Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MADem

(135,425 posts)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:43 PM Mar 2016

As California primary nears, even Sanders supporters are uniting behind Clinton and against a common

enemy: Trump



http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-latimes-democratic-primary-poll-20160328-story.html


Most of Sen. Bernie Sanders' supporters in California say they expect that come November, Hillary Clinton will be elected president — and, by and large, they're OK with that.

While both Democratic camps prepare for a final battle in the state’s June 7 primary, the latest USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times statewide poll found that just over half of Sanders’ supporters said they expected Clinton to be the next president. About a third of Sanders’ backers said they expected the Vermont senator to emerge the winner, and 12% said they thought Donald Trump would prevail.

Close to 8 in 10 Sanders supporters said in the survey that they would vote for Clinton in a race against Trump, although many said they would do so reluctantly.

Those findings show the reality underlying the still-heated rhetoric of the Democratic primaries: By contrast with the civil war that divides Republicans, Democrats in the country’s largest state have begun to coalesce behind their front-runner......
19 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

MADem

(135,425 posts)
3. Well, certainly. But this part of the article is also salient....
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:52 PM
Mar 2016


“Clinton’s challenge is not one of persuasion, it’s one of motivation,” said Dan Schnur, director of USC’s Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics. “She’s not going to get Sanders supporters to fall in love with her,” he added, but “the other way to motivate your base is to frighten them about the alternative. Against Donald Trump, that should be very doable.”

That’s certainly the case for Gretta Whalen, a 32-year-old freelance writer and communications consultant from Los Angeles, who leans toward Sanders. Clinton, she said, “has been around for so long, and we know so much about her, and not all of it is positive.” Sanders, by contrast, seems attractive, and his ideas feel new, even if “some of them are very pie in the sky and would be very difficult to get the rest of the country on board with.”

But, she added, as she paused from feeding her newborn son, the contest is different “now that we’re looking at a likely race against Donald Trump.” She and her friends, most of whom back Sanders, “are all so shocked that we’re in this place where Donald Trump is a serious contender for president,” she said. Compared with past elections, this campaign “feels a little more surreal.”



http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-latimes-democratic-primary-poll-20160328-story.html

JackInGreen

(2,975 posts)
2. *adjusts eye piece*
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:47 PM
Mar 2016

Well, it's a repost alright. Pretty common, but not too valuable m'afraid. *tosses into pile with others*

kaleckim

(651 posts)
5. How is having an appreciate for objective reality
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 01:54 PM
Mar 2016

and what the numbers say (that she is the likely nominee unless he really gets on a roll) the same as supporting her? Hard to put into words the massive collapse in excitement and energy that will result if, or when, Sanders concedes. There may be a dozen people under 40 that are enthuses about her in any way, for good reason. She and her followers don't want to fundamentally change an inequitable, corrupt and environmentally destructive system.

She's a horrible candidate and she'd be in deep trouble, especially given the mood of the country, if she were likely to run against anyone other than Trump. High net negatives, huge percentages don't trust her, she's corrupt (been meeting with corporate and financial lobbyists, and raking in their money, since she entered the race. A whole bunch of corruption galas, sorry, campaign fundraising events, in recent weeks by her, her campaign and her family, banks and other corporate interests are her largest donors over the course of her career), has a hawkish foreign policy and a bad record on issues that working people care about across the ideological spectrum (like trade).

The fact that the FBI is looking into her like it is and her supporters, like usual, could give a damn, is telling. Their devotion to her is Mao like. I lived in China for awhile, bought a little red book. Maybe she should create one, so her supporters know what stock phrases to regurgitate.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
6. Welcome to DU.
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:00 PM
Mar 2016

I think there are a lot of people who don't find her to be a horrible candidate. And I think you'd do well to not hang your hat on the FBI. That's what people do when they don't understand the authority of a cabinet official or the laws that were (or more properly, were NOT) in effect while Clinton was SECSTATE.

As for your other characterizations (the "Mao like" business, particularly) the very same could be said for supporters of other candidates. Glass houses...?

You'd probably get a more nuanced and detailed response if you'd refrain from being rude and dismissive about her and her supporters. Those characterizations just don't make for conversations with any point to them at all, even if they make you feel better in the short term.

kaleckim

(651 posts)
8. Please
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:12 PM
Mar 2016

"You'd probably get a more nuanced and detailed response if you'd refrain from being rude and dismissive about her and her supporters"

No, I tried discussing policies with her supporters yesterday, and today, and they only attacked me personally. Been the case since she entered the race. I no longer care what they think, since most of them gave up critical thinking long ago.

"Glass houses...?"

I appreciate good critiques of Sanders, especially from the left, since the left tends to focus on facts and actual policies. That isn't what I've gotten from Clinton supporters. Do I have to show respect to the Berniebros thing (doubly knowing the same exact tactic was used against Obama and his supporters in 2008), the dishonest attacks and smears (David Brock has not progressed as a human being since he came to prominence by attacking Anita Hill, the only things that have changed are his party affiliation and his targets)? I can answer to critiques of his call to break up the banks, for example, or his tax on financial speculation. That is different than having to defend myself, as a supporter of his, because the Clinton camp has some cheap tactic of calling his supporters sexist pigs.

"I think there are a lot of people who don't find her to be a horrible candidate."

I understand that, but if you look at polls (not her versus Trump, thank god for her that he is the one she is likely to face), far more people think the opposite. She is not trusted by wide margins and has huge net negatives on favorability. So yes, some don't think of her as being a horrible candidate, how many of them can take part in an actual discussion on her record, her corruption, her top donors, or her tendency to change positions depending on which position allows her to take power. In addition to the FBI, you have no concerns at all about her foundation (whom has given it money, what that means as far as policy and outright corruption), or that her top donors are almost all banks and giant corporations. My god, the Washington Post showed that she and her husband have gotten almost 3 BILLION dollars in their 40 some odd years in politics! THAT is exactly what people are sick and tired of.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
10. So, your "go to" is to blame ME for slights you received at the hands of others?
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:26 PM
Mar 2016

You do see that this kind of reasoning doesn't make any sense...?

It's akin to kicking the dog because your boss wouldn't give you that raise.

I'm afraid the polls, and the vote/delegate count, just don't favor Sanders. That will become more obvious to even his fantasy number-crunchers as time progresses.

And no--I'm not worried about the Clinton Foundation, or the FBI, or all these wishin'-and-hopin' stories. It's as far fetched as "24 Business Hours and Rove is going to be perp-walked."

It's also a rather sad hope; wishing for bad legal news to derail the strongest candidate. Doesn't say much for any Sanders supporter who would push aside all that Believing in the Future stuff in favor of "Oooh, oooooh--I hope she gets indicted! I hope, I hope, I hope!!" Not a winning strategy.

kaleckim

(651 posts)
14. More nonsense
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:35 PM
Mar 2016

"So, your "go to" is to blame ME for slights you received at the hands of others?"

What in the blazes are you talking about?

Her largest donors are banks, she and her team have been meeting with tons of corporate and financial lobbyists in recent weeks. They've given her and her campaign massive amounts of money, have for decades now. She and her husband have been given 3 billion dollars by those groups since they entered politics, as well as a host of other powerful groups and individuals in other countries. You think Saudi Arabia, a country with a horrible human rights record, has given tons of money to the foundation because they want to make the world a better place? My god, they're buying influence! How in the world can anyone take any of you seriously when you talk about corruption and Citizens United when you brush this off and make it seem like it isn't a massive amount of corruption?

I also am not hoping she fails, I was asking you if any of that matters to you and you could give a damn. Clinton is the strongest candidate? Using what logic? Please, don't bother.

I also agree with you on Sanders. He is not likely to win, and the two likely candidates in the major parties have horrible net favorables, the lowest since polling began in 1984. What a wreck this democracy is.

R B Garr

(16,920 posts)
7. Hi, welcome again to DU. I saw you post this same sour grapes yesterday
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:10 PM
Mar 2016

about this same article, and you are still at it.

Again, this LAT article reflects the reality of how Sanders' voters are assessing the once longshot candidacy of Trump. The article quotes Sanders' voters having a change of mind now that Trump looks to be more of a reality. Those quoted in the article were once in love with Sanders, but have reassessed him now.

Nothing you state matches what the article is saying. You are saying the exact opposite of the article.

kaleckim

(651 posts)
9. Sour grapes, as in pointing out your absurd logic?
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 02:18 PM
Mar 2016

Yesterday there was a poll linked grouping independents and Democrats together regarding which Democrat they supported. You claimed that the poll showed that independents were moving away from Sanders, when it clearly didn't. It didn't poll independents in isolation, it grouped them together with Democrats, so there is no way you could have gathered that from the article. This isn't debatable. You are arguing that 2 +2 = 5. In case you don't know, 2 + 2 = 4.

This article talks about what peoples' expectations are regarding the person that will win the nomination and the election. That isn't the same thing as people saying they support Clinton. Honestly, I am not moved by your ability to make sense of these things and your logic. It is way off base. I support Sanders but if I were asked which person I thought would win the nomination, I'd say Clinton because the math points to that. That doesn't mean I support Clinton. How do you not see the difference? If you can't, may I suggest you commenting on something like golf or football? I don't think politics is your thing.

R B Garr

(16,920 posts)
11. You need to read the article. Start with the title.
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:31 PM
Mar 2016

I have copied the first 3 paragraphs for you.

"Most of Sen. Bernie Sanders' supporters in California say they expect that come November, Hillary Clinton will be elected president — and, by and large, they're OK with that.

While both Democratic camps prepare for a final battle in the state’s June 7 primary, the latest USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times statewide poll found that just over half of Sanders’ supporters said they expected Clinton to be the next president. About a third of Sanders’ backers said they expected the Vermont senator to emerge the winner, and 12% said they thought Donald Trump would prevail.


Close to 8 in 10 Sanders supporters said in the survey that they would vote for Clinton in a race against Trump, although many said they would do so reluctantly."

What you are talking about is your own misinterpretations of what the article is about. Read the article. It's the opposite of what you are saying. Start with the title of the article. Nitpicking about your sour grapes over some poll posted yesterday isn't what this article is about. Read the title, and read the article.

kaleckim

(651 posts)
18. You're horrible at this
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:47 PM
Mar 2016

"The article quotes Sanders' voters having a change of mind now that Trump looks to be more of a reality. Those quoted in the article were once in love with Sanders, but have reassessed him now."

There is nothing in the article that paints that picture as far as a trend, you are making things up. There is a single quote from a single person saying that she might vote for Clinton because she is more electable (which isn't even accurate according to the polls). People are not enthused by your candidate, for good reason. They are resigned to voting for her if they have to, but are (at best), blah about the whole thing. The article did say this:

The other significant division in the primary is by party. California’s Democratic primary is open to registered Democrats as well as voters who decline to state a party. Clinton leads Sanders by 14 percentage points among registered Democrats; Sanders leads by 9 percentage points among the nonpartisan voters — again a pattern seen repeatedly in other states...Something else hasn’t changed: If there’s one blemish in the picture for Clinton, it’s the persistently high percentage of voters who have an unfavorable image of her, 45% in the new poll.

R B Garr

(16,920 posts)
19. You are also horrible at this as evidened by your blasts of personal anecdotal nonsense.
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:56 PM
Mar 2016

The title alone dispels your first sentence. It's the exact opposite of what you are saying. Here is the title of the article:

"As California Primary nears, even Sanders supporters are uniting behind Clinton and against a common enemy: Trump"


You are in essence taking the entire article and trying to separate it into pieces to fit your screeds. It's quite comical. You are pretending the article says that the Sanders supporters now love Clinton. That not what it says and certainly not what I said. The body of the article is supported by the title. Yours is a total bullshit misrepresentation of what the article says. Read the article.

LostOne4Ever

(9,267 posts)
13. Of course most of us will vote for the democratic nominee
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:47 PM
Mar 2016

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=#009999]Speaking for myself, I am a iberal, and no matter how nasty the smears are against Sanders, my goals, and what I want for this country, are all advanced far more with a dem in office rather than a republican.

But, I will support Sanders all the way to the convention regardless. I feel that every vote for him helps push the party to the left and that is still a political victory. Not as big of one as winning the primary but still a victory.[/font]

bobbobbins01

(1,681 posts)
15. Nothing but pure propaganda.
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:37 PM
Mar 2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_techniques

Bandwagon and "inevitable-victory" appeals attempt to persuade the target audience to join in and take the course of action that "everyone else is taking."
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»As California primary nea...