Do you believe Bernie would have won? I do.

[NostaSeronx]

Bernie Sanders didn't even win the DNC. So, he wouldn't have won anyway. Those that could have vote always could write him in. So would he have won? No.

 

[K1052]

It's possible but not at all certain. He did not appeal to minority voters any more than Hillary did and in some cases less. Regardless he couldn't carry the primary and lost by a significant margin so the party wasn't ready for him anyway.

Now if the party pushes a black or latino version of him 30 years younger for 2020 it could well be a very different story.

 

[cubby1223]

Bernie took states in the blue wall against hillary that trump took against her.

The main swing state in the general election was Pennsylvania. During the primaries Clinton won Pennsylvania over Sanders by 16 points.

This thread is just full of more whiners playing the perpetual "what if" game.

Clinton won Ohio by 13 points over Sanders. And won Florida by a whopping 31 points over Sanders.

 

[agent00f]

...I had people stop talking to me last spring because that was my reaction to her getting the nomination. Bringing an establishment candidate to anti-establishment election is snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Bernie commanded the overwhelming allegiance of the millennials, now a group bigger than the baby boomers, not to mention a favorable or at least neutral perception by many on the right.

Republicans didn't learn anything from Dubya, let's hope the Dems learn something about ego and entitlement from the Hillary defeat.

Sanders was anti-establishment, but the leftist kind wasn't exactly what people who'd vote for a white nationalist would care for. He would certainly carry the millennial vote, if only they would vote.

I would say this though, it was better for democrats to lose with sanders than clinton. He gives the next gen more to strive for instead of the mediocrity inherent to centrism.

 

[JTsyo]

I think EC vs. popular vote is a dead issue unless there's a complete overhaul of the Constitution. Mostly because it only becomes an issue in close elections, and that means close to half of the electorate doesn't want change because their candidate won. How are you going to pass a Constitutional amendment in those circumstances?

You actually don't need a Constitutional amendment since each state decides how to handle their votes. If everyone switched to the system like Maine, where the votes are broken p according to the ratio of popular votes, then you could still have the electoral college and get the same effect as the popular votes.

Popular vote count might not be a good measure either in the elections since many in states that go solid red or blue don't bother voting. Also the votes in big states run up the total without really adding to the election.

 

[NostaSeronx]

Sanders was anti-establishment,...

True, Sanders' party-affiliations;
Liberty Union, before 1979
Independent, 1979–2015; 2016–present
Democrat, 2015–2016

Trump, on the other-hand;
Democratic, before 1987, 2001–09
Reform, 1999–2001
Independent, 2011–12
Republican, 1987–99, 2009–11, 2012–present

He was in established parties much longer than Bernie Sanders ever was...

 

[senseamp]

Maybe, but then we would have had an election between two populists promising worker paradise, and no one representing the moderate position of continuing the course of steadily improving economy that we've been on under Obama.

 

[Jaskalas]

Do you believe Bernie would have won? I do.

What I know is that I would have voted for him.
His honest positivism would have turned out the vote.

 

[Udgnim]

Bernie Sanders didn't even win the DNC. So, he wouldn't have won anyway. Those that could have vote always could write him in. So would he have won? No.

the super delegate system that DNC uses meant that Bernie had to climb a monstrous wall from the very start against Hillary

 

[NostaSeronx]

His honest positivism would have turned out the vote.

He did campaign for Hillary Clinton. Real voter turnout!

the super delegate system that DNC uses meant that Bernie had to climb a monstrous wall from the very start against Hillary

Stronger, Together;
2205 Delegates
570.5 Superdelegates
16,914,722 Votes

Feel the Bern;
1846 Delegates
43.5 Superdelegates
13,206,428 Votes

Without the superdelegates the required amount of normal delegates to victory will still be in HRC's favor. Was it a close race? yes. Did he win the popular vote or the delegates to win? no.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

What I know is that I would have voted for him.
His honest positivism would have turned out the vote.

What would have turned out the vote is that he wasn't Trump or Clinton. The voting bloc that stayed away wasn't dismayed with the message, they hated Clinton herself. They would have voted for anyone except her.

 

[sportage]

Bernie would not have won.
As bad as republicans were on Hillary with servers and emails and Benghazi not to mention that old phony issue of "trust", republicans would have been much harder on Bernie.
Trump was an outsider and so was Bernie, so for republicans Bernie would have posed more of a threat than Hillary.
So they would have called Sanders a socialist, then twisted that into a commie,
and eventually into a socialist commie.
And that would be the lighter side of their attack against Bernie.
By the time republicans were finished with Bernie, you'd think Sanders was worse than Putin, Hitler, and ISIS combined.

And they would have convinced people that a president Sanders would collect all the guns and all the peoples wealth, pooled the money into a national bucket, then divided it out evenly to all the people.
Republicans would have convinced everyone that under Sanders, your paycheck would not go into your bank, but into a national trust fund.
Then, handed out evenly to all American citizens, working or not.
And for college and healthcare, republicans would have convinced everyone that Bernie's big giveaway would bankrupt the economy and shoot the national debt thru the roof.
So Bernie would have lost.

And speaking of the national debt and the roof, take a look at Trump's little tax plan.
$1000 tax break for middle class and a whopping $1 million break for millionaires.
And infrastructure rebuilding but not using the government, Trump's plan is to rebuild our infrastructure using the private sector.
So for that to happen, the private sector would demand a profit.
And they get their profit thru tolls for roads and tolls for bridges.
So every road repaired and every bridge re-enforced people will pay a toll every time they crossed that road or bridge.
THAT is Donald's plan.
Oh.... and also privatizing every social program starting with Social Security.
No fooling. This is true. Just look it up.
They won't hide what they plan to do. Its all right there for all to see.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

lol no. Bernie lost my vote before Trump earned it.

 

[Jaskalas]

He did campaign for Hillary Clinton. Real voter turnout!

Hint, Bernie voters did not want Hillary. He beat expectations in the primary for a reason. Momentum is towards progressives.

 

[1prophet]

Funny how Obama, "a supposed Not born in the USA Muslim, Marxist, God Damn America black man" came out of nowhere and beat the establishments choice Hillary, wiped the floor with war veteran McCain, beat the personification of the 1% Romney,

but Hillary not only didn't win because of white KKK nationalists , the electoral college, disgruntled Bernie supporters, or whatever other excuse you want to use to make yourselves feel better, but lost to "Donnie and the Deplorables"

And now what if the the candidate the Democrat party stabbed in the back was the nominee?

If you college educated, self important, elitist, Hillary supporters came down from your "safe space" ivory towers and paid attention to how Obama won in 2008 maybe you wouldn't be eating Trump pie today.

 

[buckshot24]

Yeah he would have, but a good outside chance there may have been dirt on him we don't know and that it would have been revealed in the general. The margin was so close that not only would he have improved on HRC's turnout (most likely) but he would have taken some Trump voters with him (10% of Trump voters approved of Obama, for example, though exit polls are tricky). That might have given them the Senate too, as Toomey's election was super close and Ross might have won in NC too.

Your predictions aren't worth much. Just so you know.

 

[Jaskalas]

Funny how Obama, "a supposed Not born in the USA Muslim, Marxist, God Damn America black man" came out of nowhere and beat the establishments choice Hillary, wiped the floor with war veteran McCain, beat the personification of the 1% Romney,

Yes. Obama's youthful, charismatic and positive energy was revolutionary amidst the hellhole that is DC politics.
Hillary was the regressive setback, both in Obama's foreign policy and the 2016 results.
This country needs to remember 2008.

 

[NostaSeronx]

This country needs to remember 2008.

The DNC was projected to be a close race. It could have been either, of the calculations of the democratic primary; Obama won five, and Clinton won three. For the popular vote, if certain things happened.

Obama - 1,794.5 Delegates / 478 Superdelegates / 17,584,692
Clinton - 1,732.5 Delegates / 246.5 Superdelegates / 17,857,501

To say Clinton lost by a huge margin is a lie. It was a super close race.. that had everyone on edge. So much so the media screwed up that time as well.

Both would have won by a landslide as both were about the recovery of the market crash. Which we still sort of desperately need. This time from someone who actually somehow got a surplus.

 

[trenchfoot]

I'd like to think that Bernie would have won, but I'm using the same reasoning that led me to believe that Hillary would have won.

That being said, I can admit that I have abandoned that process of reasoning due to the fact that Trump won from exploiting the emotions of the voting public and absolutely not from having a better plan for the nation than Hillary did.

There is no reasonable accounting for another person's emotions, especially so when the influence of said person's emotions is being manipulated by a persona that can reach deep down into that person's being and have them toss all reason and logic to the wayside in favor of satisfying the need to feel safe and secure, the need to feel in control of the space around them, their need to feel that they matter.

Trump fooled me twice. I will not underestimate that guy again.

In my now re-calibrated opinion of him, I can honestly say that he had an overwhelming chance of winning even if had run as a Democrat.

 

[agent00f]

Hint, Bernie voters did not want Hillary. He beat expectations in the primary for a reason. Momentum is towards progressives.

I know it's fashionable in conservative circles as of late, but don't do your credibility any favors by pretending you'd vote for a leftist.

Funny how Obama, "a supposed Not born in the USA Muslim, Marxist, God Damn America black man" came out of nowhere and beat the establishments choice Hillary, wiped the floor with war veteran McCain, beat the personification of the 1% Romney,

but Hillary not only didn't win because of white KKK nationalists , the electoral college, disgruntled Bernie supporters, or whatever other excuse you want to use to make yourselves feel better, but lost to "Donnie and the Deplorables"

And now what if the the candidate the Democrat party stabbed in the back was the nominee?

If you college educated, self important, elitist, Hillary supporters came down from your "safe space" ivory towers and paid attention to how Obama won in 2008 maybe you wouldn't be eating Trump pie today.

It was McCain & Romney & gop establishment's downfall not to weaponize racial resentment to their advantage. Only one guy at the time had the vision to see it was the key to victory, and it put him on the map then, allowed him to lap the GOP field, and now beat clinton despite having nothing except the uniquely powerful message of white national solidarity.

Sanders certainly doesn't have that, and doesn't stand much of a chance as a result.

 

[Moonbeam]

Your predictions aren't worth much. Just so you know.

True but they are just as valuable as the likelihood of you being right about the value of his predictions. But thanks for the heads up.

 

[lxskllr]

l

I know it's fashionable in conservative circles as of late, but don't do your credibility any favors by pretending you'd vote for a leftist.

Your problem is you conflate the terms of "conservative" and "Republican". I'd have absolutely given Sanders consideration, cause half a Libertarian is better than none. As it is, Johnson was my vote.

This is already a socialist country, except much of that socialisim goes to corporations. I liked Sander's rock solid honesty, and if we're gonna be socialist, I want some of those sweet socialist dollars. Better than what we have from the two major players.

 

[buckshot24]

True but they are just as valuable as the likelihood of you being right about the value of his predictions. But thanks for the heads up.

Not really, he predicted 340 EC votes for Mrs. Clinton.

 

[shady28]

I'd like to think that Bernie would have won, but I'm using the same reasoning that led me to believe that Hillary would have won.

That being said, I can admit that I have abandoned that process of reasoning due to the fact that Trump won from exploiting the emotions of the voting public and absolutely not from having a better plan for the nation than Hillary did.

There is no reasonable accounting for another person's emotions, especially so when the influence of said person's emotions is being manipulated by a persona that can reach deep down into that person's being and have them toss all reason and logic to the wayside in favor of satisfying the need to feel safe and secure, the need to feel in control of the space around them, their need to feel that they matter.

Trump fooled me twice. I will not underestimate that guy again.

In my now re-calibrated opinion of him, I can honestly say that he had an overwhelming chance of winning even if had run as a Democrat.

A good post, at least some people are now realizing that Trump is not a buffoon. He's very smart, especially when it comes to Persuading people and building consensus / coalitions. That's what persuasion is about.

You should keep in mind that Clinton and Obama's teams used the same techniques as Trump though, and both hired consultants who are published experts at this. Clinton in particular had far more resources to manipulate people. In the end, they simply weren't as good at it as Trump is.

More on topic, I think Trump would have had a much more difficult time with Sanders. Big reason being Sanders didn't have baggage other than being a pseudo-socialist. Trump would not have been able to pull the rust belt from Sanders, but he might have gone elsewhere.

Trump was able to play off confirmation bias in a big way with "Crooked" Clinton, and BLM violence + ISIS attacks just reinforced setups he made for the "fake because" in spades.

I'm sure Trump would have found something to attack with Sanders that triggered the same reactions. But with Clinton it was like an across the board win, every major thing he brought up got reaffirmed by events thus triggering the confirmation bias and providing the "fake because" that he needed to give fence sitting voters on his side.

It would have been a lot more difficult to pin responsibility for these things on Sanders, as there was no pre-existing bias / view of him as being part of the "system". Obviously, Hillary wasn't just part of the system, she was the physical embodiment of the establishment.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Hint, Bernie voters did not want Hillary. He beat expectations in the primary for a reason. Momentum is towards progressives.

That would certainly explain why the Republicans now control the Senate, House and Presidency along with the majority of state governments.