dunno what to tell you.

Once it became clear the thumb was on the scale for Biden, she should have dropped out after not even coming close to winning a state.

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1235002030378422272
-----
Sanders's pledge to bring new voters into his movement seems fairly empty in the results we're seeing so far. His coalition has shrunk since 2016, not grown.
-----

its not just the multiple candidates. its the margins that bernie has lost ground on. like the white working class in oklahoma where he cleaned clintons clock.

he might still pull off the nomination but it isnt because of some broad unifying movement. its just a fervent concentrated hardline base and him being able to capitalize off a divided field.

anti establishment and insurgent politics are hard to pull off on the left. the dem base isnt really built that way. we generally believe in institutions and opening arms to people. bernie and his campaign would have been served better to take a 'catch more flies with honey' approach instead of inciting non-pro-bernie voters.

Race helped mask it (to some) but his ceiling is very real.

Just purely on some political G shit, I don't think I've seen anything like this since I've been paying attention to politics.

Outside of some serious The Wire/Game of Thrones shit on the DNC's part (which happened, obviously)...who the hell LIKES Joe Biden?

of this. On the whole, people are irrational, and impressionable.

Biden rose from some legitimately earned bad showings in the first several states in order to accomplish something that everybody already thought he was going to do. We patted him on the back and endowed his earned, but expected victory with the notion of momentum and now we're here.

The interesting thing is everybody is pretending that it's not a real possibility that he'll sound like his brain doesn't work next time he's asked to speak extemporaneously. We've all seen him in the debates over the last several months and in some of his sort of surreal showdowns with regular voters over fairly normal disagreements. And I'm not saying this in a "he can't lead" kind of way (because his actual beliefs are sufficient evidence of that) but in a "he may reveal that he does not have a full grasp of reality on live TV by telling a made-up story about a civil rights figure and calling a debate moderator dollface."

So far it's looking like VT is the only state Bernie will win at all. That's so blatantly ridiculous that laughter is the only response that makes any sense to me. Like a surprise plot twist in, as you mentioned GoT. Or at least shocking, like Silvio killing Adrianna on the Sopranos. Like an "OH SHIT!!!" moment at the end of the next-to-last episode of "Election: 2020:.

*from what i've read/seen

e.g.: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/02/us/politics/2020-democratic-delegates.html
and astead has had some excellent reporting when it comes to the black vote. *including SC

what does it mean when we are throwing around establishment, power brokers, etc
dont you think it is dismissive of black folk who are choosing to back biden? regardless of what *you* think of him or your preferences?

explain yourselves
im trying to understand here

otherwise it sounds like y'all picking a bogeyman here

happened to me the other day with 2 people
i was talking about something related to the 2016 election
(basically my mentor wrote two of her nephews out of her will because she *suspected* they voted for trump. she has no kids
until a mutual friend convinced her to at least find out first - and one nephew was lucky enough to get back in the will)

they were like
so if he votes for bernie this time doesn't that earn him some points?
me: i doubt she's forgiving 2016. and also doubt she's a bernie supporter. i mean i am #teamwarren - im pretty sure she is too

they pull that oh 'establishment', elite move
and i was like hold on wait a minute, wtf?
these are two white boys.
it was like an automated response


i'm so over it.

let people choose whomever they want to vote for without
tossing punditry sounding labels at them
its not the purity olympics

here's a funny
https://twitter.com/Freeyourmindkid/status/1235011258904203265

just piedpipering black folks toward the campaign.

now theyre mad at democrats for bringing them into the 'political process' *bernie hand circles*

Much progress with Black voters. They had all manner of numbers and polls to back that up. Votes are the ultimate deciders. I love primaries, just give me the raw numbers

Because of anything he's accomplished.
What happens when a party panders to a lost case?
You open up this seismic and intractable gap between the young and old.
No candidate was going to bridge that gap
But older always vote
And younger people don't, and have more road blocks to do so when they try.

The finger should be firmly pointed at the Democratic party for this divide where either a Biden candidacy or a Sanders candidacy doesn't represent the wishes of a sizeable portion of the party.

That would be a huge win and serve to neutralize Biden's Southern gains.

People (rightfully) talk about the vital importance of the Black vote - but don't talk enough about the Latinx vote. This is an emerging demo that Sanders seemingly has resonated with - and would be huge for the Democratic party if they could capture the imagination of the emerging Latinx generations to come.

-->

cuz if it was just up to election day post biden momentum from sc...itd be messy.

biden could still get over the hump with election day vote in tx. but the early vote is most likely dampening his gains.

bloomberg is clearly siphoning off *a lot* of votes as well.

sanders should prolly thank him too lol.

Biden will get a good chunk of dels from Texas if this holds, no blow out...

>People (rightfully) talk about the vital importance of the
>Black vote - but don't talk enough about the Latinx vote.
>This is an emerging demo that Sanders seemingly has resonated
>with - and would be huge for the Democratic party if they
>could capture the imagination of the emerging Latinx
>generations to come.

will biden be able to turn out the latinx vote vs trump? i think a significant percentage might stay home.

Bernie above 15 in every state except Alabama

Definitely a two person race, both with come out with big hauls of dels.

The narrative remains up in the air

https://twitter.com/KatyTurNBC/status/1235024725467754498
-----
Biden wins Tennessee @NBCNews projects. 62 percent of the black vote goes to Biden.
-----

when dude said black voters were his firewall...he wasnt lying.

those polls showing sanders ahead nationally with black voters look craaaaaazy.

By winning a delegate, the DNC rule change may mean she's now able to return to the debates.

#ThanksBloomberg
-->

i definitely want to see less people on the debates, for now it could be 4 which is much better than it has been. really should be 2 but im sure tulsi will show up if they dont find a way to not invite her or she doesnt drop out.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1235026060514701313
-----
Steve Kornacki notes on @MSNBC that Democratic turnout in Virginia has nearly doubled from 2016.
-----

and sleepy joe won it overwhelmingly. a lot of narratives getting put to bed.

where bernie beat clinton by 10+ points.

fam if bernie is coughing up wwc midwestern states to unk unk...

So quickly. Primaries definitely get ppl hyped and engaged for the general

not just because of trump and how much is on the line.

but just so we can have a historical reminder that we can fight viciously among ourselves to the point where it feels like we hate each other...then form like motherfucking voltron when its time to boot out some bitch ass republicans.

I want whatever y'all are smoking.

-->

lol jk.

-->

But it’s true. A good portion of Bernie supporters aren’t even democrats and exclaim it proudly. I’m talking about democrats, sorry not sorry.

to have any chance for your boy Joe Biden to beat Trump.

Otherwise it's a landslide.

-->

Y’all true colors are showing. I haven’t factored Bernie diehards into my equations for a while, I’m thinking about Obama trump voters in PA, Wi, and Mich. voters who found HRC off putting, im thinking about Black voters who stayed home in those states in 16. That’s who we’ll need

after you've been generalizing and throwing everyone under a "y'all BBs" box for months lol.

It don't work like that playboy.

-->

Alone tonight, I can tell ur hurting. It’ll be ok

-->

I hate this country
https://twitter.com/tomwfranck/status/1235010281656455170

Can't talk about a political revolution when all these old voter's 401ks are tanking

now its looking like biden could take it.

Up aces.

outside of her home state - and she's going to finish 3rd there! If she doesn't reach the 15% threshold in Cali this was a horrible miscalculation on her part to stay in the race.

Her brand is going to take real damage from this. Can't even carry your home state tho?! yikes.

-->

Person race in multiple posts. I know u looking for something to make this night feel better but let’s focus on Bernie and Biden lol

Stop attacking women, leave my Lizzy alone

>Stop attacking women, leave my Lizzy alone

You've been shitting on the Indigenous woman (and the only POC) still standing in the race for weeks.

And I've literally canvassed for Warren. But call it like it is: This is an ugly look for her.

-->

I couldn’t vote her. That’s all I’ve said. Find the replies. They don’t exist, u have me confused. Wipe the tears out of ur eyes and carry on lol

"wipe the tears out of your eyes"

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

What are your thoughts?

I think there's some truth to it but last night would have still been a huge turning point for Biden either way.

Millions, Steyer spent millions and Biden barely spent anything at all(becuz he didn’t have it lol) and is cleaning up. Barely had campaign offices in some of these states

Name ID and earned media mean a lot

He'll make it rain on whoever the nom is in the general.

The 500 mil he already has spent

one of the dumbest campaigns ever.

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1234999750052675586
-----
(video)

Reporter: "Would a third-place finish be good?"

Michael Bloomberg: "If there's only 3 candidates you can't do worse than that."

Reporter: "Well there is Elizabeth Warren also."

Michael Bloomberg: "I didn't realize she's still in, is she?" #SuperTuesday
-----

and to think - he could've cleaned up Flint's water instead of this vanity project.

-->

and coming in a distant 3rd at best.

www.Tupreme.com

Becuz if it’s not, it’s not just a bad night for sanders, it’s a super bad night

We’ll see, cali been voting since Iowa. So a lot is already baked in

that early vote is saving a lot of the bleeding in states like tx and presumably ca like you mentioned.

but them margins still might not be where he wants them to be.

he may still end up the delegate and pop vote leader but we all know what the real story of today was.

and the story should also be that Sanders may very well still be able to win a plurality - but not a majority threshold to win the nomination outright.

Ain't no way the Super Delegates nominate Sanders.

Joey Biden bout to make Trump look like an intellectual on the debate stage lmao.

-->

-->

and will be ready to fight to ensure nothing major changes

Man... Biden on the mic is scary.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Trump was threatening to not debate the Dem nominee - but after tonight he's def gotta be reconsidering that.

Biden bout to make Trump look like a gifted orator lol.

-->

i will just wait to vote blue no matter who in november

even if biden shits his pants on stage, i am still voting for him if he's the nominee
i need the orange menace and his team of lackeys (devos, pompeo, munichin, carson, kucineli, kudrow etc) out.

its amazing that *this* is where we are at.

>i will just wait to vote blue no matter who in november
>
>even if biden shits his pants on stage, i am still voting for
>him if he's the nominee
>i need the orange menace and his team of lackeys (devos,
>pompeo, munichin, carson, kucineli, kudrow etc) out.
>
>its amazing that *this* is where we are at.

of all time, and might get Super Bowl types ratings. And it will be a complete, total, and utter shitshow.

and continue to be underestimated in polling/analysis/etc.

and also the media needs to smack itself for how much content and narrative priority it devoted to iowa and new hampshire.

had people thinking biden was dead and moderates were gonna consolidate around p booty.

Clyburn changed the entire course of the 2008 primary when he shocked the Dem Establishment and rocked with Obama.

In 2020 - he did the exact opposite - shocking the world and siding w/ the Establishment.

Clyburn got that juice.


-->

of establishment vs 'progressive'.

i think it would help with a lot of blind spots.

It is binary to view politics as simply a tension of left v. right - which is the tendency of most analysts. Viewing it under the lens of multiple factions vying for the heart of the party infers multiple perspectives *within* each partisan banner - which creates a spectrum of political views that are defined as "Left".

This primary was very much about progressive policies/platforms (Sanders/Warren) against the eventual moderate consolidation of power within the old guard of the party.

Pointing that out isn't being "binary" - it's just observing the tensions within the party.



-->

on the West Coast. That "Brown wall" (c) Chuck Rocha in Texas is holding for Sanders with the Latinx vote thus far. He wins Colorado (where Biden gets zero delegates) - and wins Utah. If he gets a big win out of California - he might actually run up the delegate lead a bit to close out.

But what a surprise in Massachusetts w/ Biden winning there.

-->

3 working machines in one location?

Charlotte usually has like 8 to 10 machines in each spot.

We dropped our votes off yesterday.



>3 working machines in one location? .
>
>Charlotte usually has like 8 to 10 machines in each spot.
>
>

That means it's a significant margin.

Huge for Sanders.

-->

obviously ca was the crown jewel and could ultimately tip the balance.

ma and tx looking like tossups right now but both seem to be leaning biden.

most of the states biden won he didnt even have a field operation in or spend any money on air time.

once again...bernie should be grateful he got them early votes banked when much of the press had written off biden. it could have been a lot worse for him if election day was a bigger share of the vote.

Undeniable failure on his and his campaigns part.

Cali saved him from an utterly ruinous night but it’s still squashes his front runner status completely

With Biden having a ground game in most of theses states that could be best be described as amateur hour, vs Bernie’s well funded and established ground game, it just really drives home that voters weren’t sold on him as the nom, myself included obviously

Biden dominates the Black vote; Sanders dominates the Latinx vote

Sanders should walk away with a delegate lead tonight (after California numbers roll in).

This is going to be a long march to the convention - and likely an ugly one.

-->

to pull the young people who have the most at stake

and i'm also not "young"...

...so maybe they have done this and I'm unaware by why isn't Bernie (despite his own age) speaking directly to young voters literally, like saying "yo, the future is for the youth, you gotta stop letting these old outta touch fucks run the world. they make shitty policies for y'all and they aren't gonna be here much longer but YOU will have to live under them."

i realize the irony of that coming from someone who is 78 but there's also an age limit to run and buttigieg (sp?) was the youngest of course but he's fairly unappealing to the youth it seemed.

i dunno. that approach just seems so obvious yet i've never heard anyone say it. like, lead a youth revolt basically.

does everything you say he should do.

draws massive rallies full of them. obviously connects with them.

but he doesnt seem to be inspiring them to actually vote.

i have no idea why that is but im genuinely curious about whats going on.

Matter and dems are just as bad as repubs. When ur in college is easy to be caught up in movements and go to rallies, be around like minded ppl, hearing someone u have affinity for saying the things u want to hear and...then go back to ur dorm room and say how awesome that was

I’ve always suspected that a good number of people at his rallies don’t actually vote.

And he brings it on himself, when u speak about revolution so much and not electoral and political realities u can’t be mad when that doesn’t translate

it looks like bernie coughed up leads in tx and me.

cali basically saved bernies night.

Massachusetts and Maine were quite close (Vermont doesn't count lol).

It's in those two states (and California) where Warren really ate into potential Sanders votes.

But there's no doubt that it was a monstrous night for Biden - which is why I'm calling the race for him lol.


-->

even 2 states where sanders had significant polling leads against the field.

sanders spent money and time in these places.

wait til biden gets this rush of fundraising and an actual ground operation.

>wait til biden gets this rush of fundraising and an actual
>ground operation.

Biden didn't even have a field office open in Virginia and he bodied the entire state. Bloomberg has spent nearly a billion dollars - littered the states with his offices and egregious staffing operatives - and he performed horribly.

Biden's winning because the moderate base has consolidated around him - and the progressive base remains somewhat fractured.


-->

theres something more going on than just moderate consolidation lol.

I didn’t think it would have this much of an impact tho.

I think what we are seeing is Hilldawg had a lot of resistance from Dems in 2016 and Biden is getting working class whites

What’s crazy is dude isn’t even showing up to states. He got that Obama fairy dust on him.

Still worried me because he doesn’t sound too hot on the mic.

Bloomberg took a lot more votes away from Biden than Warren took from Sanders.

The 'progressives' just didn't come out to vote.

>Biden's winning because the moderate base has consolidated
>around him - and the progressive base remains somewhat
>fractured.

-->

sanders had a 10 point lead on biden in tx just a few *days* ago.

bloomberg is even eating into bidens tally.

a constant theme tonight.

seriously who were these pollsters who had bernie competitive and even winning black voters nationally?

he also had the same amount of time to engage young voters and drive their turnout up.

do you think there will ever be any introspection from him or his folks on why they havent been as successful as they thought they would be?

im reading some of the condescending tweets of some of his surrogates about people who voted for other candidates and im guessing nah.

because that's where most of the voters are

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

I still maintain that at least half of warren voters would go to Biden anyway. But she definitely was part of Bernie having a terrible night

gonna be hilarious when he loses and those same black voters become the scapegoat!

Trump winning another four years and Black ppl being blamed is not my idea of a laugh. I know u all’s emotions are raw but let’s not go off the deep end

like stereotypical youtube/twitter bernie bro type shit (and i dont even like to throw that term around).

but I am serious about not giving a fuck IF Black Biden voters get scapegoated.

the calculus of trying to figure out what white folks are gonna do when the rubber hits the road are real. there was something particularly defiant and petty about this move. not low info, but high disinfo.

I struggle to understand how someone looks at Joe Biden rationally and think "yeah, that guy's beating Trump... just because." he has no movement, he campaigned nowhere, there's no platform, there's no indication that people are going to come out in numbers to kick Trump out.

and if that happens I'm not gonna party, except on those getting their rocks off it not being Bernie. ESPECIALLY if they're Black. ESPECIALLY if they're Black conservative converts.

you play dumb nigga games, win dumb nigga prizes.


if all these votes went to Warren, I would not have the same response as I do with Biden.

im not sure why you would find any enjoyment in that.

you been sounding really uncharacteristic lately.

He deployed a competent and committed group of Black surrogates and received the resounding endorsement from 100+ prominent Black scholars who touted his platform as being the most advantageous for Black (and all) lives in America:

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/02/29/step-away-fascism-and-toward-brighter-more-just-future-100-black-writers-and

Meanwhile, Joe Biden was Obama's VP and has never done anything of note to earn the Black vote.

To say that Biden made any effort to court the Black vote is just flat out wrong. He's borrowing the Obama brand. That's it.

-->

it's because black people are flawed, since bernie's campaign plan was flawless.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

I know you've been working hard for this moment.

-->

I looked for people online who I disagreed with and yelled at them.

surely it earned hundreds of votes.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

This board scattered and hid like roaches.

why do you think bernie has such trouble with supposedly weak candidates?

why isnt he providing a more compelling alternative?

i mean...you can blame it on the old establishment, low info voters, barack residue, or whatever.

but after all of the investment you mentioned...along with him supposedly being the strongest candidate to put together a broad coalition in the general...he cant even get young people to turnout for him.

why do you think that is?

Bernie is an outsider - trying to redefine what it means to be a "Democrat" -- and the party stalwarts see him as a threat (because he is).

At the end of the day - Bernie is an immensely popular Senator - but he took on so many big fights. He is trying to fight big money in politics - the military industrial complex - the billionaire class - and the old-guard Establishment within *both* parties.

It was simply too tall of an order for anyone to take on - especially a near 80 y.o. Senator from a small state.

That said, win or lose, Sanders has inspired an entire new generation of politically active citizens.

It may just turn out to be that he was a prolific messenger who spoke of an America that is not quite ripe - not yet.


-->

I'm not sure if you volunteer for the campaign, etc.

But if so- please, please try and raise a point about learning some lessons here.

This wasn't the establishment. This wasn't party stalwarts. This wasn't big money.

This was a majority of voters- the people who actually showed up to cast a ballot- choosing a senile segregationist apologist over the movement.


The question ya'll should be asking- it how the fuck did that happen? And...what can we do better moving forward?

Hillary was an awful candidate...yet Bernie lost to her.

Joe is an awful candidate...yet Bernie is losing to him.


We all want the same things here- but the movement needs to learn some big lessons, man.

Big lessons.






>Bernie is an outsider - trying to redefine what it means to
>be a "Democrat" -- and the party stalwarts see him as a threat
>(because he is).
>
>At the end of the day - Bernie is an immensely popular Senator
>- but he took on so many big fights. He is trying to fight
>big money in politics - the military industrial complex - the
>billionaire class - and the old-guard Establishment within
>*both* parties.
>
>It was simply too tall of an order for anyone to take on -
>especially a near 80 y.o. Senator from a small state.
>
>That said, win or lose, Sanders has inspired an entire new
>generation of politically active citizens.
>
>It may just turn out to be that he was a prolific messenger
>who spoke of an America that is not quite ripe - not yet.
>
>
>-->

>gonna be hilarious when he loses and those same black voters
>become the scapegoat!

it really reads as though this is where you are at.

i mean... my preferred candidate lost, but i am also very clear that there's nothing i want more than the orange menace out of the white house


is this not the case here?

Doc, Reeq & I all think Biden gets washed in the general.

This ain't about what we want to happen. We're waaay beyond that.


-->

and coalesce around the nominee
he loses if we decide to sit this out because republicans will not do the same.
and i think we have shown that we have the mettle to actually turn up, organize and vote (2018 midterms)

so... perhaps the question here should be are we really saying that if its biden we are willing to risk the presidency, house and senate?
i definitely are not saying that
at this stage bernie is my last choice (bloomy doesn't count)
but if he's the nominee, i defintely want to see him winning
and that includes turning up, organizing and voting.

what are we really saying?

This man is rallying thousands upon thousands everywhere he goes - and has won the narrative (even if it's full of lies and deceit). I don't think you beat Trump (when it's already historically difficult to beat an incumbent) by rolling out the same losing Hillary/Kerry/Gore recipe that has proven to be a losing formula.

Politics is not so much about left/right anymore as it is establishment vs. anti-establishment. We are in an anti-establishment era - and Dems are insistent on running the most traditional/establishment candidates that they can get away with coming out of the primary.

I'm sure most if not all of us here will vote for Biden. I'm also sure that legions of young voters who are aggrieved by this primary process and feel bullied will sit it out. Biden is a risky prospect when it comes to the very real possibility of depressing voter turnout. Obama won largely because he was able to bring out a lot of new/younger voters in large numbers. Biden may be borrowing the Obama brand - but he sure ain't Obama.

-->

I mean i am waiting to see the polling but it doesn't seem as though there were multitudes of young people participating in the primaries
and that's already a red flag.

i don't know about 'we are in an anti-establishment' period.
i don't know where you get this from.
if the political arena was about establishment vs anti then the progressives in the race would've done *much* better regardless of whatever else and certainly the 'establishment'
its the voters that count and my reading is that the voters aren't where *we* think they are.

>I'm sure most if not all of us here will vote for Biden.

and i hope this is the case - but i am not certain
in 2016 the electoral win was based on ~a 70k vote difference (i believe - this could be wrong)
and while we can talk about gerrymandering and all that
i also think dems failing to coalesce around the nominee plays a role in this
and this will be the same case if we do this again.

republicans dont have these qualms.
we are here projecting failure - i dont get it at all

if we lose? its going to be because of this right here
republicans arent losing sleep over voting for an idiot

def wont find any enjoyment in it.

just historically things are pointing to a biden loss.

but i will bust my ass to do everything possible to help him defy history.

a lot of the remaining big delegate states are guaranteed biden victories in fl, ga, and pa. and states biden could conceivably pull off (especially after the momentum bump) like ny and il.

biden winning states like fl, ga, and pa alone would demonstrate his downballot potential in those crucial purple/swing races and why he should be the nominee.

the question then becomes would bernie folks accept the plurality winner.

Even the most generous projections of California show that Sanders still would come out of tonight short on delegate count to Biden.

-->

its crazy how all the information you consume and discussion you participate in can make you believe things are going one way.

then they just up and go the other way.

it would prolly only be a slight exaggeration if you said *nobody* thought this would be the result back on friday.

while bernie and supporters were raging at the establishment (aka the politicians and the people who vote for them)...candidates like biden kept their arms open to welcome those establishment candidates and voters into his base later down the line. aka coalition building.

do you think bernie is gonna get more desperate and go extra hard with the bomb throwing or do you think he will strike a more welcoming tone to possibly lure in voters from other candidates and expand his base?

if either one gets clear wins there they should be the nominee full stop.

because yes warren is progressive

this should be the takeaway
we clearly have a lot of work to do at the grassroots level
i am waiting to see the youth voter turn out - but if we cant get young people
to come out and vote for the very issues that directly affect them
then we are shit out of luck when it comes to older folk who want to protect their retirement money, tax breaks and way of living
this is not even about any single candidate right now
its about the fact that even though we are offering policies that *should* improve the life and wellbeing of most people
this message is not getting through
to me it's a credit to republicans - they have played a longer game than we have
they have solidly controlled the narrative (i mean... lets go beyond fox news and talk about radio, newspapers (sheldon) etc
lets talk about institutions - down to what schools can and should teach, they just sewed up the judiciary,
how we conflate military spending with patriotism
the fact that its only social welfare that needs to be budgeted for/accounted for etc
lets talk about the notions of morality and ethics and rights -
it feels as though even amongst us we are buying into a very narrow view of what society can and should look like (bootstraps, limited welfare state, low taxes etc)

i think that's my take away in all this.
how can we start to shift the narrative?
and it falls on all of us who want to see *something* different
its not a presidential cycle game... its really taking the longer-term approach
id love to see that happen.

otherwise?
*shrug*

Congrats strav.

-->

I thought he was the biggest mistake Barack Obama ever made.

But he's the strongest general election candidate we had running (other than maybe Harris).

November will still be an uphill battle. But it got easier tonight.

Chin up, though. If Biden loses then some next-generation Sandersite can lose to catastrophically to Mike Pence in 2024.

https://twitter.com/docrocktex26/status/1192562093133910017
——-
There’s NO path to the 2020 Democratic nomination that includes talking specious bullshit about Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. You can’t begin the primary process by alienating the base that ultimately decides the outcome but still expect to win it all. Stop it.
——-

Just like everyone expected, Sanders hit the same ceiling he did in '16. Turns out running against the Democratic party can only win you so many Democrats.

Just like everyone expected, the youth "movement" Sanders cultivated was hopelessly out of touch with the broader electorate.

Just like everyone expected, Warren got pigeonholed as too wonky.

Just like everyone expected, the Obama legacy wins out among Democrats even in a vessel as flawed as Joe Biden.

with a performance like this.

i at least expected bernie to juice up the young vote and dominate independents but he hasnt even done that.

he lost oklahoma so he will prolly catch a couple more losses in the midwest (where he dominated clinton).

and it looks like he will only hold a single digit lead in ca over biden even with bloomberg leeching moderate votes.

this wasnt a disaster but it might not even be a glass half full scenario either.

another bit of conventional wisdom that'd been forgotten:

Biden seems to have all the upside that Clinton had, but he's also doing better than she did with "white working class" voters (there's a euphemism that hasn't been thrown around in a while) and midwesterners.

just by being a man too.

i posted a poll a while ago with the difference between the favorability of male/females candidates among whites without college degrees...and it was stark.

i think its pretty clear that a lot those bernie votes in these type of areas were just anti hillary votes.

im not even sure what bernies exact coalition is right now. what states can you point to demographically and be confident bernies base can nail it down?

this election cycle.

i dont know if any of yall follow him but dude regularly posts false and pre spun shit to trash other candidates, stoke pro-bernie grievances, etc.

its at the point that even maddow had to call him out.

https://twitter.com/maddow/status/1235087826720456704

of *young* voters.

https://twitter.com/shaunking/status/1234864642490556417
-----
The single dumbest thing that could happen would be for the establishment of the Democratic Party to try to override the clear will and preference of YOUNG VOTERS.

This is the path to defeat.

Young voters LOATHE @JoeBiden. And for good reason.

He will lose to Trump. Period.
----

so now that it looks like bernie prolly wont represent the will of the voters...shaun king is demanding that the democratic party bow to the will of 10% of the voters.

theyre grasping at straws still tryna find ways to justify allegiance to their patron saint.

the nicknames that be popping up in his mentions from black twitter be killing me.

talcum x.
shames fraudwin.
shaka hulu.
vanigga ice.
hueless p newton.
w.e.b. dubleach.
t'chalka from wellkinda.
etc.

the other day.

https://twitter.com/Rob_Flaherty/status/1234684651802750981

https://twitter.com/DevonGrayCA/status/1234688923491688448

dude is forever on some chris broussard shit with 'several people have told me'.

he gets repeatedly exposed for it and still continues to do it.

And then failed to climb the mountain isn't on the up-and-up?

that's not shocking in the least

lol at Talcum X.

with under 4% of the vote in his primary race.

you cant just yell about the establishment on social media and youtube all day and expect to win votes out here in real life.

a couple of other high profile 'progressive' challengers got washed tonight as well.

I'm going to be honest, I don't at all understand the race he's in or how it works

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

where everyone regardless of party runs in the same race and the top two candidates advance to the general.

https://twitter.com/MMFlint/status/1233938457170522113
-----
An emotional victory speech from Joe Biden tonight in South Carolina. After 32 years of running for President, he won his very first state tonight. Congratulations!
-----

smartass.

Sanders surrogates were all over the place with it.

Then and now, they were gleefully dismissive of the South. Meanwhile, if we want to take the Senate, we'll desperately need some coattails to help people like Doug Jones and Jaime Harrison.

If I hear one more Bernie supporter complain "but we won't win the South anyway!"...

There aren't any feasible routes for him to get a majority, and he knows that he's not winning on the convention floor. The sooner he faces this unfortunate reality the better

All this "establishment" talk isn't helping anyone, himself included.


If he can get on the Biden train early enough, maybe his not so passionate supporters won't be too bitter. He could spin it as it not being time for a revolution, YET.

Let that happen and Bloomberg and Steyer throw their cash in the mix. Maybe get a little push from Putin. Biden could have a chance.

He's probably down about 65 delegates after California. There is def still a path for him yet.

Im not even sure Warren will drop out yet but if she does, those votes may go to Bernie and help him as well. Way too early for him to give up tho, even tho we all think its Biden's to lose now.

he should take the lesson from this beating not to become *more* divisive.

he would prolly be in a better position if he ran a unifying campaign instead of just grievance/demonization.

made me think, hey THIS is the Biden everybody saw as a dark horse that could re-energize the Democratic party while Trump was coming to power.

He did still stumble a few times, but he kept the momentum going, even with the weird protestors climbing on stage.

I think he's going to get his ass handed to him in general election debates though, unless he has a miraculous reverse stroke or something.

Trump sniffing and talking shit and Biden forgetting his point half way through an answer.

But yeah, strictly as theater?

Wildly entertaining

in terms of his support that I think the debates can only serve to hurt Biden and there's slim to no chance they'll help him out even if he doesn't have any verbal gaffes.

I say that mainly because four years ago, Hilary pretty much bodied Trump in all the debates from what I remembered and it didn't serve her any good at all.


I wish the stakes for this election weren't so high so I could enjoy the theater of Biden and Trump in the debates.

between already established factions. Especially at the general election level.

I think they might only serve as entertainment.

That said, Trump has repeatedly hinted that he wouldn't even show up for a debate. He doesn't like being challenged in public. In '16 he could act the plucky underdog. But this time around it'll be a referendum on him.

We ignored the elephant in the room IRT Buttigieg

...well, maybe because Limbaugh was the messenger...

Are we really going to ignore Biden’s obvious cognitive decline

Looking forward to the debate on the 15th

Biden does not beat Trumpster.

Can’t believe people are being manipulated into turning the POTUS election into a celebrity roast competition

SMH

it boils down to this:

Bernie can sell the people on "Getting Trump Out"
Biden will be NOT be able to sell the people on the "...and what?"

they gotta hope for depressed turnout for Cult 45.

Not happening.

Just as mass media manufactured consent for Biden, they will do so for Trump.

but Bernie couldn't even sell enough people to beat a senile man who hasn't set foot in a lot of these states.


The "movement" just isn't as big/powerful as we thought.


The coalition isn't as broad as some people said.

but I've always believed he was the best to beat Trump. I will do everything I can to support him. If we want Trump gone, I would urge everyone to do the same.

I used common sense and also voted for Biden.

https://youtu.be/I0kfe5tkdD4


Trump: "This is what happens to someone who loyally gets appointed Attorney General of the United States & then doesn’t have the wisdom or courage to stare down & end the phony Russia Witch Hunt. Recuses himself on FIRST DAY in office, and the Mueller Scam begins!"

Did he vaporize into a bright poof of pure electoral energy?

To vex at least. The rest seemed to have fled back into the woods to rage chant around a hemp fire

As much as we all play up the rivalry here, it really isn't a sporting event. It really does matter, a lot, who the nominee is gonna be.

And when it looked like Sanders was the nominee I was genuinely depressed and not interested in talking about it. I wasn't even lurking around here between Nevada and SC. As much as I told myself I'd swallow my real concerns and vote for Sanders in November, I was not at all looking forward to it.

And I honestly can't blame any honest Sanders supporters for being depressed about this outcome and worried about the race ahead, even if I personally believe it'll be an easier race than it would have been with Sanders as the nominee.

I'm just tweaking Vex and reaction because they're kinda the epitome of dishonest Sanders supporters.

>And when it looked like Sanders was the nominee I was
>genuinely depressed and not interested in talking about it. I
>wasn't even lurking around here between Nevada and SC. As much
>as I told myself I'd swallow my real concerns and vote for
>Sanders in November, I was not at all looking forward to it.

Shows that you are hugely invested and I can't criticize that level of involvement no matter who your candidate is (unless it's Bloomberg)

>And I honestly can't blame any honest Sanders supporters for
>being depressed about this outcome and worried about the race
>ahead, even if I personally believe it'll be an easier race
>than it would have been with Sanders as the nominee.

Frankly I was a little bummed at the poor showing for Sanders last night, yes. I was interested in the resurgence of Biden in the political world a few years back and shared many people's favorable view of him. The political process has tarnished him unfortunately since and his performance at the debates have been off-putting, to put it mildly.

At the same time, with a lot of help from a focused staff and the party machine, he showed he can still bring people together and can speak convincingly and energetically. It's not grassroots and it doesn't gain any important political ground for my beliefs, but as far as winning a political battle, it will have to do.

I think it's funny that most people are gleeful in here that they've stopped Bernie. The Bernie base cares first and foremost about policy, politics isn't a sport to us and we care about the material well being of others, hence "fight for someone you don't know". To me it is sad to be happy that 70,000 people a year will still die without M4A under Biden or Trump. That America will still have the most people in jail under Biden or Trump. That 500,000 people will still be homeless under Biden or Trump. That children will continue dying in Yemen under Biden or Trump. etc. etc.

I think a lot of people on here have nothing to really lose no matter who is in and live, comfortable, safe lives. That includes me, but I have empathy and compassion for the poor and disenfranchised and a Bernie administration would have had huge material effects on those people's lives and now it most likely won't. To me that is not cause for celebration.

Obviously things will be marginally better under Biden compared to Trump but there was so much hope for a truly better world with the Bernie movement. Does AOC have the stuff to make it next time, I think it's a possibility.

>I think it's funny that most people are gleeful in here that
>they've stopped Bernie. The Bernie base cares first and
>foremost about policy, politics isn't a sport to us and we
>care about the material well being of others,

If that was true then your movement would be fighting for small, incremental changes *at least* in cases where the big proposals wouldn't happen.

Obamacare (which admittedly was never "enough") improved the material well being of millions. The modest student loan forgiveness programs of the Obama years improved the material well being of huge numbers of Americans. Simply having more Democrat-appointed judges in the judiciary would improve the material well being of millions. There is no problem more important than climate change. The (extremely modest) regulations the Obama administration was able to put on auto emissions, the loan programs and research funding they gave to efficiency and alternative energy, actually made a quantifiable difference on this coming catastrophe.

A proposal that's too "radical" to become law doesn't do a fucking thing but provide an opportunity for its supporters to wash their hands of the world's problems. That's what I see the Bernie supporters doing.

>hence "fight for
>someone you don't know". To me it is sad to be happy that
>70,000 people a year will still die without M4A under Biden or
>Trump.

And they'd die without M4A under Sanders, too, because there is no way to pass it.

There's an outside chance we might be able to win back the senate. If a President Biden found himself with a Democratic House and Senate, he might actually be able to pass a public health insurance option, which WOULD save many of those tens of thousands of people.

If Sanders came into office, even if he had Democratic majorities in Congress, he would expend all his political capital on M4A and it would not pass. We know this. Who knows if he'd even be able to scale back to something real? What about all the people who die because Bernie didn't deliver them even a public option?

I have been a progressive for my entire life. I've spent my time and energy arguing that single-payer is the best kind of health care system since before OKP even existed. So, by the way, did Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama. No mainstream Democrat disputes the moral case for single-payer health care. And few, if they were unconstrained by weaponized misconceptions among the voters, would dispute the long-run economic case for it. But I also know that it's not a promise that any presidential candidate can make and honestly hope to deliver on. If it were to happen, it would require a moment of massive economic upheaval (that's why it was able to happen in Europe), and would cause more economic upheaval in the process. And in the short term, yes, it would cost people's lives. The fact that you pretend not to know about this reality, and dismiss as a shill of the insurance companies anyone who actually does understand it, is one of the best reasons not to ever take a Sanders supporter seriously.

>That America will still have the most people in jail
>under Biden or Trump.

Or Sanders.

>That 500,000 people will still be
>homeless under Biden or Trump.

Or Sanders. Why do you pretend that Bernie Sanders has the power to end homelessness?

>That children will continue
>dying in Yemen under Biden or Trump. etc. etc.

Etc. etc. Yeah, Bernie makes a hell of a lot of promises. You should look at them with a more skeptical eye.

>I think a lot of people on here have nothing to really lose no
>matter who is in and live, comfortable, safe lives. That
>includes me, but I have empathy and compassion for the poor
>and disenfranchised

Then why don't you care more about making their lives better? Why is your movement more important than actual progress?

>and a Bernie administration would have had
>huge material effects on those people's lives

It really is disturbing that you just take him at his word when he makes promises that he OBVIOUSLY could never deliver on. Bernie Sanders does not have any special powers. The only power he ever claimed to have was the power to drive a massive political movement. And that is now being revealed as the biggest lie he ever told.

>and now it most
>likely won't. To me that is not cause for celebration.
>
>Obviously things will be marginally better under Biden
>compared to Trump but there was so much hope for a truly
>better world with the Bernie movement. Does AOC have the
>stuff to make it next time, I think it's a possibility.

She might. The fever won't break for your movement until you get the kind of massive electoral loss to a Republican that you've had coming all along. If Biden doesn't make it (which is most definitely a strong possibility), then I imagine she will lose in a landslide to Mike Pence. Then a decade or so later we start running as "new Democrats" once again and finally start winning again, with candidates to the right of Joe Biden. I am not looking forward to that at all.

He was the one candidate (well maybe any and petey) who was always running for the General Election and not necessarily the Primary.

It had a cost and seemed like a bad strategy because he seemed SOOOO right of everyone on stage at debates. Even tactically it cost him because he seemed unwilling to go after people who were attacking him and I think that contributes to the appearance that he was old and doddering. I am holding out that his approach with Trump will be totally different (more like those confrontations with protestors on the primary trail).

Anyway, now you have Bernie seemingly trying to pivot and running ads with Obama voiceover clips sounding like an endorsement. SMH.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1235202301658386433

Again, Biden isn't my guy, but I am not at all surprised but what is happening now.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mike-bloomberg-drops-out-of-presidential-race/2020/03/04/62eaa54a-5743-11ea-9000-f3cffee23036_story.html
Mike Bloomberg, the billionaire former mayor of New York who had hoped to self-fund his way to the Democratic presidential nomination but was spurned by voters in Tuesday’s balloting, has dropped out of the race.

Bloomberg endorsed Joe Biden, saying the former vice president had the best chance to win in November.

“I’ve always believed that defeating Donald Trump starts with uniting behind the candidate with the best shot to do it. After yesterday’s vote, it is clear that candidate is my friend and a great American, Joe Biden,” Bloomberg said in a statement.

Bloomberg, a media tycoon worth an estimated $60 billion, entered the race in November and quickly spent hundreds of millions of dollars of his own money to flood social media, television and radio with ads that boasted “Mike Will Get It Done.” In a still-crowded field, Bloomberg projected an image through the airwaves as a moderate candidate with the governing experience, bravado and financial resources to take on President Trump.

Through exorbitant sums of money and despite skipping the first four state nominating contests, Bloomberg managed to rise in national polls, earning the ire of fellow candidates who accused him of trying to buy his way to the nomination. His unconventional campaign schedule also meant Bloomberg avoided any truly unscripted public appearances until the Feb. 19 Democratic debate in Las Vegas, for which he qualified after the Democratic National Committee changed its rules to eliminate a donor threshold.

Debating for the first time in more than a decade, Bloomberg appeared stoic and shaky in a performance that was widely panned. In particular, he was on the receiving end of several significant hits from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who opened the debate referencing allegations that he had made profane, sexist comments toward women.

“I’d like to talk about who we’re running against, a billionaire who calls women ‘fat broads’ and ‘horse-faced lesbians,’ ” Warren said within the debate’s first few minutes as Bloomberg stood stone-faced to her right. “And no, I’m not talking about Donald Trump. I’m talking about Mayor Bloomberg.”

Later in that debate, Warren cornered Bloomberg on nondisclosure agreements his former employees had signed regarding sexual harassment or gender discrimination.

“We have a very few nondisclosure agreements,” Bloomberg acknowledged on the stage. “. . . None of them accuse me of doing anything, other than maybe they didn’t like a joke I told. And let me just — and let me — there’s agreements between two parties that wanted to keep it quiet and that’s up to them. They signed those agreements, and we’ll live with it.”

The Bloomberg campaign waved off his debate performance, vowing he would shake off the cobwebs in time for the next debate in South Carolina. But in a sign of their fear that her criticism had struck a vein, he later released three women from their NDAs; he said those were the only women who had made personal accusations about comments he made.

His focus remained on delegate-rich Super Tuesday states, where Bloomberg had been heavily advertising in the hopes of seizing support from underperforming moderate candidates — including former vice president Joe Biden and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) — as well as blunting the rise of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

He began mocking his Nevada debate performance and was seen as doing better in a South Carolina debate, but the contrast between his smooth ads and his persona on the stage was so jarring that his poll numbers began to decline.

Worse for Bloomberg, Biden resurrected his candidacy with a strong showing in the Feb. 29 South Carolina contest and moved to consolidate the moderates who Bloomberg had hoped would flock to him in the event of a Biden collapse.

The day before the Super Tuesday primaries, in which Bloomberg appeared on the ballot for the first time, Klobuchar and former South Bend, Ind., mayor Pete Buttigieg dropped out of the race and endorsed Biden. Former candidate Beto O’Rourke, a onetime congressman from El Paso, also endorsed Biden the night before Texans went to the polls.

Bloomberg spent Super Tuesday campaigning in Florida, insisting that he planned to stay in the race until the Democratic convention in July.

When a reporter asked whether he risked taking away votes from Biden, Bloomberg suggested Biden had as much responsibility as him to winnow the field.

“Joe’s taking votes away from me right now. I think that is true,” Bloomberg said. “Have you asked Joe whether he is going to drop out? When you ask him that, then you can call me.”

Bloomberg refused to set a bar for his own performance in the Super Tuesday voting, saying he was not sure he would win any state.

“I have no expectations for today,” he said about the voting happening around the country. “But we will have a decent number of delegates.”

He also acknowledged that his only path to the nomination at this point was a contested convention, resulting when no candidate receives a majority of the pledged delegates.

“I don’t think I can win any other ways,” he said. “But a contested convention is a democratic process.”

or wipe out student loan debt flush down the drain

or wipe out student loan debt flush down the drain

Thanks, Liz.

Now, I would HOPE this means people understand that this is NOT ACCEPTABLE and should NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN... but if there's still an America by 2028, some other billionaire will try it.

Farewell, Alt-Biden.

to get emasculated on live network television by Elizabeth Warren.

What a complete and total clown.

Gotta wonder how many dollars Doomberg is going to plunker down for this election because I have a feeling Biden and the DNC is going to need it. Badly.

Win or lose, if he's actually serious about helping Democrats win in Washington, his best investment is in trying to turn the Senate blue since I'm very very very doubtful on Trump losing this go round.

minus Kyrie and LEBRON.

but go off. Twirl in a circle.
Take that hot sauce out ya bag.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVsah5EBKuI

-->

The man is clearly on the onset of senility and not sure how you can see that and think he'd be capable of being president or even continue running a campaign. I imagine it's only going to get worse before November and Trump will have no problem calling him out live in the debates. Plus Biden has no platform or message and despite all the shaming coming their way, many progressives will stay home and undecided voters won't be motivated by anything Biden has to say. There's sadly no way I see Biden beating Trump, and part of me thinks the DNC knows that but would still rather have Biden lose to Trump than Bernie lose (or even win).


It does make you wonder if Sanders went just a bit more to the center would the DNC have backed him because he clearly had the most grassroots support. That's something that should have been weaponized as the democrats will need it to beat Trump. It's a shame that Bernie's "anti-establishment" rhetoric, while much of it is legitimate and a huge part of his platform, was too much for most people. The media certainly played a role in painting him as divisive and radical too. If he had toned it down I think he could have won the nomination, and in the past 6 months he seemed most likely to win against Trump. Still think he could if he somehow gets the nomination.

I'm getting mentally prepared for 4 more years of Trump. Hope he doesn't do any irreparable damage and hope the DNC or voters learn from their mistakes and Bernie's message starts to become more talked about and not seen as "revolutionary". Also the lack of the youth vote is very troubling, not sure what more can be done about that as I thought Bernie was getting through to them. Maybe a progressive and precocious younger candidate could do the trick.

Had a lot to do with people voting more conservatively than they would with less fears about the economy and the coronavirus (which the current administration has proven itself to be scarily inept at addressing).

>The man is clearly on the onset of senility and not sure how
>you can see that and think he'd be capable of being president
>or even continue running a campaign. I imagine it's only going
>to get worse before November and Trump will have no problem
>calling him out live in the debates. Plus Biden has no
>platform or message and despite all the shaming coming their
>way, many progressives will stay home and undecided voters
>won't be motivated by anything Biden has to say. There's sadly
>no way I see Biden beating Trump, and part of me thinks the
>DNC knows that but would still rather have Biden lose to Trump
>than Bernie lose (or even win).

He's great with a teleprompter and good writers. He clearly has physical energy and he can be charismatic when the words and message are given to him. But yes, no real platform. I think depending on whether centrists are sick of Trump and want a safe alternative, Biden can still win. But I think Sanders would have been a much bigger win for the middle class, young people, and progressives that want more than to undo what Trump is done but address root evils.

biden got all the states he was supposed to. picked up minnesota, mass and maine? won the toss up of texas. just edging out texas would had been good enough to give him a big night. picking up minn and mass would had neutralized sanders taking texas. im sure the final delegate count for last night will end up closer than it is but no other way to say it but biden won big last night.

bloomberg did better than i thought he would % wise but definitely didnt pick up enough delegates to matter. dropped out accordingly.

warren...sigh. it didnt happen. there was no bump. if she had internal numbers that expected this turn out she should had dropped out. definitely hope she endorses bernie soon. without the endorsement i still think her support will be fractured if she just drops out.

ill need to wait for more numbers to come in and look forward to polls from the next states before i form an opinion of what happens next. biden is the front runner now though.

rt now:

https://twitter.com/LouisBarr/status/1235012162009141248


you really think an endorsement is coming?? I feel like the bridge hasn't even stopped burning.

they are not happy she's still in, and she is still drawing (very correct) contrasts. that ship might have sailed unfortunately...

Also - why isn't there a call for a moderate to stay in and draw "very correct contrasts" with Biden?

Oh that's right: Because they all (Amy, Pete, Bloomie) dropped out to consolidate behind the person who better shares their values/policies.

Warren & Sanders have never really been allies. She's rivaling him right now while others are consolidating.


-->

re: their healthcare plans. She drew a factual indisputable contrast that the particular poster viewed as a slight.


>Also - why isn't there a call for a moderate to stay in and
>draw "very correct contrasts" with Biden?
>>Oh that's right: Because they all (Amy, Pete, Bloomie)
>dropped out to consolidate behind the person who better shares
>their values/policies.

I mean, I think he took a couple dings during the primary from folks over foreign policy and his nostalgia. But that was overridden by the Dems wanting to rally together I guess *shrug*


>
>Warren & Sanders have never really been allies. She's
>rivaling him right now while others are consolidating.
>

I donno. I think they were, sadly. They were long-time friends/colleagues, no? Didn't they have an alleged "non-agression pact"?... Which apparently went out the window as soon as Warren exhibited independent thought on healthcare etc and his base began harassing her non-stop lol.

Tbh, and no beef or anything, but I find someimes that you guys dismiss the negative impacts of being terrorized online by Bernie's base. As someone that liked both Warren and Pete, I watched it play out for 2 candidates and it definitely kneecapped both of their reputations not-to-mention platforms being flooded with disinfo that muddied their messaging. In now way did Bernie suffer at the hands of other candidates at a similar scale, and I personally think Warren is justified in her position at the moment.

I've said for a long time it's as tho Warren is in an abusive relationship with the left-wing this cycle, lol. In a way I'm glad she found the courage to just be like, fuck it lol

im just saying I hope she endorses bernie. she could very well jump to biden. she might drop out and not endorse either or stay in until the end.

i think she will and should have a big role in either's potential administration. even if she doesnt get a cabinet position the next president needs to lean on her for policy. im betting she even would work to keep pushing good policy through under trump, obviously that will be to a lesser effect but i do think she is going to keep doing what she can to try to improve peoples life.

Sanders lands hard and abruptly. Cisneros and Sloan down. Still got Anthony Clark in Illinois and Marie Newman beating Lipinski would be swell.

One thing to be happy about is Bloomberg flaming out. Having the truism "you can't buy a presidential election" be tested to that extreme degree is sort of gratifying, and I don't spend a lot of time being proud of American voters but rejecting Bloomberg is one of those moments.

Momentarily good is that California is so rich in delegates that Sanders holding on there will make this bad night just part of a larger, weirder race. But that means winning some actual elections against this kind of impressive liberal consolidation, and that's a ton to fight against: different appeal by some strong candidates now backing Biden, cable news*, and the old chestnut that liberals hate socialism as much as they hate fascism.

People are going to tell us to give up. Don't give them anything. Any durable left movement in the United States is about recognizing the material demands of poor and working American people, and putting those aside because you're scared of Donald Trump or of being yelled at by people who are scared of Donald Trump isn't going to get anything useful done. When Biden talks about his long track record of getting things done in DC, he's talking about getting things done for credit card companies, student loan providers, pharmaceutical companies, and NatSec ghouls. If that isn't the world you want to live in, don't concede to live in a bad one because there's an election in eight months. Make him work for it. The same coalition building that everybody demanded of Sanders - now demand it of Biden. Or force him to say "I can win without the left." They're going to blame us when he loses anyhow, so you may as well extract something from it.

*which isn't a complaint about fairness, but they worked the hell out of turning Biden's expected win in South Carolina into a grand redemption story and he didn't have to pay a dime for it or make a single speech on behalf of himself to do it. Nobody's doing that for Sanders because when you're fighting to move something giant and heavy, gravity isn't on your side.

>The same
>coalition building that everybody demanded of Sanders - now
>demand it of Biden. Or force him to say "I can win without the
>left." They're going to blame us when he loses anyhow, so you
>may as well extract something from it.



-->

Those of u you who don’t, were never going to vote for anyone but Bernie anyway and are mostly in states that any democrat will win.

This ain’t about the left, it’s about voters in a handful of states that Biden does have an appeal with.

>People are going to tell us to give up. Don't give them
>anything. Any durable left movement in the United States is
>about recognizing the material demands of poor and working
>American people, and putting those aside because you're scared
>of Donald Trump or of being yelled at by people who are scared
>of Donald Trump isn't going to get anything useful done. When
>Biden talks about his long track record of getting things done
>in DC, he's talking about getting things done for credit card
>companies, student loan providers, pharmaceutical companies,
>and NatSec ghouls. If that isn't the world you want to live
>in, don't concede to live in a bad one because there's an
>election in eight months. Make him work for it. The same
>coalition building that everybody demanded of Sanders - now
>demand it of Biden. Or force him to say "I can win without the
>left." They're going to blame us when he loses anyhow, so you
>may as well extract something from it.

At least his speech writers seem to be incorporating some of the left's platform, because since when has Joe worked for unions, the lower class, and 'the existential crisis of the environment', or against corruption and war-profiteering?


>One thing to be happy about is Bloomberg flaming out. Having
>the truism "you can't buy a presidential election" be tested
>to that extreme degree is sort of gratifying, and I don't
>spend a lot of time being proud of American voters but
>rejecting Bloomberg is one of those moments.

This was a bright spot

>At least his speech writers seem to be incorporating some of
>the left's platform, because since when has Joe worked for
>unions, the lower class, and 'the existential crisis of the
>environment', or against corruption and war-profiteering?

Say something bad about a zillionaire plutocrat who plucks virgins from the town in order to bathe in their blood, ensuring perpetual youth, and Biden will be like "C'mon Jack I've known him for forty years and we've worked you can't just together and get things DONE for it's like when you and I had a different handshake for everyone of them and their wives and so I'm not going to sit here and PERIOD"

His time holding office has been the worst time in America for union activity since they were sending Pinkertons to shoot us. But he's not unique or even out of the ordinary in the party on that. Virginia Democrats control every part of the state government and they still can't manage to dispose of right to work in that state. Permitting public sector employees to strike passed the house, which isn't nothing, but isn't a lot.

He's a disaster for poor and working people in America. Less of a disaster than Trump, to be sure. But we owe it to our people to be pushy about this. That means backing Bernie, who understands and will fight for us, as long as he's willing to be backed. And maybe longer. And when it's time to stop, we make Biden pay for support.

counterbalance the young, Black progressive (really not that progressive) is the guy that democrats respond with in this political climate. Everything this party does is to NOT LOSE. Every vote is made to be safe and not piss of the rednecks with guns or cause instability in the market. Don't demand a better life for all Americans, protect the interests of the wealthy and if we're good they will make sure we're fed and housed, etc. etc.

My hope is that the Obama goodwill fades by the time the new Left comes of age.

I'm not anti-Biden, but I think the brand of 'healing' he's talking about is tremendously superficial.

>Everything this party does is to NOT LOSE.

Pretty much. They're afraid of what using political power will require from them, and so what they've offered to us is a gradual erosion of union power; a gradual increase in the influence of the financial sector; a less vocally aggressive destruction of vulnerable people abroad. All during a historic growth in power for the executive branch.

So when we ask why we can't have good things, they'll point to the looming threat of a legitimate fascist movement and say "do you want that?"

Obviously, we do not. But when they come together and work harder to fight against a popular, well-articulated left agenda than they ever will against any individual conservative threat then it's probably time to stop being suckered. They'll never share this party with us. Getting something new of our own going will take decades, and will waste the careers of the assembled talent we have right now - which is small but stronger than it's ever been. The best option is to keep working to take this party for ourselves, and then offer its (clearly substantial) right wing the same deal they've offered us for decades: join us or enjoy your increasing marginalization.

In the short term, that means treating a setback like a setback and not as a disaster. Sanders is (still present tense) a chance to hit fast forward on this movement decades. That's a relatively low-risk proposition if we can avoid despair. And though I hate, hate, hate appeals to the power of positive thinking, that's kind of the move today. Every inch that we can push them and every explicit promise we can extract to dislodge capital from its grip on American politics is worthwhile.

But I'm a gloomy person so thinking positively is difficult for me. So in my case that will mean remembering that voting is just the stone in the stone soup of American politics. It's what brings us together, but it's not in itself anything that makes soup.

If somebody's reading this and nodding at that sentiment, please check out your local DSA chapter (https://www.dsausa.org/chapters/). It's not everybody's cup of tea, but most of these branches are full of good, warm people who are doing the sort of work that you can touch and feel. In DC, that means canvassing tenants to let them know their rights when threatened with eviction or working for local rent control or showing up at deportation profiteers' homes and making sure their neighbors know that they make their money off of breaking up families. I did that one a few times and even though I am a tremendous 'fraidy-cat, it was *good*. Other chapters do free brakelight clinics so the cops have one less way to pull you over. This isn't a big recruitment press, because I know that joining shit isn't for everybody and calling oneself a socialist isn't for everybody either. But if you have a set of principles that prioritize making sure that ALL poor and working class people can live their lives with freedom and dignity, then you're my comrade (sorry, I had to drop it in there once) in this. And I remember the last time I felt this sense of political despair, but the resolution of "cast a vote" was alienating both temporally and metaphorically and joining up and doing something with people who felt the same way felt really good.

>People are going to tell us to give up. Don't give them
>anything. Any durable left movement in the United States is
>about recognizing the material demands of poor and working
>American people, and putting those aside because you're scared
>of Donald Trump or of being yelled at by people who are scared
>of Donald Trump isn't going to get anything useful done. When
>Biden talks about his long track record of getting things done
>in DC, he's talking about getting things done for credit card
>companies, student loan providers, pharmaceutical companies,
>and NatSec ghouls. If that isn't the world you want to live
>in, don't concede to live in a bad one because there's an
>election in eight months. Make him work for it. The same
>coalition building that everybody demanded of Sanders - now
>demand it of Biden. Or force him to say "I can win without the
>left." They're going to blame us when he loses anyhow, so you
>may as well extract something from it.
>

Well what do you know, the DEMOCRAT got more votes from the Democratic primary electorate.

Vexed much?

and wanted a democrat to win. the centrists are all ghouls I tell you, ghouls!

With cult like follows and describing things as revolutions. This is a primary process for a election. This is how things work.

Oh wait no that's Tulsi Gabbard.

-->

1) Biden names a woman as his running mate.

2) Trump responds by dropping Pence and naming Nikki Haley as his running mate, using botched Coronavirus preparedness as an excuse.

No matter who the candidate is, I think theres a large chance that Trump is going to get reelected anyway. Ill vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is, but I'm not getting invested.

Maybe I’m a sucker but I think Biden got that juice. His 8 years with Obama has him looking presidential af.

but when he opens his mouth.. Ionno. Lol.

After 2016 Im not making any assumptions

so I won’t be too disappointed

but the way Biden is winning makes me believe there may actually be enough working class whites who realized they need to get that fool out of office.

of course the Black vote is on lock too.

You thought it was Biden at first, he did poorly.

seems like once you embraced Beto, he fell the fuck off.

then it happened with Warren.


now Bernie.


Just keep your mouth shut in the general lol

made a whole post but got it deleted





i keed

Would that change it for you?

>No matter who the candidate is, I think theres a large chance
>that Trump is going to get reelected anyway. Ill vote for
>whoever the Democratic nominee is, but I'm not getting
>invested.

Incumbent presidents USUALLY win re-election.
Only Bush Se. and Carter lost re-election in

I'm just preparing myself for the L

let's get the orange guy out.

His team is probably halfway hoping for that.

including viewers who dont have to witness that shit.

https://twitter.com/shaunking/status/1235221403839991808
——-
Bernie is up by 250,000 votes in California and has won almost every county in the state.

Most major networks and newspapers are still saying it’s “too close to call.”

😂😂😂😂😂😂

Simply outrageous.

Bernie has a 10 point lead.

Texas was called with a 2 point lead.
——-

most major networks and newspapers are saying cali is too close to call?

cali was called for bernie as soon as the polls closed last night.

talcum x even retweeted several news outlets calling ca for bernie.

wtf is the point of all this?

You're clowning him, but you're also promoting him lol.

If so, you are the real winner of Super Tuesday.

both black twitter and the alt right call him that lol.

but I had to tune that dude out a lloonnng time ago

Last night sucked for sure. I really don't think Biden is the guy- unless they can just hide him for 8 months or whatever.


But even to back up, take Trump out of the equation, and think about what PROGRESS actually looks like?

The left is fucking up. Badly.


You need to win fucking elections. In order to win in the general, you need to win the primaries. In order to do that, you need to appeal to voters of all kinds.


You can't call yourself a democratic SOCIALIST in America. You can't even do it in the Dem party.


You can't call for a political REVOLUTION in America.


You can't scream down anyone who doesn't match you 100%.


You can't call universal healthcare MEDICARE for all when a lot of seniors hate fucking Medicare.


You are scaring granny. Language and tone matters. And a lot of Americans are dumb as shit.

You can't win as a Dem without the black vote. Why wasn't Sanders in SC for the past 4 fucking years? He stunts Biden's SC performance, things go much differently.


I'm sorry, but you can't run an 80 year old man who has been in congress 30 years as an outsider who is going to deliver all these structural changes suddenly when he is president.


Run a younger person of color (an actual democrat) on the same platform, but replace "socialist" with FDR or some shit. Have Bernie endorse.

Call it universal healthcare.


Instead of yelling about a revolution, take a page from Obama's book and soften your message. Call it change. Call it progress. Hell, call it justice. Don't call it a fucking revolution.

Welcome all progressives to the fold.

etc

...and your "movement" has a much better night imo.



Can't rely on the youth to carry you.

Can't blame Warren when Bloomberg was there, and my guess is she took more from Joe- or at least as much.

Can't claim that your movement would win the general when you can't win the primary.

Can't claim you're ready to fight and pass M4A when you get out-strategized by Tom Perez.

Can't claim a "broad historic coalition" when you made such small progress with black voters.

Can't just yell establishment over and over again, when the votes simply weren't there. The establishment didn't cast those votes- people did.

Can't win by releasing a hyper-detailed plan every 3 days.



The left (all of them- Bernie, Liz, AOC- all of them) needs to put in serious work on branding, messaging, and tone.

And the bros needs to really take a beat and realize the word isn't their twitter feed, and to win votes your team needs to leave space in the tent.

Otherwise, its all purity tests no movement.


But I don't think that reflection is going to happen. Seems like a lot of finger pointing, denial, and rage. Or apathy.


When Hil lost, saw a lot of the same. Didn't seem like her campaign did much self reflection. Her supporters blamed everyone from the media to Bernie to Stein to whatever. Very little talk of what could have been done differently.


The left so far is doing the same. Its the media. Its not Jill Stein, its Warren. Its not the Republican machine of attacks, its the establishment. Different things getting the blame, same game.

Can't even blame money. Biden was dead in the water, and Bloomberg fumbled.

The left just didn't earn the votes. That is the lesson.


If you don't get the votes (from people), that is on you. There isn't some grand conspiracy. A lot of shit happens to every candidate in every election.


The establishment boogie man didn't cast votes in TX, MA, NC, etc.


The left just didn't appeal to enough voters. Figure out how to do that.

y'all have fun with him.

so?

ya'll act like this shit is zero sum.

40 years of non-stop, bipartisan policy aimed at grinding the working class to dust, and JOE BIDEN is the one who will change it??!!

I just want to make sure we all learn some lessons here- especially the progressive politicians and people running their teams.


We all want them (progressives) to get more votes, no? Well, to do that, they clearly have to change some things.


I think nominating Joe Biden is a fucking mistake already, so...?

>I'm sorry, but you can't run an 80 year old man who has been
>in congress 30 years as an outsider who is going to deliver
>all these structural changes suddenly when he is president.

Biden would have still won throughout the south, of course. But what made Biden the presumptive nominee, in the end, was that people saw it as a two-person race, and in the south they gave Biden landslide after landslide after landslide, at a time when the Sanders team thought they'd be competitive in NC and VA, at least.

Some of that's probably Clyburn. Some of it's the resounding SC result that followed from it, but I wonder if Sanders might have hurt himself in the south a little more by skipping the Selma commemoration. If Sanders had done just a little better in the south he might have ended the night (after California eventually comes in) still holding a delegate lead. Then who knows what the narrative would have been by now.

It seems like they wrote off the south almost out of habit, maybe over hard feelings from 2016. But margins matter. You can't write anything off.

Obviously it is a narrative/momentum game.

If Bernie somehow cuts Biden's lead in SC so that he under performs I think things go much differently.


But wasn't he campaigning in MA? Or do I have my timeline off?


Like someone said, SC basically created a free campaign for Joe Biden and he didn't have to do shit.


Plus, a big knock on Bernie is the black vote. I would have been working over-time to prove that knock wrong.


I get folks are upset, but they are forgetting Bernie was the frontrunner for a little bit. I think he had a huge opportunity to help democrats feel better about the idea of a Bernie nom and he just didn't do it.

In an alternative universe where he performs better in SC, sends unity emails rather than attacking emails, and starts to pivot to the general?

I don't know.

The other thing is, if Biden under-performs a little those drop outs and endorsements maybe don't happen.

Compete everywhere. Thats word to Howard Dean.

>
>Biden would have still won throughout the south, of course.
>But what made Biden the presumptive nominee, in the end, was
>that people saw it as a two-person race, and in the south they
>gave Biden landslide after landslide after landslide, at a
>time when the Sanders team thought they'd be competitive in NC
>and VA, at least.
>
>Some of that's probably Clyburn. Some of it's the resounding
>SC result that followed from it, but I wonder if Sanders might
>have hurt himself in the south a little more by skipping the
>Selma commemoration. If Sanders had done just a little better
>in the south he might have ended the night (after California
>eventually comes in) still holding a delegate lead. Then who
>knows what the narrative would have been by now.
>
>It seems like they wrote off the south almost out of habit,
>maybe over hard feelings from 2016. But margins matter. You
>can't write anything off.
>

i didnt think it was a big deal. but it was really odd considering everyone else was there.

To be making significant out reach to the Black community but decided to make sure he sured up Cali, a political calculation that had consequences

That was the death pin for his relationship with the Black community at large. It was such an easy thing to attend

that brand of elimination/grievance politics is just not resonating with a lot of people.

its becoming a broken record.

obama inspired his seeds to build coalitions and adapt to the needs of their constituencies.

bernie inspired his seeds to mudsling and scorch as much earth as possible to the point it suppresses their own base.

like you got ‘progressives’ running in little peaceful local elections calling everyone corrupt and establishment puppets lol. who the hell wants to vote for that?

its all led to bernies base basically eroding except for young people and latinos and those are two groups with some of the worst turnout rates. aggrieved rural voters who used to relate to bernies anti establishment message are even jumping off the train.

people said bernie would fail to expand his base. he did them one better and made his base even smaller.

instead of figuring out how to appeal to more voters...and actually garner that big broad coalition they bragged about in polls (lol in hindsight)...his surrogates are on twitter posting selective exit poll numbers with young people and calling everyone else out of touch.

i cant call it fam.

by letting people vote.

thats what bernie surrogates on twitter are saying. looks like they arent taking a single constructive lesson from last night. just more persecution complex and conspiracy theory.

who knew that if you demonize and demagogue an entire party like an evil entity...the mainstream voters in that party will come out and reject you?

its gonna be pretty interesting watching them justify demanding that superdelegates overturn the will of the voters and nominate a candidate who failed (twice) to gain the support of the majority of voters in the party he is running to lead.

wanna fight?

Be cathartic

congrats.

and they would have stayed home if Sanders had won.

you seem to want a cookie.

for progress.

Instead of reaching out and trying to build bridges with the grassroots Sanders/Warren base - some are more interested in joining in on the Peter/Amy/Mikey/Joey consolidated gang-up that it took to beat Bernie Sanders. And you're laughing about it?

This is the recipe for building a unified base to defeat Trump?

Yikes.

-->

>This is the recipe for building a unified base to defeat
>Trump?
>

if the votes are any indication. Obviously people think Trump can poke less holes in Biden.

You're going to need a considerable turnout.

Granted - less Bernie voters voted for Trump than did Clinton voters (in '08) who voted for McCain (so they've shown that they'll indeed vote for the nominee) - but bad blood will be magnified yet again - and Biden is in many ways objectively a *worse* candidate than Hillary Clinton.

I mean - congrats on beating Bernie Sanders - I guess. But I thought the goal was beating Trump.


-->

>You're going to need a considerable turnout.

so turn out. Even if they came out in droves in the primary, it obviously wasn't enough people looking at the numbers.

>Granted - less Bernie voters voted for Trump than did Clinton
>voters (in '08) who voted for McCain (so they've shown that
>they'll indeed vote for the nominee) - but bad blood will be
>magnified yet again - and Biden is in many ways objectively a
>*worse* candidate than Hillary Clinton.

>I mean - congrats on beating Bernie Sanders - I guess. But I
>thought the goal was beating Trump.
>

Folks taking this shit way too personal. I get younger people being in their feelings, but the fact of the matter is your guy doesn't always win. The how and why you vote aint got shit to do with who you are or your morality or whatever identity you wanna assign to it to make you feel good (i mean "you" in general, not specifically you). Work with what you have. The goal is to beat Trump, the rest we can work out.

also for the record, i personally did not vote Biden.

Boy I can just smell the Kerry/Edwards electoral failure brewing lol

-->

nobody needs suck you off to get Trump out. Shit aint got nothing to do with Biden, Bernie or none of them.

In 2008, tireless care and work was put into mending bridges between Hillary & Obama. There was as much effort put into healing that divide (which was in retrospect almost as (if not more) nasty than the Sanders/Hillary divide) - and it was a top priority of Obama's team - and rightfully so.

Had they simply took your attitude of "shut up and turn out" - they would've seriously risked the big-tent opportunity at stake.

But sure, let's just continue to marginalize 25-30% of the base? Makes sense.

-->

the world had a modicum of normalcy in 2008

Here we are again in 2020 just like we were in 2016 on some "No Sanders, No Vote" shit. IDGAF if they nominate a chair, this aint happening again.

mfrs worrying about whats in the rear view while the car is swerving into the other lane. foh

then thats on them.

its not on other people to negotiate hostages and pander to children who would rather throw tantrums than unite with the majority ready to defend our democracy.

Like I told Trump supporters where I work, you want to let it all burn, baby, let's do it.

Glad we're learning crucial lessons and not poised to repeat the same mistakes.

-->

>Glad we're learning crucial lessons and not poised to repeat
>the same mistakes.
>
>-->

Jesus Vex take a fucking break. This little metldown isn't doing anyone any good.


You aren't even learning mistakes from this cycle, much less 4 years ago.


Serious man- try following different people on twitter.

there is a significant, uneven divide in the "possible Democratic voting" bloc.

one side - perfectly OK with what the Democrats were doing pre-Trump. Any Blue Will Do, for the most part. Trump ruined it all.

other side - "no, actually -- this is fucked up." and when these get the attention of elected officials, all you get is lip service. they want a Democrat, but they care what they do.

today, this is the "Trump Must Go" vs. "Trump Gotta Go, But You Gotta Do Something Else" vote.

If I were to wager a guess, this is a 65/35 split. Or it was pre-Obama. Post-Obama, this has inched even further to being more even.

Both sides need to reconcile if Trump is to be added, and you'll need more, you'll need everything. But I wager the "Trump Gotta Go, But..." side, mostly consolidated in the Sanders vote, will be more difficult to corral. especially given the current state of the country.

it's a very real divide, and Joe Biden, Obama sidekick or not, is the absolute worst person for this task. unless the impossible happens and he actually integrates the left into his policy and puts a real plan in motion. Walleye has been saying this less angrily and more eloquently than I.

part of my Sanders backing calculus is that I believe "Get Trump TFO" (something he /HAS/ been repeatedly saying on the campaign trail) is an easier sell for the "We Want A Democrat" voter base then trying to sell an increasingly disaffected, and disgusted pool of people on ...the utter lack of vision Joe Biden provides.
It actually helps that he has "Stans". that energy will be needed against Donald Trump.

they're basically inverses of one another.

this isn't happening because Sanders supporters are "mean". it's because the Good Democrats have been fucking it up forever. that's what 2016 was about.

Not only that, but they've been peddling all kinds of disinfo for generations. as it pertains to Sanders, it's been about "Bros", and stupid ass calls for civility when a FASCIST is ruling the roost. propaganda that paints Sanders, a Northeastern grandpa who just wants to take the yoke off the back of the working class in Earnest.... as the lefty equivalent of Donald Trump.

like he's actually out here calling for a border wall, and the locking of kids in cages.

the idiot professional managerial class that has run the Democratic Party over the last quarter century has all been about the diversion. even the "good guys" who work through the system get compromised (see: Elizabeth Warren).

and Joe Biden, the epitome of someone who's benefited from disinfo, is the one left behind for the other right-wing candidates to coalesce?

I'm sorry, I want Trump out, too.
But you're really the ones with garbage takes thinking you're going to build a coalition around .... not even centrism. just emptiness.

this is before you get to the issues with Joe Biden personally, which have been covered all over the place.

Vex isn't even being a Stan. He wasn't even a Bernie guy for the longest; I'm actually surprised he's come all the way over to the left from what I thought was libertarianism.

But yeah, Bernie Bros.

Fuck outta here.

i will say this;

if it's time for the progressive movement as claimed... ok.
but where is the evidence of this?
its not happened with young people (they voted at what? 13%?)
we certainly didn't see it on tuesday overall.
and yes, i think that is an issue - it means that we are not doing the work to actually build a solid coalition where it matters.
and without that... any so-called revolution is a pipe-dream

now. instead of taking time to really excavate what all this means for people who want more progressive politics...
upto and including maybe bernie is not the best standard-bearer (neither is warren, sadly for me)
its hottakes and pointing fingers.
instead of coming up with a ground-game for the next four years.
its like shooting yourself in the foot, lol

tbh.. at *this* point?
i will take my chances with the people who retook the house in 2018
that's the level of organizing that is clearly lack and needed.

theres no pleasing entitled losers.

got your delegate rules.

kept your precious low turnout caucuses in place.

got your debate criteria rules.

got your full robust primary with multiple candidates.

got your early state wins.

then as soon as you lose its back to bitching about unfairness again.

the act is even more tiresome the 2nd time around.

democracy happened and it chose someone else.

again.

grow up and get over it.

time to focus on the bigger picture like adults.

I thought the goal was beating Trump.

Interesting that you think the only camp that needs to self-reflect is the Bernie camp (and they do need to retool and do some self-assessment for sure). But this idea that the same people who pushed Hillary on us (who are now pushing Biden on us) have nothing to learn is beyond laughable.

-->