Trump & Sanders are already the projected winners in each respective party.

Kasich makes a strong showing and holding 2nd place right now.

#DatBernieTho still a fringe candidate or nah?

-->

That's not exactly what you asked, but nobody ever claimed Bernie was a fringe candidate.

Cruz won big in Iowa, and he's unelectable too.

how'd that work out for her?

fuck you.

But I don't doubt that Bernie could win the nomination. That's precisely why he's so dangerous.

and i'd vote for him in the general.

i don't really want him as POTUS but he's better than any of the GOP candidates, for sure.

fuck you.

but in many instances a strong showing in NH has sent shockwaves throughout the electorate and very well can influence both perception and reality as it pertains to electability.

-->

fuck you.

>
>That's not exactly what you asked, but nobody ever claimed
>Bernie was a fringe candidate.

lol. k.

Yes - everybody knew Sanders would be toppling Clinton in Iowa and NH.

Let's rally behind the UnderHillDawgie!

-->

>Yes - everybody knew Sanders would be toppling Clinton in NH.

yes. he's expected to win the primary in the state that neighbors the one he's spent 25 yrs or so representing in both houses of Congress.

i've heard that for a couple of months now when i've checked in on the election. so i'm sure folks who're more in tune w/the election news have heard it too.

fuck you.

but not many people outside of the North understand the dynamics up here.

>yes. he's expected to win the primary in the state that
>neighbors the one he's spent 25 yrs or so representing in both
>houses of Congress.

The electorate in NH and Vermont are not alike - like at all. Virtually all of the analysts have stopped saying "NH is a given because it neighbors VT!" -- This is as inaccurate as saying that NJ will go for Clinton because NY neighbors NJ.

Clinton got beat in NH because the NH electorate resonates with Sanders.




-->

going back several months.

so i fully expected him to win.

*shrugs*

fuck you.

That lead steadily declined but it wasn't until fairly recently that Sanders surpassed Clinton in NH.


-->

months ago i heard predictions that he'd win NH.

*shrugs*

fuck you.

it would be a huge shock if he can get that margin into the teens, let alone win, but minds are being changed. that's undeniable.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_presidential_primary-3351.html

_______________________________________

I heard a prediction months ago that Sanders would win NH.

*shrugs*

fuck you.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/bernie-sanders-could-win-iowa-and-new-hampshire-then-lose-everywhere-else/

*Jews you*

"this is okp tho, reading is completely optional" (c) desus

Proceed with caution. I am overtly racist.

<-- In Pigpen we trust

i heard the prediction on one of those talking head shows on cable news. or one of the Sunday talking head shows on broadcast tv. i can't recall b/c i wasn't paying close attention. and as the primary approached i heard the prediction increasingly often in response to NH poll numbers showing Sanders pulling ahead of Clinton.

the idea of Sanders winning NH was in the air months/weeks ago.

fuck you.

are we done yet or what?

sheesh.

i can't believe there are 48 more of these.

fuck you.

as it should be. All the leading candidates have enough resources to go deep into the primary - and that's good for the country. Iowa and NH should not be able to determine the victor without other demographics/states having their say.



-->

mostly pointless too as i suspect ppl's minds are made up. and if they aren't i just can't understand why not.

i can't believe i ever thought i'd be into that shit.

fuck you.

of if...

his 'unpredictability' is predictable. if his name falls out of the news cycle for a day or 2 he'll say something offensive on Twitter or in some TV interview and that'll get him back in the news. wash, rinse, repeat.

fuck you.

You're probably the most prolific posters in these election posts.

Don't stop though. I don't want to be talking to myself

_______________________________________

>You're probably the most prolific posters in these election
>posts.

go on and count the replies and see if that's true. i'll wait.

fuck you.

fuck you.

i half want a brokered convention at this point. at least the endless coverage would make sense

-------
"A man who is good enough to shed his blood for his country is good enough to be given a square deal afterwards. More than that no man is entitled, and less than that no man shall have." - TR

i feel for those kids, they might live the rest of their lives in constant election cycles.

we'd all live in a constant campaign/election season.

fuck you.

Clinton wants to be able to leave NH saying it was relatively close.
I think Sanders needs to win by at least 20 to exceed expectations

Trump is mollywopping the opposition. Rubio lost that post Iowa momentum.

_______________________________________

Lol. He was hooping with his kids and grand kids before his speech.
This dude didn't miss one shot in the clip they showed. Had that solid, overhead, old man stroke. You don't want to see him in around the world

_______________________________________

https://twitter.com/todayshow/status/697238209349156864


Bernie could get some run at my local gym anytime he wants to come thru

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

****************
TBH the fact that you're even a mod here fits squarely within Jag's narrative of OK-sanctioned aggression, bullying, and toxicity. *shrug*

on some I can not believe this happened in my lifetime

people were so mad at those who wasted a vote on Perot/Nader

but look at this primary nonsense

That is bad news. He is almost certainly the strongest GE candidate the Republicans have, but no, that does not mean the country would be okay if he won.

They tried that hand too many times and failed.
They're gun shy about going that route again, even though someone like him probably stands the best chance. Especially if they want to scoop up those undecideds

_______________________________________

No...he's none of these guys^^^^^

Much better politician and he is Captain Ohio.....But the Republicans are too mad at that black man in office to get behind that dude...Thank god....

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

McCain seems like a fair comparison no? I suppose he's less hawkish though.

>McCain seems like a fair comparison no? I suppose he's less
>hawkish though.


Nope...McCain too war crazy.....He wants to invade EVERYTHING....lol

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

but instead of that good bible belt power he draws his strength from austerity.

Romney was fatally flawed for a variety of reasons, none of which apply to Kasich.

McCain would have been a very strong candidate in any year other than right after a historic collapse of Republican support.

he's picked up a few "i'm republican but...." votes from rand paul and ben carson's campaigns as they fell apart. and i'm sure rubio having a shitty week helped him too.

but republicans in most states give way less fucks than n.h. republicans. pretty sure he's polling behind people who aren't even running any more in south carolina.

But everybody's expecting that once the race thins out, Republicans will be split between a crazy candidate and a grownup candidate. And by that point, the grownup might win.

For the record, I think either Trump or Kasich would be a threat in the general. But Kasich is a more textbook threat.

At this point, it looks like it's one of those two. When Christie drops out, all those voters go to Kasich. When Jeb drops out, all those voters go to Kasich. Assuming Rubio drops out, all those votes go to Kasich. Who knows what happens to the Cruz and Carson voters, but they likely wouldn't go to Trump en masse.

>
>But everybody's expecting that once the race thins out,
>Republicans will be split between a crazy candidate and a
>grownup candidate. And by that point, the grownup might win.
>
>For the record, I think either Trump or Kasich would be a
>threat in the general. But Kasich is a more textbook threat.
>
>At this point, it looks like it's one of those two. When
>Christie drops out, all those voters go to Kasich. When Jeb
>drops out, all those voters go to Kasich. Assuming Rubio drops
>out, all those votes go to Kasich. Who knows what happens to
>the Cruz and Carson voters, but they likely would go to Trump
>en masse.



All this^^^^^^^

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

when they haven't been before this?

he did worse than most of those people in iowa, and might be dead last in s.c.

this is a republican party that consistently sabotages people who are seen as compromisers and moderates. why would they vote for the guy just because democrats can stomach him? in my district, our congressman regularly says public schools shouldn't exist, and even he's got a primary challenger from the right.

i think that prediction says more about who you see as a reasonable candidate than what republican partisans see.

>when they haven't been before this?
>
>he did worse than most of those people in iowa, and might be
>dead last in s.c.

Politicians love momentum....If Kasich represents the "sane" candidate coming in second after Trump that will def. help with those donations....



>this is a republican party that consistently sabotages people
>who are seen as compromisers and moderates. why would they
>vote for the guy just because democrats can stomach him?


People are merely saying that Kasich would be the BEST Republican candidate....But we all know that's not going to happen....Because the Repugs are being led by their crazy ass base.....

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

>>when they haven't been before this?
>>
>>he did worse than most of those people in iowa, and might be
>>dead last in s.c.
>
>Politicians love momentum....If Kasich represents the "sane"
>candidate coming in second after Trump that will def. help
>with those donations....
>

the momentum will shift by the weekend. the only one who has been able to hold attention is trump. rubio was KILLING it a week ago, and he's still a better bet in the general than kasich. rubio only went hard-right crazy because he had to do it to compete in the primaries. and part of his trouble right now is he's trying to parrot catch-phrases he knows are b.s.

and why donate to a guy who is going to get WRECKED in the south in 3 weeks? donors know how this works.


>
>>this is a republican party that consistently sabotages
>people
>>who are seen as compromisers and moderates. why would they
>>vote for the guy just because democrats can stomach him?
>
>
>People are merely saying that Kasich would be the BEST
>Republican candidate....But we all know that's not going to
>happen....Because the Repugs are being led by their crazy ass
>base.....

that's not what the post we replied to said.

>>>when they haven't been before this?
>>>
>>>he did worse than most of those people in iowa, and might
>be
>>>dead last in s.c.
>>
>>Politicians love momentum....If Kasich represents the "sane"
>>candidate coming in second after Trump that will def. help
>>with those donations....
>>
>
>the momentum will shift by the weekend. the only one who has
>been able to hold attention is trump. rubio was KILLING it a
>week ago, and he's still a better bet in the general than
>kasich. rubio only went hard-right crazy because he had to do
>it to compete in the primaries. and part of his trouble right
>now is he's trying to parrot catch-phrases he knows are b.s.


Nah...don't get it twisted homie...The momentum, as someone else posted better than I ever could, is all in the money...This has nothing to do with "momentum" as in HE'S ON FIRE...It's all about donors....

Who stands to bank more money after donors starts to freak out about Rubio malfunctioning (In fact, the money men are already freaking out about Rubio...He showed he wasn't ready for primetime by repeating the same lines IN A DEBATE..Got clowned by Christie, Trump, and Cruz....lol...That's why he bombed in NH...He finished...), Christie getting out, and Bush dropping out all together?

Kasich...

Again, if it's a clear case between Trump and Kasich anything can happen...The problem is the Republicans are too thick headed and angry to play the smart game....

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

these are wealthy people who choose candidates.

they know what's going to happen. he's going to lose in s.c. he's going to lose on super tuesday.

he's dead last in $$$ among active candidates right now for a reason. dude's raised less than carly.

these rich folks, if they want kasich to win, would not have been waiting for bush and christie to drop out to drop their cash. they would have started dropping that cash the second walker dipped out.

they don't need to worry about hurting anyone's feelings. it would be stupid of them to wait this long to get behind their guy.

republicans don't want kasich to be president.

Those donors are already looking at Rubio funny, homie. In fact, they running for that front door:

G.O.P. Donors Hit Pause After Rubio Bombs

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/02/marco-rubio-debate-donors

And another one (See Biggie)....

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-09/rubios-glitch-isnt-going-away

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

donald trump and ted cruz are what it means to be republican in 2016. they got friends in the media too. they may not have love in d.c., but they have strong organizations.

and money? they got billionaire friends too. donald trump's last job before this was a tv show where famous/rich people competed to see who could get other famous/rich people to give them money.

if we're going to play the "cruz and trump don't count" game and think of this shit like a tie between everyone else, then kasich looks a little better. but he's still last there too. some quotes from jeb bush's people don't mean shit in this context.

there's not enough money out there too get kasich into second place in the south. and even if there was, second place doesn't count once these electoral votes start stacking up.

he's got a month. yeah, you can fuck up a campaign in a month, but you can't invent a ground game.

he's not even the front runner for jeb's people and money, BUT IF HE WERE, if jeb's people and money were going to be the difference in this election, jeb would be winning.

I'm playing the numbers game not the media game.....

Donors don't like bank rolling losers....Rubio is a loser...That has nothing to do with the media...Even Rubio is aware of the fuck up....

This was his speech just an hour or so ago after his flop onstage led to a very disappointing finish in NH ....:

"I can tell you I know many people are disappointed. I'm disappointed with tonight. But I want you to understand something. I want you to understand something. Our disappointment tonight is not on you. It's on me. It's on me. I did not -- I did not do well on Saturday night. So listen to this: that will never happen again."

Yeah dog...it's the media...lol

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

then again, if trump fucked up like that, he wouldn't have to go on the defensive like rubio is.

>then again, if trump fucked up like that, he wouldn't have to
>go on the defensive like rubio is.


Because Rubio already put the idea in people's head that he is in over his head...It fits with his narrative...Remember when he gave the State of the Union speech and grabbed that water WHILE ON CAMERA?...lol

Or how he ran away from an Amnesty bill he was apart of...I'm not talking about someone simply flip flopping on an issue....Nah...dude flip flopped ON HIS OWN IDEA...lol

Rubio is a joke....Could have been a contender....

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

It would have been Rubio if not for the software glitch.

Bush will leave soon to save face. Money will dry up for Christie and Rubio, and they'll be out. But Kasich will have a funding surge and run a healthy campaign in the next few states.

Not saying it's guaranteed. If one of the other establishment candidates holds on, they might have time to beat him in SC and become the new flavor of the month. The important thing is, it's not really up to the voters for these candidates anymore. For Kasich, it's up to the donors, and for the others, it's up to the accountants.

> For Kasich, it's up to the donors, and for the
>others, it's up to the accountants.


Money quote^^^^^

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

...Looks like he's going to come in second place...Rubio is toast (his run got blown out of the water after that ROBO RUBIO massive failure)....So is Cruz (he doesn't play beyond the hardcore Right Wing faithful....)...Bush is running on fumes but beating Rubio and Cruz will help him continue to run in a few more states before the money runs out...

Kasich is the candidate the Repugs should have been pushing a minute ago....He could beat both Hill Dawg and Bernie if Conservatives understood what a weapon he is. He already checks that all important Ohio box...But they so mad at Obama that they can't think straight. GOOD....lol

For the Dems the true battle begins....SC and Nevada.......Whoever does well in those two states will most likely win the Democratic nomination....

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

\

fuck you.

Because its all in the demos....

If Hillary can't win SC, her firewall state....THE SOUTH...And a state that represents the real electorate from here on out; a place where she has the same level of connection with and history as Bernie did with NH, she might as well pack it in.....

For the Dems, this election officially begins in SC and Nevada (Latinos).....

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

I was a registered voter. Why aint i #feelthebern ? Was i sleep? Did i fail to #staywoke?


***
I'm tryna be better off, not better than...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPyaJlfE140

Get Familiar doggie.


-->

why the consistent above this shit tone? he was doing his job in 1996 just like hillary clinton was doing her job.

But no, I can only wish I had that power.

Still, the Democrats will face a headwind in this election, and it's extremely important that we win. It is very sad that we're threatening to nominate a fatally flawed candidate.

and we'll probably just have to agree to disagree, but i'm not going to vote for a party that's dead inside just so we can keep up appearances in the white house.

>It is very sad that we're threatening to nominate a fatally flawed candidate.

It really is.

It's not beyond Democrats to find a way to lose the election against a Republican nut.

I don't think Bernie is electable, either. There's, perhaps, a more complicated and surprising picture than the Iowa and New Hampshire electorates suggest. I think some liberals misunderstand how the rest of the country is calibrated.

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

A sea of red.

I can't conceive of a world where red states will vote Bernie.

Even if Bernie (or Hillary for that matter) wins, there will be a concerted, organized, political push back against them. In our country's future with a Democratic president? Likely gridlock. More conflict. More people unwilling to compromise when it's in their interest-- and NOT a land flowing with milk and honey where the 99% get their just due, corporations are in check and we can all go to college for free. WTF. That's as improbable as Mexico paying for a damn wall.

Bernie, so often, has been a party of one as an Independent and now Democratic Socialist. There's nothing mainstream about his platform or ideologies. There's a reason why he's had to often align himself, over the years with Democrats. Ideologically, Bernie may very well be more progressive than Hillary, but that doesn't translate into political power or capital.

When Bernie and Hillary were in Congress together, they virtually cast the SAME votes.

From the New York Times:

"Hillary Rodham Clinton is a liberal Democrat on domestic matters, and Bernie Sanders is a socialist. They voted the same way 93 percent of the time in the two years they shared in the Senate.

In fact, from January 2007 to January 2009, Mrs. Clinton, representing New York, voted with Mr. Sanders about as often as she did with the like-minded Democrats Ron Wyden of Oregon and Barbara Mikulski of Maryland."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/28/upshot/the-senate-votes-that-divided-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders.html?_r=0

But of course, the race between Bernie and Clinton, I think, is in large part about perception.

And so, I'll be interested to see how Hillary regroups and changes her messaging.

I swear: if I hear another Democrat spouting the trickle down Republican poison of about her trustworthiness and honesty....

>>It is very sad that we're threatening to nominate a fatally
>flawed candidate.
>
>It really is.
>
>It's not beyond Democrats to find a way to lose the election
>against a Republican nut.
>
>I don't think Bernie is electable, either. There's, perhaps, a
>more complicated and surprising picture than the Iowa and New
>Hampshire electorates suggest. I think some liberals
>misunderstand how the rest of the country is calibrated.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_states_and_blue_states
>
>A sea of red.
>
>I can't conceive of a world where red states will vote Bernie.
>
>
>Even if Bernie (or Hillary for that matter) wins, there will
>be a concerted, organized, political push back against them.
>In our country's future with a Democratic president? Likely
>gridlock. More conflict. More people unwilling to compromise
>when it's in their interest-- and NOT a land flowing with milk
>and honey where the 99% get their just due, corporations are
>in check and we can all go to college for free. WTF. That's as
>improbable as Mexico paying for a damn wall.
>
>Bernie, so often, has been a party of one as an Independent
>and now Democratic Socialist. There's nothing mainstream about
>his platform or ideologies. There's a reason why he's had to
>often align himself, over the years with Democrats.
>Ideologically, Bernie may very well be more progressive than
>Hillary, but that doesn't translate into political power or
>capital.
>
>When Bernie and Hillary were in Congress together, they
>virtually cast the SAME votes.
>
>From the New York Times:
>
>"Hillary Rodham Clinton is a liberal Democrat on domestic
>matters, and Bernie Sanders is a socialist. They voted the
>same way 93 percent of the time in the two years they shared
>in the Senate.
>
>In fact, from January 2007 to January 2009, Mrs. Clinton,
>representing New York, voted with Mr. Sanders about as often
>as she did with the like-minded Democrats Ron Wyden of Oregon
>and Barbara Mikulski of Maryland."
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/28/upshot/the-senate-votes-that-divided-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders.html?_r=0
>
>But of course, the race between Bernie and Clinton, I think,
>is in large part about perception.
>
>And so, I'll be interested to see how Hillary regroups and
>changes her messaging.
>
>I swear: if I hear another Democrat spouting the trickle down
>Republican poison of about her trustworthiness and
>honesty....


That's been my only issue during this entire process. I have no beef with the rise of Bernie...NONE...Got no issue with dude running for President. Got no issue with Bernie turning on a lot of first time younger voters...

Nah...My issue is how the far-left wing of the the Democratic party is adopting the very same Republican hit squad talking points about Clinton AND then making her out to be some fake ass progressive...lol

When I hear that its like I'm in Bizarro World....

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

You're not very good at this. For somebody who purportedly employs the scientific process, your political opinions are remarkably absent of fact and statistical evidentiary backing.

Corporate Crime Accountability (February 1995): A Sanders amendment to the Victims Justice Act of 1995 required “offenders who are convicted of fraud and other white-collar crimes to give notice to victims and other persons in cases where there are multiple victims eligible to receive restitution.”

He served as Chairman of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, and received the 2015 Congressional Award from the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), who said: “It is no understatement to say that Bernie has truly taken care of wounded, ill, and injured veterans and their surviving family members.”

Saving Money, for Colleges and Taxpayers (April 1998): In an amendment to H.R. 6, the Higher Education Amendments of 1998, Sanders made a change to the law that allowed the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education to make competitive grants available to colleges and universities that cooperated to reduce costs through joint purchases of goods and services.

Holding IRS Accountable, Protecting Pensions (July 2002): Sanders' amendment to the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 2003 stopped the IRS from being able to use funds that “violate current pension age discrimination laws.” Although he faced stiff GOP opposition, his amendment still succeeded along a 308 to 121 vote.

Expanding Free Health Care (November 2001): You wouldn't think Republicans would agree to an expansion of funds for community health centers, which provide some free services. But Sanders was able to win a $100 million increase in funding with an amendment.

Getting Tough On Child Labor (July 2001): A Sanders amendment to the general appropriations bill prohibited the importation of goods made with child labor.

Increasing Funding for Heating for the Poor (September 2004): Sanders won a $22 million increase for the low-income home energy assistance program and related weatherization assistance program.

Fighting Corporate Welfare and Protecting Against Nuclear Disasters (June 2005): A Sanders amendment brought together a bipartisan coalition that outnumbered a bipartisan coalition on the other side to successfully prohibit the Export-Import Bank from providing loans for nuclear projects in China.

Greening the U.S. Government (June 2007): A Sanders amendment made a change to the law so at least 30 percent of the hot water demand in newer federal buildings is provided through solar water heaters.

Protecting Our Troops (October 2007): Sanders used an amendment to win $10 million for operation and maintenance of the Army National Guard, which had been stretched thin and overextended by the war in Iraq.

Restricting the Bailout to Protect U.S. Workers (Feburary 2009): A Sanders amendment required the banking bailout to utilize stricter H-1B hiring standards to ensure bailout funds weren't used to displace American workers.

Helping Veterans' Kids (July 2009): A Sanders amendment required the Comptroller General to put together comprehensive reporting on financial assistance for child care available to parents in the Armed Forces.

Exposing Corruption in the Military-Industrial Complex (November 2012): A Sanders amendment required “public availability of the database of senior Department officials seeking employment with defense contractors” – an important step toward transparency that revealed the corruption of the revolving door in action.

Support for Treating Autism in Military Health Care: Sanders worked with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) to pass an amendment by a vote of 66-29 ensuring that the military's TRICARE system would be able to treat autism.
-->

It was a joke, friend. But you're not actually gonna pretend that he was ever a major player in the Congress.

It's okay, neither was Hillary. The problem with Sanders is not that he never created any major legislation. The problem is still that he's poison in a general election.

He's a great campaigner. btw HIllary is a terrible campaigner.

I'm definitely worried about Bernie in the Democratic South, but if he's strong there I don't see why he wouldn't be able to stand up on the general.

I do expect Hillary to show strong in the South of course, but the fact is that the more Hillary talks the less people want to vote for her.

____________________________

http://instagram.com/yogikenan
http://instagram.com/shotbykenan
http://stackoverflow.com/users/43089/triptych
http://github.com/djtriptych

>He's a great campaigner. btw HIllary is a terrible
>campaigner.
>
>I'm definitely worried about Bernie in the Democratic South,
>but if he's strong there I don't see why he wouldn't be able
>to stand up on the general.
>
>I do expect Hillary to show strong in the South of course, but
>the fact is that the more Hillary talks the less people want
>to vote for her.

Hillary's issue is not how she talks or being a terrible campaigner this time around...Nobody is being turned on by Bernie because he's some great orator...He screams just like Hillary...lol...Let's not get crazy here...They are turned on by Bernie's message....

Hillary is just getting caught up in that OUTSIDER wave....She's not a socialist progressive...She's an old school Democrat with some progressive accomplishments...But when the far left-wing base starts to take over, suddenly a candidate that has been vilified by Republicans as an EXTREME Liberal comes off looking Conservative Lite standing next to Bernie....

GOAT of his era......long live Prince.....God is alive....

Sometimes she's surprised us, but yeah, generally she's been a disappointment on that count.

I would love to have a better campaigner running. But we don't have that.

No amount of momentum among overconfident liberals or college students will change the fact that he calls himself a socialist (still polls worse than atheism, by the way), a radical, promises to take away the healthcare of all those middle-class people who are happy with their employer plans, and promises to raise almost everyone's taxes (we've all heard him try to use those last two points to explain away the other, but there isn't a chance that would work in a general election). Any one of those points would make even a very skilled politician unelectable with the general public. He manages to combine them all.

And on top of all that, he promises not to use superpacs. Makes for a great applause line, but it'd be an *enormous* handicap in a general election. General elections are measured in the billions of dollars these days. Those $27 donations can only go so far.

>
>The problem
>is still that he's poison in a general election.

You keep saying this - but again, the facts say otherwise. Find me a reputable (and recent) poll that shows Clinton outperforming Sanders in a general election vs. Trump (the front-runner).

Go.


-->