2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumGeneral thoughts on the Sanders' campaign.
1. I agree with almost everything he has said so far, and think it has played a major role in his meteoric rise.
2. However, like many on the left, he has an instinct to multiply issues beyond the core message. This may or may not be advantageous for the primary, but will definitely not be advantageous in a general election. I hope that message discipline is a part of the long-term campaign (knock on wood).
3. A Sanders/Trump main event would be a fascinating one, exposing the fundamental nature of the distinction between the people and the powerful, the problem-sovlers and problem-causers in this country. However, it would not be a slam-dunk, as cartoonish as Donald Trump is: He is a bully, and believe it or not bullies tend to do well in politics. However, I am still of the opinion that the establishment GOP is using him as a distraction to take heat away from Jeb Bush, whose machine will ramp up at a predesignated point and simply annihilate Trump's primary viability.
4. A Sanders/Bush matchup would present different challenges, since Sanders would have the entire media going after him with a vengeance rather than dividing its mockery between two candidates who lack insider support. But since Bush would look like what he is, it's not clear whether that's an advantage or a disadvantage.
5. Whether we like it or not, American presidential elections are just personal popularity contests. Americans elected Ronald Reagan because he was a charming actor with a stage presence who projected a role, not because people wanted to see the government gutted and corporations elevated to the status of gods. Americans elected Bill Clinton because he was also an extremely charming version of an actor, not because people were in the mood for muddled half-measures and constant Stockholm Syndrome to the frothing-at-the-mouth conservative degenerates who hated him. And while there was every rational reason to elect Barack Obama, the reason we elected him personally is that he's a cool guy while his opponent was an angry old man.
Sanders can play the FDR/Truman card, but we just don't know how potent that is among the apolitical masses who know jack shit about history and vote based on what the inner trilobite at the base of their spine says watching debates and ads. Half these morons watched George W. Bush (a dead-eyed serial killer psychopath) and saw a fun, down-home bro based on nothing but the inflection of his accent and some cheap image management, so we just don't know.
djean111
(14,255 posts)Because I agree with what he says, and believe he will stand by what he says and will at least try to do what he wants to do, and not smilingly triangulate.
A lot of "You need to go with what has been declared as the safe bet" these days. No.
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)He's packing out venues wherever he goes and he's got people excited.
Hillary's unfavorables are already at 49%. Half the country already does not like her. She's a very polarizing person (like it or not).
Ron Green
(9,822 posts)for American voters: whether they can translate Bernie's message about a bought system into a personal popularity sufficient to pull enough of those levers.
It's a fascinating time.
True Blue Door
(2,969 posts)And even more interesting if we get him into the White House.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)he won't get a chance to define himself. The multi-billion dollar Repuke machine will already define him as a marxist, a tax and spend extreme liberal and he will be toast even before he can utter a word.
Old white liberals are not enough to win elections anymore just as old white racists aren't.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)sibelian
(7,804 posts)Oh, hang on, she's not a liberal... Or is she? What's the story these days?
Avalux
(35,015 posts)I originally posted a nasty graphic about Hillary in kind, then decided to not stoop to your level.