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
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Clinton blesses Bloomberg as a back-up if she loses to Sanders. [View all]Gothmog
(145,176 posts)139. Sanders is bringing knife to gunfight
Some candidates are better able to raise the funds necessary to complete. President Obama blew everyone away in 2008 with his small donor fundraising efforts and that made it clear that he was electable. Jeb is trying to do the same on the GOP side with his $100 million super pac.
There are many on this board who doubt that Sanders will be able to compete in a general election contest where the Kochs will be spending $887 million and the RNC candidate will likely spend another billion. This article had a very interesting quote about the role of super pacs in the upcoming election http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/03/bernie-sanders-grassroots-movement-gains-clinton-machine
Harvard University professor Lawrence Lessig, who founded a Super Pac to end Super Pacs, said Sanders renouncing Super Pacs is tantamount to bringing a knife to a gunfight.
I regret the fact the Bernie Sanders has embraced the idea that hes going to live life like the Vermont snow, as pure as he possibly can, while he runs for president, because it weakens his chances and hes an enormously important progressive voice, Lessig said.
I regret the fact the Bernie Sanders has embraced the idea that hes going to live life like the Vermont snow, as pure as he possibly can, while he runs for president, because it weakens his chances and hes an enormously important progressive voice, Lessig said.
President Obama was against super pacs in 2012 but had to use one to keep the race close. I do not like super pacs but any Democratic candidate who wants to be viable has to use a super pac.
The fact that Sanders was unable to raise any money for the DNC and the down ballot races while the Clinton campaign raised $18 million is very telling
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
168 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I have never liked him. I was never a Hillary fan either. So, I dunno whose vote Bloomberg...
Kalidurga
Jan 2016
#2
What's funny is that think liberals and young people and anyone left of center
Fawke Em
Jan 2016
#48
Bloomberg is stating that he believes that Sanders is not viable in the general election
Gothmog
Jan 2016
#129
Hypothetical match up polls are worthless and should not be relied for anything
Gothmog
Jan 2016
#136
You are saying the only thing that matters is who has enough money to buy themselves the White House
notadmblnd
Jan 2016
#152
Again, Sanders would be running a much stronger campaign if he could show electability
Gothmog
Jan 2016
#156
Here is a warning from Nate Silver's 538 website on relying on worthless match up polls
Gothmog
Jan 2016
#138
Bernie Sanders says he polls better against GOP candidates than Hillary Clinton
Gothmog
Jan 2016
#167
Well, I did not see the endorsement, she stated he is a good friend of hers.
Thinkingabout
Jan 2016
#5
Heh, great minds think alike I see! Can't be the only ones who noticed that slipup.
JonLeibowitz
Jan 2016
#79
"so he doesn't have to" I just checked to see if anyone else zeroed in on that
Babel_17
Jan 2016
#109
Why didn't she add, but I will urge all Democrats to support whomever our nominee is?
Armstead
Jan 2016
#14
And my point that I made above was she was looking to show confidence she would win the
hrmjustin
Jan 2016
#88
The people who think "Middle Class" is a $4 Million Condo and a live in nanny, believe Bloomberg
Warren DeMontague
Jan 2016
#38
"Vote for my Nope or the billionaires will have to make it 100% clear who is really in charge!" nt
mhatrw
Jan 2016
#45
whatever Hillary is saying, it's clear the more moderate oligarchs want to have Bloomberg
Fast Walker 52
Jan 2016
#50
The OP can not read!! Period.!! You purposely distorted her words--better than fox or the RW
riversedge
Jan 2016
#61
If that's not a clear demonstration of the bullshit corruption in the corporate dem party.
onecaliberal
Jan 2016
#82
Your question: Is that an unfair reading? Answer: It's a crap reading of the highest order.
Hekate
Jan 2016
#116
"Rich man's burden": Reads to me like a tacit endorsement of Bloomberg's sentiment
Babel_17
Jan 2016
#122
So Bloomberg prefers Hillary or almost ANY republican, to Sanders. He knows who benefits!
arcane1
Jan 2016
#128
Hasn't the Sanders campaign shown money from the rich was overestimated in its importance?
Babel_17
Jan 2016
#135
It's a fight to get votes, the Sanders campaign has shown it can get the needed support
Babel_17
Jan 2016
#141
Thanks! But the Sanders campaign hasn't need luck, or super pacs, to get this far ...
Babel_17
Jan 2016
#153
You are wrong-the Karl Rove super pac has been running negative ads to help Sanders
Gothmog
Jan 2016
#155
Didn't he say he supports unlimited H1b visas? Not that I'm all that surprised. She supports
liberal_at_heart
Jan 2016
#145