Discuss.....

[brooklynite]

1968: anti-war activists decide there’s no difference between Democrats and Republicans. Result: Richard Nixon.

2000: environmental activists decide there’s no difference between Democrats and Republicans. Result: George W Bush.

2016: Democratic Socialist activists decide there’s no difference between Democrats and Republicans. Result: Donald Trump.

My interpretation: ideological purity is admirable, but politically deadly.

[dchill]

1. I'm a Democratic socialist (small "s") who has ALWAYS...

...voted, and voted Democratic. When does this narrow, myopic stuff end? It's insulting.

[Javaman]

50. +1 nt

[questionseverything]

59. The beatings will continue until morale improves

[dchill]

67. I know, I know. It already started to rankle years ago.

[Demsrule86]

90. I suppose some believe that beatings will raise morale. I do not. What fairy dust will

improve morale exactly? If we get beaten as you suggest, I see no hope of any improvement in morale. Failure doesn't make anyone happy.

[Emile]

76. +1 insulting and divisive.

I don't see where calling out the socialist wing of the Democratic party were for Trump as uniting the party!

[bucolic_frolic]

2. The young are politically naive, volatile, and easily misled

They can't see or understand the lies behind the rhetoric. Some of them never find out and never grow up, that's why the anti-war generation voted Trump.

The electorate is ignorant. That's why there is redneck Pennsylvania. If you get your political directives from the pulpit, you'll believe anything.

The Achilles heel of democracy is that elections are decided, on the margins, by ignorance, sloth, and emotion.

Therefore, Democrats need to take a look at how their leaders motivate voters.

Sorry, that's all I got. As I grow older, broad strokes seem to paint the truth to me, because paths are determined by forks in the road, bad decisions, and serendipity.

[AZProgressive]

3. There were over 6 million Obama-Trump voters

I guess they weren’t ideologically pure.

FTR I voted Democratic in every election since 2008.

[CentralMass]

4. From comparable studies of how voters have voted in the general after their

candidateost in the primary. The voters who voted for Sanders voted for Hillary vs those who voted for tRump by a 2;1 margin over Hillary voters in 2008 who vote for Senator Obama vs Senator McCain.

I think you are looking for blame that doesn't exist.. both the 2008 and 2016 Democratic primaries were pretty contentious.

[iemanja]

5. The difference is that Obama became president

Hillary didn't, and Trump did.

Where did you get your figures for voting behavior?

[CentralMass]

11. The other difference was both tRump and Hillary had historically low favorability ratings in 2016.

Last edited Thu May 19, 2022, 05:12 AM - Edit history (1)

Also the study that I referrred to in 2016 looked at the Sander/tRump voters and came to conclusion that they were unlikely have have voted fior Hillary to begin or in other words they were likely independents or republicans.

[Demsrule86]

79. Please stop defending what happened in 16. I can't continue. As is stands women will die

as a result...and thousands have died from Covid already because of 16. We can't do this anymore and expect our Republic to survive.

[SunImp]

83. +1

[FoxNewsSucks]

20. Clinton got 3,000,000+ votes more than MF45

She lost because of republicon stealing.

[inthewind21]

82. She lost

Because of the electoral college. civics 101

[BlueCheeseAgain]

55. Also, there's a huge difference between McCain and Trump.

[Demsrule86]

91. I think there is plenty of blame. I do not find your analysis convincing. Had those who

voted for that ...dreadful Stein woman voted for Hillary, we would have won. So to all those who did not vote for the Democratic candidate in 16 or for that matter for Gore ...how about in 10 and 14, for Obama, I find you despicable period. But, I would be more than willing to let it go and move on. However, I hear the same sort of rhetoric on a daily bases which enrages me and terrifies me. We don't have many more chances IMHO before our Republica is destroyed.

[lapucelle]

111. The impact tells the general election story.

General election voting data:

Bernie Sanders supporters switched their allegiance to Donald Trump in large enough numbers last November to sway the election for the real estate billionaire, according to an analysis of voter data released Tuesday by the blog Political Wire. Since Trump's shock victory over Hillary Clinton, much discussion has focused on the degree to which passionate Sanders supporters' refusal to embrace Clinton led to the Republican winding up in the White House.

According to the analysis of the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Survey, fewer than 80 percent of those who voted for Sanders, an independent, in the Democratic primary did the same for Clinton when she faced off against Trump a few months later. What's more, 12 percent of those who backed Sanders actually cast a vote for Trump.

The impact of those votes was significant. In each of the three states that ultimately swung the election for Trump—Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania—Trump's margin of victory over Clinton was smaller than the number of Sanders voters who gave him their vote.

https://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-trump-2016-election-654320

==========================================================

Link to tweet

==========================================================



==========================================================


https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi%3A10.7910/DVN/GDF6Z0

[LetMyPeopleVote]

115. Thank you for posting this

The facts are clear here

[jcgoldie]

6. Blame the left whenever right wing candidates win

Sounds pretty fucking stupid.

[brooklynite]

8. I'm not blaming them for 1972, 1980, 1984 and 1988....

Just looking at the close ones when a unified center left should have won.

[Demsrule86]

24. I blame Ted Kennedy for 1980. You primary a sitting president, you lose. NO

EXCEPTIONS!

[paleotn]

44. It's called math.

Pretty fucking NOT stupid. And it's not blaming the left. It's blaming the whiners and foolish.

[Demsrule86]

56. I am a progressive and I vote in every election. I love Obama but he had one issue that I didn't

agree with him on...trade agreement but I still voted for him twice. I am not a one-issue voter. And everyone has their own interests..so how can any Democrat be all things to all people? Party loyalty is needed and is stupid to not vote...or use your vote as a message. You are correct.

[Celerity]

7. de rec nt

[dchill]

68. Ah, yes! We used to say unrec around here.

[ymetca]

9. Except

ideological purity works great for Republicans.

Hmmm.. I wonder why that is?

[MadameButterfly]

19. maybe it works to go for what you really believe in

instead of compromising to the lowest common denominatorr.

People will come to the conclusions they want to come to.
What if the lesson is stop ignoring the left because you think they don't have anywhere else to go. There will always be some who don't like being treated that way.

Don't put it on the overwhelming majority of Progressives who will hold our noses and still come out to vote Democratic in the general.

By the way, Bernie was polling higher than Hillary against Trump and the 'moderate establishment' chose to ignore it.

[FoxNewsSucks]

21. AMEN!

I think running to some "center" is what gives credibility to people who say there's no difference.

There is a difference, and it needs to be made clear.

I'm definitely a leftist who is sick of being taken for granted.

[Demsrule86]

26. It has nothing to do with that. It is called party loyalty...they vote Republicans whether they

like a certain candidate or not because they don't want to see Democrats elected..and it works. We should do it too...this message voting or holding their feet to the fire is an abysmal failure.

[Demsrule86]

39. Progressives and anyone else should always vote the Democratic candidate. And the fact that some

don't is why we are about to lose Roe. I say anyone and I mean anyone who doesn't vote for the Democratic candidate in the General should bow his/her head in shame...and then consider the metaphoric blood dripping from their fingers. Vote Democratic always...and turn out-no excuses.

[MadameButterfly]

95. Saying how someone else should vote isn't going to get them to vote

I will always vote Democratic even if my candidate doesn't win the primary. But getting the people on the edges, the ones who might switch parties or the ones who might stay home requires inspiration by the candidate, not the ranting of some people on a Democratic website. We don't own these voters. They have free will whether we like what they do with it or not.

It's frustrating trying to get through to people whose priorities we don't agree with, especially low information voters who are changing their minds with every poll. But that's what we have to do. A rule saying what all Dems have to do in the general isn't going to happen.

[Demsrule86]

96. I don't believe if these voters are not motivated to vote after what has and is going on, we

should even bother. They will always have a reason. We need to have a 50 state strategy and win over new more loyal voters. We may not own voters as you say...but they have no right to complain or ask for a f'ing thing if they don't vote, vote third party, or stay home, screw them.

[MadameButterfly]

101. They have a right to complain

it's called the first ammendment.

They can ask for a thing if we want their vote. If we have plenty of voters elsewhere we can ignore them.
We have to kow-tow to people more obsessed with mis-assigning blame for inflation, etc. than the end of democracy.

What wins an election especially for Democrats is when more people vote, and that means bringing in exactly the voters who we can't count on. Unfortunate that these are the people who hold the cards.

[Demsrule86]

104. Really, well I disagree. There are things I too would like. But I would NEVER withhold my vote

from a Democratic candidate for any reason. And to threaten such is beyond the pale IMHO. And if these are the people that hold the cards and they are so disloyal, then maybe we need to find new voters to hold the cards. These people can not be relied upon and I question their motivation.

I suspect some are simply Republicans or third-party plants. Remember this, the moderates gave us the House in18 and we have fewer seats because these moderates lost in 22 and they should not have. We can move to the middle and reach Independent voters if we must. I hope we don't need to do that. None of my comments are directed at you by the way.

[MadameButterfly]

106. we don't disagree as much as you think

Neither would I withhold a vote for a Democrat for any reason. Yes, I would rather find more reliable voters than cater to these people.

i just haven't noticed us having so many voters that we can afford to lose any.
Some might be Republicans (understandably unhappy with Republicans these days) or third party but that doesn't make them plants. Not everyone is as loyal to one party as you and I.

There can be reasonable debate as to whether you get more voters moving to the left or the right. I think these 'unreliable" voters aren't policy wonks, and it has more to do with the charisma/communication skills of each candidate.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

116. I saw these complaints up close and first hand

I was a Clinton delegate to the 2016 National Convention. Do you really think that sanders did much to campaign for her? sanders endorsement speech was all about himself as was his speech at the convention. I was there when the sanders delegates booed Congressman John Lewis. I was warned about this stunt 30 minutes before it happened by the Clinton campaign whip. According to my whip, sanders was asked to stop this event and declined.

I was at the Texas delegation breakfast when a group of sanders delegates marched in and demanded that we condemn Clinton and change our votes to sanders.

sanders spoke to the Texas delegation the next morning and his speech was again solely about himself. There was a mini-riot due to his delegates the prior morning and the only thing that sanders talked about was himself. sanders did nothing to deal with the fact that his delegates were out of control and did nothing to try to help Hillary Clinton win the general election.

Finally, a group of sanders delegates yelled at my daughter and called her the c-Word because she would not try to get me to change my vote. Again, sanders was asked to tell his delegates to behave during the convention and sanders refused

These disruptions were not simple complaints.

[wnylib]

48. Wasn't it the voters who chose Hillary

at the polls in the primaries?

[plimsoll]

35. I think that really only applies for Trump.

The GOP elite have been promising the mob liberal blood since 1964 with no real intent to deliver. Trump did deliver that's why they love him. For the most part that GOP proletariat have been happy with pious words and promises of vengeance on the liberals. Trump abandoned the piety for crudity but still promised vengeance on liberals. The real delivery was on tax cuts for the rich.

[paleotn]

52. You misidentify lock step and pragmatism for purity.

They're not the same thing. Most Republicans who weren't all that happy with Trump still voted for him, twice, simply because he was a Republican and at least tangentially represented their world view. It's pragmatism that I admire. Not purity.

[Demsrule86]

80. I agree. You won't always like every Democrat but all are better than Republicans especially

now.

[Demsrule86]

100. I agree.

[BeyondGeography]

10. Is this a mad about Fetterman post?

[Sympthsical]

12. I was wondering what the context of this was

What "purity" are people preparing to blame a bad November on now? (We also go full Scooby Doo with these things. "And we would've gotten that election if it weren't for you dang X!" )

Fetterman would track, given posting history.

But I think he's going to win, so meh.

[brooklynite]

13. No.

Are you under the impression that someone won’t vote because Lamb lost?

[Demsrule86]

28. No it is not. You know what Fetterman said when he was asked if he was progressive

which he is by the way. He said I am a Democrat and will vote as a Democrat. That is what we need. Fetterman is awesome.

[BeyondGeography]

34. Hey there

Just tweaking the OP. Fetterman? I love the guy.

[Demsrule86]

43. I agree. I don't really think this is about Fetterman although I have been told it was a proxy

war for 2016. I don't see it. I just really like the guy. How are you?

[BeyondGeography]

46. I'm good

Everything ok with you? I have very high hopes for your guy Timmie against Elegy Fraud.

[Demsrule86]

92. I do too...the numbers are not bad...I think we have shot. Tim Ryan is a good guy.

[Demsrule86]

113. Me too!

[BumRushDaShow]

32. !!!!

[questionseverything]

41. Me thinks the op just likes to stir

Makes me wonder what his goal is

😳

[Demsrule86]

105. Yes, and I got to say this post surprises me.

[walkingman]

14. My two cents...

"1968: anti-war activists decide there’s no difference between Democrats and Republicans. Result: Richard Nixon."

The way I remember it was after the '68 Democratic Convention there were a lot of young people that refused to support Humphrey. Add to that the entire Deep South (Democratic at the time) went for the racist George Wallace.


"2000: environmental activists decide there’s no difference between Democrats and Republicans. Result: George W Bush."

Ralph Nader was the spoiler in 2000 and Gore's VP pick Lieberman (POS) didn't help things. Gore won..SCOTUS should have stayed out of it.

"2016: Democratic Socialist activists decide there’s no difference between Democrats and Republicans. Result: Donald Trump."

Bernie was the spoiler in 2016 and I think Hillary should have picked him for VP - a clear win. But hindsight is 20/20 and the result proved to be maybe the worst outcome ever experienced in American History - the Kraken was released, SCOTUS was changed for at least a generation, and the toilet is swirling even today as we speak.


My take on the entire Democratic debale in '68, '00, and 2016 is that elections have consequences...real consequences and in America voting is a binary choice - VOTE DEMOCRATIC or RISK YOUR ENTIRE WORLDVIEW BEING DESTROYED.

[MadameButterfly]

16. how was Berrnie a spoiler

He didn't run 3rd party like Nader, supported Hillary in the general. Are all candidates who run in the primary and lose spoilers?

[Demsrule86]

29. Come on...the General was lost.

[FoxNewsSucks]

31. She got 3million more votes.

They stole it. Put blame where it belongs.

[Demsrule86]

47. They didn't steal it...it was an electoral college win. Hillary had been damaged very badly by

the time the General rolled around. Party unity would have elected her. We need to vote in every election for the Democratic candidate...and I don't want to hear how so and so won't turn out unless XYZ happens. If that is the case, then they are part of the problem and not the solution.

[FoxNewsSucks]

70. They stole it legally.

and came far too close for comfort to stealing it from Biden too. Despite a 7 million vote lead. The BS with the electoral college is a different topic, and just one way republicons exploit the shitty system.

Of the few Sanders supporters I knew personally who ended up voting for MF45, not ONE of them would ever have voted for Clinton, and most would not have voted for any Democrat. I never did and still don't understand the hatred they had, and they couldn't explain it rationally to me.

BTW, what does PUMA mean?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

73. Party Unity My Ass

They were the angry Clinton supporters in 2008 who refused to back Obama.

[Demsrule86]

75. Really, Obama won election and it was a very close primary so Clinton supporters voted

for President Obama...or he would have lost. I do not recall any Clinton supporter suggesting voting for a third party either. You can say what you want but here we are. The proof is in the rotten pudding...from 2000 to 2016. And we are on the verge of destruction...both our party and our Republic because of it. Every bad thing can be chalked up to losing important elections when we didn't have to. Time to face reality while perhaps we can still do something about it.

[Demsrule86]

77. That is absolute crap...The attacks continued in the General and you know it.

Hillary struggled in the General but she almost won. Some (Greens and others) helped Trump win the election by siphoning off votes for Hillary in key battleground states. I often wonder if they are pleased with themselves or if they feel any remorse for the caged babies, Covid victims, and women who will undoubtedly die as a result of Bush II picks and Trump picks for SCOTUS.

You can defend them and cry PUMA until the cows come how...PUMA was right-wing and we know that but Hillary supporters were smart enough not to fall for it in the 2008 General...and they voted for Pres. Obama. Unfortunately, 16 was a different story in terms of voting for the Democratic nominee by the 'but her email' crowd and we will pay a terrible price for this -likely for decades.

[ymetca]

71. See the problem?

In every Presidential election, it takes an increasingly overwhelming number of votes for a Democrat to win, and then only if a tiny minority in a few swing states inches over an almost imperceptible bifurcation line.

And then we trash each other over the outcome, like this is somehow our fault. We "whiney" few! It isn't.

The entire history of this nation has been the systemic disenfranchisement of the majority, by design.

But let's just keep blaming a tiny fraction of the whole that, for whatever reason, just didn't vote (or get it counted) that particular day in November.

[Demsrule86]

74. It is not my fault but it is the fault of those who don't vote for the Democratic nominee in

every election. What do they think the GOP will be better? I have never understood that for years...going back to Gore. Also, Clinton and Obama were stabbed in the back in 94 (Clinton) and in 10, and in 14 (Obama). Vote Democratic always in every election. The lack of party loyalty has brought us here...on the verge of Roe being ripped away. We can't change the electoral college or stop all gerrymandering...it is built into the system, but we can show up and vote for Democrats in every election and that includes midterms folks. Oh and as a closing statement...fuck the Greens and all third parties...no more feet to fire or message bullshit.

[ymetca]

85. If only that were true

It's the same logic that tells us if we all just recycle a little better, the planet will heal.

We've been guided to that conclusion by what we're led to believe, not by what is actually happening.

Our national political system was designed specifically to favor the wealthy and powerful, and to prevent the masses from exercising any real control over our collective fate.

Unless and until "both sides" (whatever that means) begin to understand that, things will continue to get worse.

[Demsrule86]

98. I heard the same thing with Gore and it is just plain wrong. In a close election every vote

matters. And unless our side is more loyal, we will lose and maybe lose our Republic too. So, I don't give a damn while these folks would rather whine than vote for the Democratic candidate.

[betsuni]

72. +1

[MadameButterfly]

94. Democratic nominees are not destroyed by contetious primaries

they are destroyed by bad campaigns in the general. Yes, Dems should ALL vote Democractic in the general, but we should vote for who we want in the primaries and not be blamed if the person we didn't prefer doesn't win the general.

There were lots of people voting for Bernie in 16 who never would have voted for any other Democrat. He had the support of a lot of the angry libertarian mavericks. We can't wring our hands that they didn't come along when he wasn't the candidate. That's not the same as Bernie Dems, who should have voted and I expect did.

There were Dems who didn't come out--I contend these were low information voters who were feeling disillusioned and didn't fully assess the ramifications of their choice. I contend this had more to do with what was happening in sept. and Oct. than what was happening in the spring. There were lots of unfair things happening to Hilllary: Wikileaks, Russia, Comey...there really was a vast right wing conspiracy. To blame it on the Bernie faction of the Democratic party is a way to just sow the disunity everyone is complaining about.

[Demsrule86]

97. I disagree...go back to 1980 with Kennedy, Carter never recovered.

I have no interest or sympathy for those who didn't turn...out in the General. The blood of God knows how many women is their fault, the fact we can't end gun violence because of the right-wing courts is their fault and the million who are dead from Covid is their fault. And after all, they have wrought, they want to whine and threaten again...I have no interest.

[MadameButterfly]

102. There's hardly a comparison

Kennedy torpedoed Carter's health care plan under the guise of wanting something more expansive, when Carter's plan would have made ObamaCare look pitiful. He was willing to undermine Carter's presidency so he could run against him.

What is similar, is that Carter, like Hillary, was not a dynamic enough candidate to overcome a contentious primary and challenge the GOP. Obama overcame a highly contintious primary and won.

Maybe we need to look more at who won the primary than who lost.

[Demsrule86]

103. Look at any time that an incumbent was primaryed and it destroyed said election is the

the General. There can be no primary in 2024 unless Biden doesn't run and I pray he will as incumbents win. Unless of course, we want to lose the general, then by all means have a primary. While Hillary was not an incumbent, there is no doubt in my mind that she was damaged and never recovered in the General.

[MadameButterfly]

107. Exactly, Hillary was not an incumbant

and should not have been treated as one.

She was damaged, but not by the primary.
There were the Russians, Comey, Facebook, Wikileaks, yes--there really was a vast right wing conspiracy, plus a poorly run campaign (for a second time). To blame it on Democrats having a democratic primary seems a bit misguided to me.

She ran a more negative campaign against Obama than any run against her. She went after Obama's Black minister and Bernie didn't even go after her emails. Hillary's campaign against Obama brought out the best in him, and made him a better candidate for the general.

We Dems have to get over being afraid of primaries--even primaries that last until a convention, if that's what it takes to make a solid choice. Some excellent people were pushed out of the last primary debates over the DNC fear of too much competition--narrowing the debate state before we got to know them, and we ended up with the 2 people who started with the most name recognition. Who knocks an experienced US Sentor off a presidential debate? Do we want the DNC to choose our nominees? Do we not trust democracy any more than the Republicans?

We need to know that our nominee can shine in a tough general election. A tough primary shows us who is up to it.

[Demsrule86]

108. Hillary was damage goods after the primary...going into the General and the negativity did not

stop with the primary..and as a result, we got Trump...I often wonder what would have happened had there been no primary. It was a much closer primary between Clinton and Obama...than in 16. And the Clintons...both of them... support Obama tirelessly. I worked with Bill Clinton during the General in Ohio. And Biden made sure the Midwest went to Obama. Unity was achieved in 08 but not 16 and we lost.

[MadameButterfly]

109. Hillary and her supporters

need to take some responsibility for her role in this. She was not a victim but was rather supported from the beginning by all the powers that be in the Democractic party, ran against the worst candidate in history, and you blame the primary. What if all Democrats who had a primary were destined to lose? Come on. That's an excuse to end democracy in the Democratic party and let the DNC appoint nominees. Let's get us some candidates who can handle a tough (and damaging) primary (like Obama) and go on to victory.

[Cha]

114. No denying that.. although

apparently some do.


Save Our Democracy💙 in 2022 & 2024!

[Demsrule86]

118. I know...every Justice who overturned Roe came from an election that a Democrat was fucked

over...Dukakis was a decent man...he won but ten states which meant a number of Democrats voted for Bush...a betrayal...and we got Clarence Thomas. Next Gore was screwed over by the Greens, Michael Moore, and Nader...we got Alito and Roberts...and finally, Trump appointed three more after the 'but her email crowd refused to vote for Hillary' (fuck them)-Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barret...this is the crew that is now destroying our nation. We have paid an enormous price for not supporting Democrats in every election.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

110. I was a Clinton delegate to the 2016 convention and saw how Russia pushed Sanders supports to revolt

I was a Clinton delegate to the 2016 convention. Before the start of the Convention, Russia leaked some bogus and possible altered emails to stir up the Sanders delegates. Russia helped Sanders and Jill Stein by raising the sad talking points being pushed in this thread.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/02/17/indictment-russians-also-tried-help-bernie-sanders-jill-stein-presidential-campaigns/348051002/

WASHINGTON – It turns out Donald Trump wasn’t the only candidate the Russians allegedly tried to help during the 2016 presidential campaign.

A 37-page indictment resulting from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation shows that Russian nationals and businesses also worked to boost the campaigns of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Green party nominee Jill Stein in an effort to damage Democrat Hillary Clinton.

The Russians “engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump,” according to the indictment, which was issued Friday.

[Demsrule86]

93. I do...some however would like to change history. But it is what it is.

[walkingman]

69. A lot of young people did not vote after their "man" did not win the primary. As far as

Bernie being the VP - who knows but it is obvious that Bernie helped move the Dems towards a move progressive agenda.

I am still puzzled why so much hatred for Hillary (although I supported Bernie) she was maybe the most qualified candidate to ever run.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

112. Sanders' voters voted TFG in sufficient numbers to swing the key states

Here is some more on this topic http://www.newsweek.com/bernie-sanders-trump-2016-election-654320

Bernie Sanders supporters switched their allegiance to Donald Trump in large enough numbers last November to sway the election for the real estate billionaire, according to an analysis of voter data released Tuesday by the blog Political Wire. Since Trump’s shock victory over Hillary Clinton, much discussion has focused on the degree to which passionate Sanders supporters’ refusal to embrace Clinton led to the Republican winding up in the White House.

Here is some more https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/24/16194086/bernie-trump-voters-study

About 12 percent of Bernie Sanders supporters from the Democratic primary crossed party lines and voted for Donald Trump in the general election, a new analysis says.

In several key states — Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan — the number of Sanders to Trump defectors were greater than Trump’s margin of victory, according to new numbers released Wednesday by UMass professor Brian Schaffner.

Link to tweet

[wnylib]

58. Bernie as VP? Really?

I can't see him as content with a second place role. If he even accepted it, which I doubt that he would have, there would have been a continuous power struggle between them if they had become President and VP together.

[Autumn]

15. My interpretation: Make sure Democrats differentiate themselves from Republicans and listen to

what their voters say and need. Overt one way bipartisanship isn't necessarily a good thing. Oh yeah FYI Gore won and Hillary won.

[Demsrule86]

30. If enough on our side (nominally) keep voting that way autumn, we will have a Trump or a

Trump lookalike who declares himself president for life. Vote for whoever the Democratic candidate is in every election...no exceptions. And in closing, I say FUCK THE GREENS.

[Autumn]

36. Check your crystal ball and save your pious lecture. I have never missed an election

in my life and I have voted for for the Democrat every time. We had Trump because he won 3 important states and got the electoral vote.

[Demsrule86]

49. Did I say you? I didn't you know. I merely pointed out that if folks vote as you described

(but didn't do yourself), we will continue to lose important elections which has tragic consequences. Like the loss of Roe.

[FakeNoose]

17. My interpretation: every HORRIBLE President is a Repuke

... and we get them whenever too few Democrats Get Out And Vote.

[FoxNewsSucks]

22. Gore got more votes

Clinton got 3+ million more votes than the Orange Anusmouth. Neither was denied the presidency because "too few democrats" voted. Biden nearly suffered the same fate despite getting over 7 million more votes. And that's AFTER voter suppression. Think how many he'd have had if everyone was able to vote and every vote counted.

Republicon cheating and stealing is the problem. Not democrats' failure to vote.

[Demsrule86]

78. You are exactly...right!

[dpibel]

18. Environmental activists? WTF?

Environmental activists abandoned Al Gore, the only major candidate ever to take climate change seriously?

Are you confusing the Green Party with environmental activists? There may be some overlap, but they aren't synonyms.

In addition to the fact, noted by others in this thread, that Gore won outright and Clinton at least won the popular vote, the endless finger pointing about who really caused problems is fatuous. There were many segments of the Florida vote that could have made Gore's margin too big to steal, not least Jews for Buchanan.

The blame game around both the 2000 and 2016 elections does little but identify which group the blamer likes least.

[58Sunliner]

27. Yep.

[Demsrule86]

23. +1000000

You are absolutely correct. K&R

[58Sunliner]

25. It's nice to feel important. What has decided elections, besides Bush, which was thrown,

is low voter turnout.

[Demsrule86]

37. Right exactly, we didn't show up...sends a message doesn't. Of course I think the message is 'hey

Democrats are not perfect and I am PISSED. So, I am sending a message and fuck my family, my neighbors, my party, and my country...not a great message IMHO. In fact, one could call it destructive.

[58Sunliner]

86. I think we need a national program, of commercials, etc., telling people the importance of voting.

It's an important issue that needs focus monthly. Not just during elections.

[Demsrule86]

87. First of all, I know people who don't vote. When I GOTV, people tell me they don't vote and why..

What I hear mostly is why bother, nothing changes. We have a 50-50 senate and two Democratic Senators who have been very unwilling to vote with us on various things. So, the answer is this...in order for Democrats to legislate important policy...we need a bigger congressional majority...so maybe ads that say what we will do but consider that not everyone is on the same page as to what the most important issues are and while we may encourage one set of voters...we may discourage others. It is complicated. So ads and candidates need to be targeted...a fifty-state strategy. If we don't vote for Democrats, we will lose our Republic period. NO ONE on our side should need 'gimmes' in order to vote for us.

[paleotn]

42. Had those in FL voted for Gore instead of Nader....

there wouldn't have been a second Bush. But, oh my gawd, we must stick to our "principles", fate of the fucking world be damned.

[Demsrule86]

88. That is right. And the thing that drives me nuts is this...more than 20 years later with multiple

lost elections because of this sort of behavior important policies like Roe and Contraception are on the chopping block, I still hear the same crap...' oh I need to be excited', 'oh I need whatever I want now' or else, oh Democrats didn't do XYZ, 'oh Democrats are corporate' and the worst thing is that all this hateful, spiteful rhetoric is directed at Democrats and never Republicans. And these folks never consider that it is unreasonable to have these expectations because we don't have the votes.

There are five votes on SCOTUS that will end a woman's right to choose that came from electing Republicans by our side not supporting the Democratic candidate (Gore and Clinton)...I find that shameful. And they continue to threaten with our Republic on life support to do it again. I would like to say a giant FU to all those who said to me when I got out the vote in 16 'don't threaten me with the courts'.

[Demsrule86]

89. Haha...OK really well since we lost I assume the low turnout was on our side I find that tragic.

[Traildogbob]

33. BEST friend

Just told me after primaries he changed his affiliation to independent. All politicians are crooked and Biden has done nothing. He don’t do politics. He really is ignorant about it all. Told him next time he gets all patriotic and goes to the military cemetery in Asheville, kneel down beside one of the Vietnam soldiers and say, I know you didn’t have the right to vote. But were sent there for that political war for Nixon to keep power, and you are gonna throw your damn vote away to make a political statement. Tell him you don’t do politics, just don’t wanna take the time and inconvenience yourself. It’s too messy.
I’m sure he will completely understand the sacrifice it takes to educate yourself about who is for what and make a vote for democracy to survive.
And the guy did 4 years active Navy and 16 reserves as a corpsman. Don’t do politics and won’t vote for republicans or Dem. But he did vote trump 2016, because Hillary is a crook.
How are we friends? Did not talk much politics until trump. That exposed his idiocracy. Other than that I love the guy. For now,

[paleotn]

40. Not all that admirable in my mind.

But it is politically deadly. Pragmatism. Now that's admirable.

[questionseverything]

45. If the ballots had been counted in 2000, gore would of won

There were 175,000 overvotes the machines rejected, 2/3 were gore votes with additional gore write ins

Hillary was begged to recount Wisconsin but she didn’t so we will never know

[Demsrule86]

53. It the Greens and others had not attacked Gore, he would have won easily and there would

have been no reason for a recount. Fuck Nader.

[questionseverything]

57. He did easily win, the votes were not accurately counted

I get you hate the greens but it’s not their fault the votes aren’t accurately counted

Btw, do you think open hatred of anyone makes them inclined to vote with us?

[Willto]

81. No

He did not easily win. It was close. Nader shaved off enough of the vote in Florida to screw him. And that egotistical jackass is probably still proud of it.

[world wide wally]

51. Idealogical purity is just another word for too stupid to figure it out.

[BlueCheeseAgain]

54. I wish people realized that voting is not an act of love or devotion...

You're not saying you approve of everything that a candidate says. Or even most of the things. All it's saying is that you prefer that candidate to the others.

Don't like Al Gore, but prefer him to George W. Bush? Then vote for Al Gore.
Don't like Hillary Clinton, but know that Donald Trump is a danger to America and the world? Then vote for Hillary Clinton.

The Green Party, with their "everyone else is corrupt and equally bad" stance, is probably the most unintentionally destructive political forces in modern American history.

[11 Bravo]

60. Sirhan Sirhan had a LOT to do with any decisions that were made in 1968.

Bobby was the first politician I ever worked to help elect. I doubt that I will ever get over his loss.

[AntivaxHunters]

61. I was going to post a reply then I said

to myself, "no", because it's 2022 and the rights of women are being taken away to the point they could be potentially executed for having an abortion in a state like Louisiana. So why talk about things years ago when we have the hear & now to fight for?

Unity or lose. It's that simple.

[Novara]

62. I've got bad news for you

Our society is getting more and more selfish with people demanding their preferred candidate or no one.

Example: Bernie-supporting Dem voters who would rather sit out an election because Bernie didn't get the nomination rather than suck it up and vote for Hillary or Biden for the good of the country.

And it isn't just the Bernie-loving Dems, though those are the most vocal.

Yes, these people exist.

We tend to be anti-authoritarian, and that's a good thing. HOWEVER, it bites us in the ass when people get rigid and refuse to vote in the general if their preferred candidate didn't get the nomination.

The other side sucks it up and gets in line. On our side we have people stamping their feet because their favorite candidate didn't get the nom.

[Demsrule86]

99. Then I guess Republicans will continue to win...as their voters are not doing that. Loyalty matters.

[czarjak]

63. Cheating! They cheat too. And they're damned proud of it.

[Joinfortmill]

64. Heads Up. Next time may be our last time.

[Patton French]

65. Captain Obvious

But purity is very important to some, even at risk of the results you highlight.

[bluboid]

66. my humble interpretation -

ideological purity is not admirable - it's stupid beyond words!!!

this is not a utopian society - never has been, never ever will be!

so cut the sh%t!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

117. I agree with your analysls

[H2O Man]

84. Gracious!

The OP is good in illustrating why memes & bumper-stickers are often shallow and tell only the tip of the ice cube, reducing them in value from meaningful conversation. However, I do agree with you on one of the three.

The 1968 bit is silly, as anyone alive and conscious back then knows. Hopefully, no one mistakenly believes it was those darned anti-war activists. The Democratic Party was divided internally, starting at the top, from early 1968 on. One can only speculate, but RFK may have been the most likely candidate to beat Nixon. But, as educated people know, there were not primaries in every state back then, and a significant number of top Democrats favored the vice president. We'll never know what might have been had Robert lived.

The Democratic Convention was, of course, devisive. Yet the majority of the anti-war demonstrators outside the convention and victims of the police riot, were of draft age but not old enough to vote. So blaming them for not voting for HHH seems about as valid as saying the Chicago police riot would justify defunding the police today. Different sides of the same ignorant coin.

Had HHH broken with LBJ a week earlier before Election Day, all indications suggest he would have won. But he didn't. Nixon, of course, lied about his "secret plan" to end the war, and that plus his "law & order" stance got him the votes of the older, middle class Democrats that gave Nixon the victory. Hence, your first claim is at best nonsense.

Now let['s take a gander at 2000, shall we? At the time, Al Gore was the most popular national politic figure in America with environmental groups and their members. It would be more accurate, though equally foolish, to blame the Jewish voters in FL who mistakenly voted for Pat Buchanan, due to the infamous "butterfly ballot." Neither deserve serious attention. What can be said is that the make-up of the US Supreme Court is mighty important, since their selection of Bush included several members voting for him, despite serious conflicts of interest.

The importance of the Supreme Court is obviously iimportant in considering 2016. The general election was the first time either major party nominated a candidate with an over-50% negative polling among the general public going in. The Democratic primaries were divisive, and you are correct that this division brought about a lack of support from groups -- such as white and black women -- on Election Day. I'm not sure either of those two groups could accurately be termed "Democratic Socialist activists," but I sure hope they are moving in that direction.

In the end, without question, the responsibility for either a win or loss belongs to the candidate. There is no advantage gained by blaming the very voters the Democratic Party needs to win, now is there? Perhaps it is a pot you should avoid stirring. We need to take the Obama-Biden approach instead, as that leads to victory. I, for one, prefer winning to carrying a chip on my shoulder. Maybe that's just me, though. I can only speculate.

The most important point you raise, and the only one that educated, well-informed people need to consider, is the "there's no difference between the parties" bit. We can be certain that our opposition will attempt to make Joe Manchin the poster child to promote this. Thus, we need to take a lesson from Malcolm X -- no chance I wouldn't mention Malcolm here today, as it is his birthday -- and set a glass of sparkling clean water next to a glass of filthy sludge, and trust a thirsty public to make the correct choice.