Article: Unless the Democrats Run Sanders, a Trump Nomination Means a Trump Presidency

[FourScore]

Article: Unless the Democrats Run Sanders, a Trump Nomination Means a Trump Presidency
By geebeebee
Tuesday Feb 23, 2016 · 9:01 PM EST



Link: www.currentaffairs.org/…

As a Donald Trump nomination for the Republican Party looks more and more like a reality, it makes it critical that the Democrats be prepared with a candidate that can defeat Trump. And, it is fairly obvious that the candidate to do that is Bernie Sanders. Polls prove this, but so does logic.

This article expresses that logic well:

Here, a Clinton match-up is highly likely to be an unmitigated electoral disaster, whereas a Sanders candidacy stands a far better chance. Every one of Clinton’s (considerable) weaknesses plays to every one of Trump’s strengths, whereas every one of Trump’s (few) weaknesses plays to every one of Sanders’s strengths. From a purely pragmatic standpoint, running Clinton against Trump is a disastrous, suicidal proposition.

It speaks how Trump’s campaigning style is short on plans and big on outrageous statements, typically attempting to reduce his opponent. Hillary would be a dream for his type of circus, and the author makes a pretty good effort at what a Trump attack on Hillary may look like:

“She lies so much. Everything she says is a lie. I’ve never seen someone who lies so much in my life. Let me tell you three lies she’s told. She made up a story about how she was ducking sniper fire! There was no sniper fire. She made it up! How do you forget a thing like that? She said she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary, the guy who climbed Mount Everest. He hadn’t even climbed it when she was born! Total lie! She lied about the emails, of course, as we all know, and is probably going to be indicted. You know she said there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq! It was a lie! Thousands of American soldiers are dead because of her. Not only does she lie, her lies kill people. That’s four lies, I said I’d give you three. You can’t even count them. You want to go on PolitiFact, see how many lies she has? It takes you an hour to read them all! In fact, they ask her, she doesn’t even say she hasn’t lied. They asked her straight up, she says she usually tries to tell the truth! Ooooh, she tries! Come on! This is a person, every single word out of her mouth is a lie. Nobody trusts her. Check the polls, nobody trusts her. Yuge liar.”

Bernie, on the other hand, has strengths that match up to Trump’s strengths as a campaigner. He has a clean record, is known as incredibly honest, even to a fault, and he does not fold under pressure.

Trump’s various unique methods of attack would instantly be made far less useful in a run against Sanders. All of the most personal charges (untrustworthiness, corruption, rank hypocrisy) are much more difficult to make stick. The rich history of dubious business dealings is nonexistent. None of the sleaze in which Trump traffics can be found clinging to Bernie. Trump’s standup routine just has much less obvious personal material to work with. Sanders is a fairly transparent guy; he likes the social safety net, he doesn’t like oligarchy, he’s a workaholic who sometimes takes a break to play basketball, and that’s pretty much all there is to it. Contrast that with the above-noted list of juicy Clinton tidbits.

Trump can’t clown around nearly as much at a debate with Sanders, for the simple reason that Sanders is dead set on keeping every conversation about the plight of America’s poor under the present economic system. If Trump tells jokes and goofs off here, he looks as if he’s belittling poor people, not a magnificent idea for an Ivy League trust fund billionaire running against a working class public servant and veteran of the Civil Rights movement. Instead, Trump will be forced to do what Hillary Clinton has been forced to do during the primary, namely to make himself sound as much like Bernie Sanders as possible. For Trump, having to get serious and take the Trump Show off the air will be devastating to his unique charismatic appeal.

This article has many more excellent points as to why Bernie Sanders is CLEARLY the best candidate to run against Donald Trump. We cannot afford to lose this one; it would be insanity to pick the candidate that we KNOW will be the weakest against their presumptive candidate.

VOTE BERNIE SANDERS.

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/2/23/1490081/-Article-Unless-the-Democrats-Run-Sanders-a-Trump-Nomination-Means-a-Trump-Presidency

[cantbeserious]

1. IMHO - A Vote For HRC In The Primary Is A Vote For Trump In The General Election

eom

[StevieM]

30. Well, fortunately, if she wins the nomination she will have your support in the GE, right? (eom)

[bobbobbins01]

37. Loyalty Pledge Time!

If she wins the nomination god help us.

[CorporatistNation]

85. Game Over...

Anyone with a scintilla of insight understands what the outcome will be...

[cantbeserious]

61. Down Ballot Democrats - Yes - Top Of The Ballot - No

eom

[Proud Liberal Dem]

68. Surely

youcantbeserious?

[cantbeserious]

93. Always Serious

eom

[rhett o rick]

112. I don't think some realize what is at stake. There are a lot of people both Democrats and

Republicons that really, really do not like Clinton. She represents big money in politics that we as good Democrats are fighting will all our heart.

There will be some Democrats that will not be bullied into voting for someone they really don't want. Right or wrong if you don't want Trump, you'd better take that into consideration.

Some tried to warn the Democratic Elite in 2000 that the grassroots were tired of the DLC, but the hubris of the Democratic Elite ignored us and gave us Bush.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

122. And for those of the grassroots whom stayed at home and/or voted for Nader (in Florida)

I wonder how well that worked out for them?

[rhett o rick]

125. The point is that the Oligarchy won. The Wealthy 1% supported Democratic Elite didn't care

if Bush won. They might rather have had the DLC candidate but never, never a progressive (read real Democrat). You are turning your nose up at people, honest hard working Americans that are sick of the choices give to us by the PTB. The corrupt culture is out in the open. The Clintons have amassed a huge wealth of between $100,000,000 and $200,000,000 from honorarium. From gifts from the Oligarchy. They have jumped into the top 1% of the top 1% in a matter of 15 years.

And now we are faced with the same situation as in 2000. Nominate Clinton and piss off millions of grassroots Democrats looking to get Big Money out of government. If they stay home it's because they (Homey) don't play that game. They won't be blackmailed into playing that game.

So if you don't want Trump, then nominate the People's choice and not the PTB's choice.

"Take the chance - accept the challenge - join the movement that can Change the Narrative. "

[hifiguy]

115. Abso-frikkin'-lutely.

With laser beams on their heads.

[peace13]

80. People who support Clinton in light of all that we know..

...can not expect others to double down on their bad decision! Support Hill at your own peril and know that the damage being done is real with consequences for all of us. Personally I think that a choice between Clinton and Trump are one in the same. Actors vying for a position of power to reap all rewards from their friends who are waiting in the wings! You have the right to your decision, I'll give you that. Please don't expect me to clean up after you!

[trillion]

119. the history annals already show Trump to be a fascist threatening

Violence from the start and consistently. Should he deliver we can't be claim not knowing to the next generation. I'm not trying to scare, I just saw him threatening violence again on democracynow today.

[libdem4life]

124. I think you meant annals?

[trillion]

127. Yep, and I was typing on my tablet while walking out a door. First message I've ever posted from

a tablet.

My point is, everyone ignores what Trump is saying. I think that fascist little man means what he says. His supporters certainly cheer when he calls for violence - today he was irked because a protester got non-violently removed where he was campaigning and said to his crowd that the guy was now laughing at them and he'd personally like to punch the guy in the face. How many times has he said this? He means it. His crowd cheered. The protester was non-violent. I will not ignore a violent person.

I'm spending a lot of time trying to decide who would be worse - Hillary who already has blood on her hand from the Honduras coup, and fighting the Syrian peace deal that let both countries sink into incredible violence. or Trump who's threatening minorities here and is supported by people who want a race war.

It takes a pretty bad candidate for me to consider Hillary because I'm aware of how sold out to everyone she is and her incredibly bad foreign policy including being a war hawk.

[libdem4life]

130. I share your concern, to be sure. It puts us in a dilemma.

[peace13]

131. Trump is bad.

The ignorant folks that adorn our shores are scarier yet! This country is full of them and no matter who is selected for President those folks will still be here, plotting against the country they 'love'. The loss of a free press has done some true damage to this place.

[votesparks]

135. It doesn't matter

Left politicos like people who post here will vote for Hillary over Trump. But independents won't show up for her, and she won't be able to motivate the youth base that has been motivated by Sanders to volunteer. She just won't. If we want our party to succeed in this election, we should support the candidate who can inspire an army of volunteers willing to do the necessary street work, as Sanders has proven he is able to do.

[Jester Messiah]

136. lol. If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.

No one's going to turn out for Hillary.

[srobert]

138. The Answer Is, Hell No! I Will NOT Vote for Hillary in the GE

The week before last, a video showed up on Youtube of Carrier workers being told that their jobs in Indianapolis are being moved to Monterrey, Mexico. This was made possible by the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, that was signed into law by Bill Clinton. Similarly, trade with China which has destroyed manufacturing jobs in the U.S. was made possible by legislation signed by Bill Clinton. Obama favors a similar trade agreement, the TPP, that will make it easier yet to outsource jobs from the U.S. to nations where workers have no rights, no unions, no democracy, and live in poverty. It's one of the few areas where Republicans think Obama is doing the "right" thing. Hillary has backed such trade agreements at times, and at other times opposed them, depending on which way the political winds are blowing. Her sudden opposition to the TPP only came up in response to Sanders gaining ground on the issue. If she were to actually win the White House, she would owe it to her Wall Street backers to favor trade and labor policies that would hold labor costs down. That means holding wages down for people who work for a living, instead of invest for a living.

My friends in Canada have health care whether they have jobs or not. Canada as a nation pays 11% of its GDP for health care and covers every one of their citizens, while we pay 17%, and we fail to cover everyone. In the U.S. health care costs can still force families into bankruptcy even with Obamacare, which enriches health insurance company CEO's, while keeping out of pocket costs too high. Health insurance companies in the U.S. kept us from having a national discussion on this during both the Clinton and Obama administrations by controlling both the media and politicians from both parties.

Hillary Clinton's ties to the rich and powerful, confine her progressive positions to social issues like abortion, gay marriage, gun control, and perhaps climate change. But on the economic interests of working people, she may as well be a Republican. The interests of working class people would always be compromised away under her leadership, just as they have been under both her husband's and Obama's administrations. Bernie Sanders backs the kinds of policies that Franklin Roosevelt would have backed, and that is what we need. More union jobs. Health care as a right. Fair Trade, rather than Free Trade. College as a public good. Prosperity for all of us, not just billionaires and austerity for everyone else. I'd rather allow Trump to become President than for Democrats to continue drifting to the economic right as they have been doing since Ronald Reagan was President.

Hell, NO! I WILL NOT vote for Hillary in November. Either help me get Bernie Sanders as the nominee, or I will vote for Jill Stein and the Green party ticket in the G.E. I speak for many, and that is the reason why Bernie polls better against Trump than Hillary does. Don't blame me if Trump wins.

[Betty Karlson]

50. Crude, but true.

[LWolf]

74. +1

[peacebird]

76. I agree. If Hillary is the nominee, Trump wins. When will the FBI decide on indictments? When will

the Judge issue summons for Huma and Hillary?

[Politicalboi]

2. Trump would have so much to work with

And he didn't even touch Bill.

[Gothmog]

34. Give a little thought to what a GOP campaign against Bernie Sanders might look like

I hold the opposite view to the opinion set forth in the OP and believe that nominating Sanders would insure a Trump victory. In addition to the attacks by the Kochs, Rove and the RNC, Sanders would also be facing a well financed third party run by M. Bloomberg.

I personally believe that the GOP, the Kochs, Rove and Bloomberg would destroy Sanders if he was the nominee. This article from VOX has some good predictions as to how nasty the GOP and the Kochs will be http://www.vox.com/2016/2/3/10903404/gop-campaign-against-sanders

I'm not sure I have the requisite killer instinct to fully imagine how the GOP will play a Sanders campaign. But consider just this low-hanging fruit:

Sanders would be the oldest president ever to take office — older than John McCain, who faced serious questions about this in 2008.

Sanders is a socialist. "No, no," you explain, "it's democratic socialist, like in Denmark." I'm sure GOP attack ads will take that distinction into careful consideration.

Sanders explicitly wants to raise taxes, and not only on the rich.

That's just the obvious stuff. And he has barely been hit on any of it so far.

I have no real way of knowing whether Sanders and his advisers appreciate what's coming if he wins the nomination, or whether they have a serious plan to deal with it, something beyond hoping a political revolution will drown it out.

But at least based on my experience, the Bernie legions are not prepared. They seem convinced that the white working class would rally to the flag of democratic socialism. And they are in a state of perpetual umbrage that Sanders isn't receiving the respect he's due, that he's facing even mild attacks from Clinton's camp.

If they are aware that it's been patty-cakes so far, that much, much worse and more vicious attacks are inevitable, and that no one knows how Sanders might perform with a giant political machine working to define him as an unhinged leftist, they hide it well.

In the name of diverting some small percentage of the social media bile surely headed my way, let's be clear about a few things: This is not an argument against supporting Sanders. There's nothing dumber than making political decisions based on how the other side might react. (For one thing, that would have foreclosed supporting Obama, a black urbanite with a funny name, in 2008.)

But it is an argument that Sanders has gaping vulnerabilities that have not yet been exploited at all, so his followers should not yet feel sanguine about his ability to endure conservative attacks. Also they should get a thicker skin, quick.

The GOP will have a great deal of material to work with and the Kochs will be spending $887 million, the RNC candidate may spend another billion dollars and Bloomberg (who will only run if Sanders is the nominee) will spend another billion dollars. These groups will have a great deal to work with

[trillion]

39. I'm kind of lost on the math here. I've gathered the only way for trump to win is if the dems are

not united, Correct? How could anything Trump say against any blue candidate matter? the Reds will vote Red and the Blues will vote Blue.

Could the Dem or the Red candidate sway enough undecideds that matter? Are their that many undecided?

There are 20 million more dem leaning voters in the country than republican. If the dems are united, I think we win the election.

The issue is which candidate can unite the dems. I don't think it's Hillary.

[femmedem]

72. Unaffiliated voters (independents) are 42% of the electorate.

Republicans are 26% and Democrats are 29%.

Democrats could unite behind Clinton and still lose the GE depending on who unaffiliated voters prefer. I'd be a lot less worried with a Sanders nomination than a Clinton, because Sanders is doing better with unaffiliated voters than Clinton. I believe that with no loyalty to the Democratic party and with a strong anti-establishment mood, enough of those unaffiliateds would swing to Trump to give him the presidency.

[trillion]

89. I didn't know they could vote red. That's actually horrible.

[hifiguy]

116. Much of that portion of the electorate cannot stand Hillary Clinton

and would no sooner vote for her than they would swallow a live squid.

[bvar22]

99. The Republicans have called EVERY Democratic Nominee a "socialist" since FDR.

They WILL call Hillary a "socialist" too,
so this attack is nothing more than an exercise in mental mas self-pleasuring.

[Gothmog]

103. Yes but the Kochs and the GOP will not have a segment from MTP to use in these ads

The attack ads from this appearance on Meet the Press write themselves https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/12/why-bernie-sanders-isnt-going-to-be-president-in-5-words/

Meet the Press ✔ @meetthepress
CHUCK TODD: Are you a capitalist?@BernieSanders: No. I'm a Democratic Socialist.
8:33 AM - 11 Oct 2015

And, in those five words, Sanders showed why — no matter how much energy there is for him on the liberal left — he isn't getting elected president.

Why? Because Democrat or Republican (or independent), capitalism remains a pretty popular concept — especially when compared to socialism. A 2011 Pew Research Center survey showed that 50 percent of people had a favorable view of capitalism, while 40 percent had an unfavorable one. Of socialism, just three in 10 had a positive opinion, while 61 percent saw it in a negative light.

Wrote Pew in a memo analyzing the results:

Of these terms, socialism is the more politically polarizing — the reaction is almost universally negative among conservatives, while generally positive among liberals. While there are substantial differences in how liberals and conservatives think of capitalism, the gaps are far narrower.

...The simple political fact is that if Sanders did ever manage to win the Democratic presidential nomination — a long shot but far from a no shot at this point — Republicans would simply clip Sanders's answer to Todd above and put it in a 30-second TV ad. That would, almost certainly, be the end of Sanders's viability in a general election.

Americans might be increasingly aware of the economic inequality in the country and increasingly suspicious of so-called vulture capitalism — all of which has helped fuel Sanders's rise. But we are not electing someone who is an avowed socialist to the nation's top political job. Just ain't happening.

You can try to argue that the two terms are not the same but that will not stop the Kochs from running $200 milion to $300 million using that term in negative ads that would be very effective.

[bvar22]

107. They WILL do the same to Hillary.

What part of that do you NOT understand?

[Gothmog]

108. It is far harder to do without the direct quote that Sanders gave on Meet the Press

What is the opposite of being a capitalist? Sanders gave the GOP a great source of attack ads

The GOP's attempt to brand President Obama did not work well because President Obama never said that he was not a capitalist

[srobert]

139. 2 Types of Voters in a Sanders - Trump - Bloomberg Election

There are two types of voters in that scenario. Those who would vote for Bernie and wouldn't be influenced by ANY amount of money the billionaires could spend, and the other type, who think that being a billionaire makes one qualified to serve as President. The latter would have their votes split between Trump and Bloomberg. Bernie would win by an even larger margin, than he would if Bloomberg stays home.

[redstateblues]

82. Bernie is a target rich environment

The last Democrat to run for President promising to raise taxes on the middle class was Mondale- He won one state

[hifiguy]

118. And Her Highness isn't?

You're joking, right?

[Uncle Joe]

3. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, FourScore.

[FourScore]

5. I'm so glad you like it, Uncle Joe!

[Uncle Joe]

10. Peace to you, FourScore.

[daleanime]

4. K&R.....

[LiberalElite]

6. Kicking nt

[Thinkingabout]

7. By the time the GOP gets through vetting and swiftboating is completed on Sanders he

probably will not be voting for himself. It will be brutal.

[jeff47]

8. So Clinton's campaign is incompetent?

How come they can't use these oh-so-easy attacks on Sanders? Why are they relying on things like lying about pictures instead?

[840high]

15. +1

[Peace Patriot]

14. You don't think that's going to happen to ANY candidate we put up...

...but especially Hillary Clinton?

Sanders is the best possible candidate to weather attacks about corruption and lies. It's Hillary's huge unfavorability and untrustworthy numbers that will count when Trump attacks. Sanders has just the opposite--very high favorability and trustworthiness. People are much less likely to believe Trump's attacks on Sanders than on Clinton. And it's more than a perception of his honesty. It's backed up by the facts. He hasn't used his public service to enrich himself. He doesn't take corporate and lobbyist money. He doesn't take payola from Goldman Sachs or anybody else, in the guise of "speeches" or any other guise. He has no dirty deals in his past, such as Hillary's godawful Saudi arms deal (thru the Clinton Foundation). He lives simply. He is unpretentious. And he is also very, very smart and extremely adept at keeping our political discussion about THE ISSUES.

And, on the issues, he is a genuine, straightforward, honest New Dealer. On foreign policy, he supports Obama's detente and peace initiatives. He believes in diplomacy first. He was not only right about the Iraq War, he predicted this godawful mess that it caused. And he opposes these "free trade for the rich" agreement which are massively destructive for U.S. workers and for planet Earth, and which are an assault on the sovereignty of the American people. (We can be severely punished, in secretive international tribunals, for our labor laws, wage laws, environmental laws, food safety laws, et al.)

Smart man. Clean. Unflappable. Doesn't take things personally. Keeps a steady outlook in the face of media lies, dirty tricks and all the crap of Corporate-run campaigns.

[Thinkingabout]

52. Hillary has had years of vetting by the GOP, many non scandals, how

Many times has Sanders been investigated by Congress? Have you ever heard Trump call Sanders a socialist? It will get lots more brutal than anything used here on DU.

[djean111]

57. And that has resulted in a great many people ALREADY disliking her and distrusting her.

She cannot be "rehabilitated" in the minds of the people who tell me "anyone but Hillary".

[Thinkingabout]

65. Then the same will happen to Sanders. All of the non scandals has

Not made me distrust Hillary, it has made less trust of the GOP.

[djean111]

69. Well, and that is, of course, your right, and your decision.

But that does not change anyone else's decision, and it sure won't endear Hillary to anyone who already does not care for her. In addition, the younger folks look stuff up, they don't watch network TV, they care about issues that affect them. That's where Hillary falls short, IMO. They don't care if she is a woman. They care about war and the economy and college costs and jobs. Real stuff.

In any event, we shall see, won't we? The lines here at DU are drawn, and when I talk to people in real life, I tell them how I feel. You are doing the same. Nothing to do but see what happens, eh?

[Thinkingabout]

73. Peehaps they do not know her history.

[djean111]

75. They look stuff up.

They know/will know about her history. We all have different views on what that history means to the future, or how it affects what we think of her judgement and alliances.

[Thinkingabout]

77. Good, hopefully from reliable sources.

[Gene Debs]

23. If Hillary's bullshit swiftboat smear attacks on Sanders haven't worked, what makes you think

the GOP's will?

[Thinkingabout]

53. What bullshit swiftboat smear attacks have been made by Hillary?

Did you hear the swiftboat attacks on John Kerry a war hero? This was by a super PAC? Have you heard the nasty attacks Trump has used on John McCain by Trump and they are both Republicans and John McCain was not running this time?

[bobbobbins01]

38. This is Hillary Clinton's last chance at the presidency.

If there is anything to be found, she'd have already found it and used it. She is going to fight tooth and nail to win and she isn't above fighting dirty. Hillary vetted Sanders for the republicans.

[Thinkingabout]

55. Do you really think Sanders has been vetted?

No, he hasn't. They will pull up every vote, every year of his life and will run ads attacking him just as they have been on Sanders.
With twenty five years in congress there are lots of videos and just as we see here on DU of Hillary with smears they will have of Sanders. No, the GOP will be vicious and uncontrollable. Lots of stories have not been told. They called Obama a socialist,they will have a hit song with Sanders.

[bobbobbins01]

62. Nah, Clinton would get to it first.

She doesn't miss an opportunity to sling mud. If its out there, she found it already. David Brock has a paycheck to earn.

[Thinkingabout]

64. Can you point to a time she has slung mud?

[hifiguy]

117. Tell us what they are going to find.

Do proceed.

Bernie's squeaky clean.

[Thinkingabout]

120. I will leave the thrill to the GOP, would not want to take the wind out of their sail.

I doubt this will be needed.

[JudyM]

9. In addition to just preferring Bernie as a candidate, this is the thing that seems so plain,

and what is more important than which of them can actually win against the rethugs?

[Waiting For Everyman]

11. Very well stated, and true.

It'll be President Sanders or President Trump. We Dems hold the power to choose which it will be.

[Arazi]

12. Kicked and recced. This is a good article eom

[Eko]

13. The author of the article lied.

"Everything she says is a lie."

[Peace Patriot]

16. "the author makes a pretty good effort at what a Trump attack on Hillary may look like"

Welcome to DU, Eko. Please don't misquote people.

"...what a Trump attack on Hillary may look like..."

You don't think Trump will say, "Everything she says is a lie"? He surely will. And, with her huge unfavorability and untrustworthy numbers, many people will be inclined to believe him.

And that is the problem. Sanders has huge favorability and trustworthy numbers. Many people will be inclined the other way, to distrust Trump's attacks.

[Eko]

18. You are correct.

And I apologize. I missed that part. And thanks for the welcome but I have been here for a while.

[oasis]

17. Count on women. They are Hillary's White House X factor.

Madam President.

[tex-wyo-dem]

19. I don't think she will ever become...

"Madam President", but she sure as hell will take down the whole Democratic Party trying.

[Ned_Devine]

21. And not all women are voting for Hillary.

In fact, Bernie's numbers with women of all ages and ethnicities are strong, so it's probably not such a good idea to be so presumptuous.

[Nonhlanhla]

126. That is true

But I don't think that will be equally true against Trump. To be sure, some very conservative women will vote for him, but I suspect quite a lot of more moderate Republican and independent women will rather vote for Hillary than for Trump.

Many women preferring Bernie I can quite understand. But Trump, no.

[oasis]

27. Prepare yourself, then for a surprise next November.

[trillion]

42. A few more national polls and we can tell the Hillary supporters to quit

expecting us to switch to unite us. They should switch if Bernie has a national majority.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

71. If the polls support him

He will win the nomination, right?

[trillion]

90. I'm beginning to think the fix is in on that one. After 500+ super delegates for Hillary

I'm gathering the DNC wants to make sure its an establishment candidate.

[INdemo]

81. Debbie,Hillary, Rendell and H.Dean

and Bill have already done that.

[lastone]

22. Trump wins

And Hillary losses, your delusional to think otherwise.

[oasis]

25. I don't think it, I know it.

[TDale313]

28. Not this woman.

I'm supporting Bernie. He can beat Trump. I don't think she can. Her weaknesses feed right into his strengths.

[oasis]

31. Bernie should have gone ahead and accepted PAC money.

Now he's in a dither on which Super Tuesday states he needs to cover before his money runs out. I'll give him credit for winning the battle for principle, but the war for the presidency goes to HRC.

[TDale313]

33. He can do this without taking superpac money.

[trillion]

43. He doesn't need money to win like Hillary does. Jeb had by far the most money in the Republican

campaign, look what it did for him? Hillary had more money than Bernie, and she just announced she's broke last month. I realize all she has to do is call JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, or Citigroup - and many others in her super pac. What I'm saying is all the money in the world won't help her.

Look how it's helped her so far.

[Hoyt]

36. Trump can't handle a strong, experienced women. Heck, some Sanders' supporters can't.

[trillion]

46. I think it's her experience I can't handle.

Honduras
Columbia
Syria
Iraq

Bernie has been in Washington a lot longer than Hillary. I think his experience counts. And, I am a woman.

[djean111]

59. You really think that is it? Bwahahahaha!

That is, I think, being deliberately shallow. Or thinking the rest of us are. it is what Hillary has done, and would do, with that "strong experience" that I detest.

[grossproffit]

84. THIS!

[Jester Messiah]

137. HAHAHA!!

Yeah, that must be it...

[djean111]

58. Bwah! I am a woman, and I detest the things she stands for - war and the TPP and Wall Street.

Sending those children back to danger. Not caring if children picked up cluster bombs and got blown to bits.

And I have never met a woman, in "real life", who has not said "anyone but Hillary".
By your flawed reasoning, Sarah Palin should have helped sweep McCain into office, or Carly Fiorina should have been a frontrunner for the GOP. We are not voting by demographics now. New paradigm.

[Cobalt Violet]

63. pretty sexist view point. A lot of women can't stand her even if she has a vagina.

Please don't count on me to vote with my vagina.

[peacebird]

78. I only know 1 woman leaning towards her. The others are for Bernie, except one for Trump

I'm a woman who is 100% Bernie. In the primary and the general

[lastone]

20. To quote Randi "it's stunning"

How people don't see this, Hillary gets the nomination we'll have 4 (at least) years of reversing every progressive initiative passed in the last 30 years.

It's time to be clear, trump will get the nomination. Hillary losses to trump in EVERY CREDIBLE PROJECTION! We, democrats, need to look at the general and Bernie Sanders is the only choice we have if we want to win.

[Downtown Hound]

47. What a pile of shit

Please list to me even one of these EVERY CREDIBLE PROJECTIONS you speak of. Most polls have Hillary beating Trump. I'll give you that Bernie polls better than she does, but she still beats Trump in almost every poll. I support Sanders and will probably vote for him, but this narrative that Hillary is doomed if she wins the nomination is a bunch of bullshit.

[Marr]

87. Here.

Where is the polling that shows Clinton beating Trump?

[djean111]

60. Exactly. And I think they know that, and are just preparing the excuses and where to deflect and

assign the blame.

Hillary would happily ram through and inflict everything on the Third Way wish list, and say the GOP made her do it.

[silvershadow]

24. That's right. nt

[SoLeftIAmRight]

26. Americans will not vote establishment - America will get change - Sanders or Trump

...

[Gothmog]

29. The experts and the predictive markets (i.e. the free market system) disagrees with this analysis

The predictive markets which are based on the free market system does not accept the analysis in the OP. If anyone really believes this analysis, then go make some money by opening an Irish brokerage account You would get great odds on this belief and can make some money http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-president-winner Clinton's odds of being the Democratic nominee has shot up 6 or 7 points since Nevada and the odds of the Democratic candidate (i.e. Clinton) winning the general election has gone up also

[lastone]

32. Up 6 points nationally

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141357814

[Downtown Hound]

48. Sheesh, don't ruin these people's delusional fantasy with facts! n/t

[Gothmog]

67. I like the real world

Last week when Clinton was down to 82% chance of being the nominee, I was seriously considering buying a contract because the price was getting close to being a worthwhile investment. Now the markets are giving Clinton a 90% chance of being the nominee and the price of an option really does not make sense.

I would be being making some decent returns if I had bought an option prior to Biden dropping out

[Fumesucker]

49. Why would you think the "free market" is convincing to people who believe it's part of the problem?

The "free market" gave us Bhopal, the fertilizer plant explosion in West, Texas and tetraethyl lead in gasoline.

[Gothmog]

66. The free market system is efficient about processing information

Here the people who are making investments and risking their own money are not caring about the analysis is the OP and are predicting that Sanders will not be the nominee and that Clinton will be the next POTUS.

Again, if you really believe the analysis in the OP, go make the money because the financial markets are happy to take your your money. You will get great odds because the people who are putting their own money at risk disagree with the analysis in the OP

[bvar22]

109. Oh, Yes.

That is why the "free market system" predicted the crash of 2007.

[Marr]

88. Do you have any actual, scientific polling to cite, or is gimmicky 'market

magic' the sum of it?

Here's some actual polling.

[Gothmog]

94. People are investing money based on their reading of the polls

These investors have looked at all of the polling and have concluded that they do not believe that Sanders will be the nominee. It has been fun watching the numbers move against Sanders after Nevada. Clinton was as low as 80% to be the nominee two weeks ago and now she is at 90%. That is a meaningful movement.

The old Intrade system was very accurate as to its predictions

[Marr]

95. In other words, no.

I can cite actual polling from reputable sources to support my position, you cannot. Our positions on this issue are not equally valid. But if I'm going to make a bet on a football game, I'll be sure to consult the Magical Mystical Market.

Edited to add-- I just noticed you're not arguing against the OP's point at all anyway. You're talking about Clinton's chances of taking the nomination, not her chances of actually beating the Republican nominee.

[Gothmog]

98. The investors who buy these contracts use all public information and other sources

In the securities world, investors rely on many sources and these investors conduct their own due diligence. I have no doubt that they looked at the polling cited in the OP as well as other sources to make their investment decision. Again base on all information that is available to these investors, they rejected the analysis in the polling cited above. Since these investors are risking their own money, you can disagree with their analysis but I tend to trust the public markets. The predecessor to this trading market (Intrade) was very accurate as to predicting election outcomes.

As for the second part of the post go to the predictwise site. Predictwise has the Democratic candidate at 61% of winning http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-president-winner

[Marr]

102. You give more credence to the opinions of investors than plain old scientific surveys.

That's about two doors down from magical thinking. Something tells me your opinion on which is more credible would flip 180 degrees if the results did the same.

[Gothmog]

104. I believe in the free market system

I understand how the securities markets and investors think. No investor would buy or sell one of these option agreements without a substantial amount of due diligence

When Clinton's odds of being the nominee were down to 80% a week or so ago, it was almost close to the level where I was going to buy an agreement. At 90% probability of Clinton being the nominee, this investment is not attractive to me.

[Marr]

105. You keep talking about Clinton's chances of being the nominee. The OP was discussing

Clinton's chances against the eventual Republican nominee.

I realize Clinton has an excellent shot at the nomination. What I don't understand is why all the people who used to denounce Sanders as being capable of winning a primary but not a national eleciton, suddenly refuse to acknowledge the difference between those two now that it makes Clinton look like a poor choice.

[Gothmog]

106. Read the materials posted

Predictwise also reports on the market prices of option contracts based on which candidate will win the general election and the Democrats/Hillary Clinton are heavily favored to win the general election http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-president-winner

[Marr]

110. You know, the market was very bullish on credit default swaps, too.

It said Netflix was an overvalued dead end, too.

I just don't buy into the magical predictive power of the market the way you do, sorry. I'll go with good old scientific polls-- even when they don't say what I want to hear.

[FourScore]

96. Oh good grief! n/t

[Lordquinton]

35. It's like those toothpaste commercials

If you're not voting for Sanders, you're voting for Trump.

[nadinbrzezinski]

40. Yup

And I happen to know this is a pretty conservative magazine and elite publication. Tje fact they are going there is gather telling.

[dchill]

41. K&R

[avaistheone1]

44. Smart money is on a Bernie Sanders win.

Just sayin'....

[scottie55]

45. This Is What I Have Been Saying All Along

Baggage a mile deep.

Golden Handcuffs.

[NanceGreggs]

51. Well, you know the old political adage ...

As goes geebeebee, so goes the nation.

No, really - little-known fact.

[Sunlei]

54. If Bernie Sanders doesn't get the nom. he will support Mrs. Clinton and help steamroll over Trump.

It's republicans who are crying in fear, quitting & running from Trump like old Jebbie ran away

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. And her influence with independent voters is anywhere from none to negative

which is part of the point.

I know this is really hard to get, but this is exactly what will happen. I have been saying it for a while after looking at a lot of data. I am now being joined by the comentariat

Of course this is the same commentariat that chortled as late as December that Trump was a joke. So there is that, but this is a base revolt, on both sides.

This is a change election.

[Dems to Win]

56. If Democrats want to WIN, and I do, we'll Nominate Bernie Sanders

Been saying this for quite a while now.

GREAT article. Thanks for the OP

[PonyUp]

70. Who do you want nominating Supreme Court justices? Sanders or Trump? n/t

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

79. That hypothetical Trump speech sounded exactly like him.

So yeah, that's how he'd attack her, on her already underwater unfavourables on untrustworthiness.

[PatrickforO]

83. This was a great article.

Sanders would do much better against Trump because all Trump would be able to come up with on him is a hammer and sickle. He could turn Clinton every which way but loose.

[Marr]

86. And it's not just Trump. All the GOP's candidates beat Clinton in the polling, but her fans

and the party establishment are nevertheless determined to foist this certain failure upon us. They're ignoring the data completely, and I've not doubt they'll just blame the left, as usual, if they do manage to get their way and Clinton inevitably loses.

[closeupready]

101. I'm trying to think of a film metaphor - "300" or "Alien" come close,

in some respects, in terms of an important actor who is either: 1) unforgivably delusional (Leonidas) and leads followers to complete loss; or 2) one who places personal ambition above teamwork, and doesn't care whether his/her team wins or loses, at all (Ash).

[senz]

91. Hillary is damaged goods.

As the article shows, she's a proven liar and thoroughly corrupt.

Furthermore, though she briefly held two prestigious positions, her performance was mediocre in both.

She would be easy to beat in the GE.

[pdsimdars]

92. Brilliant and totally common sense

[closeupready]

100. Unquestionably. K&R

[ebayfool]

111. Kicking for more eyes! n/t

[merkins]

113. Hillary voters are voting against their self interest.

A vote for Hillary is a vote for Trump. I hope you Hillary voters have a reality based view point on what the ramifications of a Trump presidency means to your future well being, along with your family, friends and the nation.

[hifiguy]

114. Ive been pounding this drum for a while now. Clinton at the top of the ticket

is a Titanic waiting to happen, and she will sink to the bottom, taking the party with her.

She will depress Democratic turnout while motivating the Repigs to do everything but come out of the grave to vote against her; they've been waiting for that chance for 25 years.

Win-win for the Repigs.

[workinclasszero]

121. In U.S., Socialist Presidential Candidates Least Appealing

POLITICS JUNE 22, 2015
In U.S., Socialist Presidential Candidates Least Appealing

by Justin McCarthy
STORY HIGHLIGHTS

More than nine in 10 would vote for a Catholic, black, or woman
Ninety-one percent would vote for a Jewish or Hispanic candidate
Americans show most bias toward socialists (47%), atheists (58%)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/183713/socialist-presidential-candidates-least-appealing.aspx

Op is totally wrong but nice FUD I guess. SMH

[Mufaddal]

123. This is why I would like to see a mixed debate

With Trump, Cruz, Sanders, and Clinton, all on one stage.

I also believe Bernie is a much stronger GE candidate (and conversely that Clinton is an abysmal GE candidate). A few debates like this would help put all of them to the test.

[Tarc]

128. Trump will get trounced by Clinton in the fall

This "Bernie is the only one that can beat him" is the last, desperate meme floated by Camp Sanders as they face losing almost a dozen states over the next week.

Trump is the best thing to happen to voter registration drives in minority communities. They will vote against him, independents will not support his racist rhetoric. He only wins the GOP showdowns with 35-40% of the conservative vote, even most of THEM don't like him;

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/02/will-conservatives-mount-a-third-party-challenge-if-trump-is-the-nominee/470499/

Sorry, but Democrats are not going to jump ship on this angle. Hillary can and will beat him like a drum in the fall.

[workinclasszero]

134. You nailed it

This "Bernie is the only one that can beat him" is the last, desperate meme floated by Camp Sanders as they face losing almost a dozen states over the next week.

[DesertFlower]

129. nice to know you have psychic abilities.

[Mufaddal]

132. To me, this was the key part of a very cogent and frightening analysis

One’s support for Sanders should increase in direct proportion to one’s fear of Trump. And if Trump is the nominee, Hillary Clinton should drop out of the race and throw her every ounce of energy into supporting Sanders. If this does not occur, the resulting consequences for Muslims and Mexican immigrants of a Trump presidency will be fully the responsibility of Clinton and the Democratic Party. To run a candidate who can’t win, or who is a very high-risk proposition, is to recklessly play with the lives of millions of people.

I also think the core point--that yeah, we just don't know how Bernie will play against other candidates--is certainly true to an extent, but that "from a purely pragmatic standpoint, running Clinton against Trump is a disastrous, suicidal proposition."

Clinton vs. Trump is a wholly unacceptable risk. If it continues to be clear that Trump will probably be the GOP nominee, then I hope and pray rational Clinton supporters will catch on to the impending tactical disaster of running her against Trump before it's too late.

[WillyT]

133. HUGE K & R !!! - Thank You !!!