Sanders Scores Some Key Endorsements

[UCmeNdc]

Democratic presidential candidate and U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., recently received endorsements from a Democratic National Committee superdelegate and two New York state senators.

Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont gained momentum in his bid for the Democratic presidential nomination this week, announcing endorsements in Nevada and New York. New York State Sens. Bill Perkins and James Sanders Jr. (no relation), who represent parts of Harlem and Queens, backed Sanders Wednesday — a valuable local endorsement for Sanders' campaign against front-runner Hillary Clinton, the New York Daily News reported.

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/01/two-new-york-state-senators-endorse-bernie

[Thinkingabout]

1. Not possible, the DNC had a conspiracy to stop Sanders candidacy

For president and now he has gotten super delegates endorsement, well guess that ruins that talking point.

[Wilms]

2. .

[zalinda]

3. Yeah, and he didn't buy them either. eom

[SCantiGOP]

4. Complete desperation

Don't you guys realize how this looks? Celebrating one superdelegate and two STATE senators?
According to Nate Silver's current count, Clinton has 145 superdelegates; 38 US - not state - Senators, and 12 Governors as endorsements.
How can anyone post/comment on this like it means something positive for Sanders?

I love Bernie, he is one of my favorite Senators, but he has never had a path to win the nomination - for many reasons but primarily because he would likely lose the general election.
The stakes are too high - the Democrats have to retain the White House in 2016.

[NurseJackie]

5. Great post ... thanks!

[Number23]

6. I think it is positive. And it's rare to see positivity from this guy's supporters here

so I'm happy to K&R this.

It may not be that big of a deal but it's a happy, clean positive post about endorsements. I hope we see more of them.

[Armstead]

7. That attitudfe is what dooms Democrats to perpetual also-ran status...even in vioctory

It's never proactive. Always reactive. Always excuses why we can't do better. GOP Congress....The filibuster....keep power dry...The Tea Party is sooooo powerful....we have to raise money to compete....can't alienate swing voters.....now's not the time....We have to have an "electable" candidate, even if they don't reflect our true beliefs.....etc.

So Dems always lose even in victory.

[SCantiGOP]

8. We won then last two Presidential elections

Yet you think we lost.

[Armstead]

9. TPP....no public health insurance program..,.Wall St grows fatter and happier.....

GOP still drives the agenda....Corporate monopolization continues as fast as ever....Middle Class still losing ground....poor largely forgotten....Social Security used as a bargaining chip....GOP controls state governments and Congress....women's rights eroded.....Vioting rights eroded.....etc.

I will give Obama credit for some things. But overall we're still living in a Reaganesque fantasy world.

[SCantiGOP]

10. And if McCain/Palin were in the White House?

Politics is the art of the possible.
I will be very content with an extremely qualified progressive like Clinton in the White House; I am not willing to roll the dice and end up with Cruz, Rubio, Trump, pick your poison.

[Armstead]

12. I'm not saying that would havbe been equal oir better

But too many Democrats underestimate what is "possible" constantly. It sets a very narrow window of possible to constantly go for the Wall St./Corporate approved name brand.

That's what I am referring to.

If you look at their comparative ability to win elections by attracting wide ranging support, Sanders is superior to Clinton.

If you weigh their negatives, Sander's deficits and Clinton's are different but about equal.

Yes Clinton is ahead in the primary because of Clinton TM brand recognition, and the "play it safe" mentality. But that's just going to keep things stagnant at best, and slipping further back at worst. It isn't going to move us out of Ronnieland.

[Wilms]

13. re: "he would likely lose the general election"

Really? Polling indicates the EXACT opposite. He would do better than Clinton against any of the Repukes.

So where did you come up with, "he would likely lose the general election"?

[SCantiGOP]

14. Common sense, as well as

All of the polls except the few that are hand-picked and carefully nuanced here.
The tea party may want someone with no experience, but most people want someone who actually has experience, and Clinton probably has the best Presidential resume of anyone who has run since Daddy Bush.
The word 'socialist' is still pretty toxic to most Americans.

[Uncle Joe]

11. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, UCmeNdc.