At this moment what do you think Bernies chances of winning the nomination are?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

I'm a Sanders supporter but a bit of a realist.

I think his chances of winning the nomination are pretty good.

50% if Biden runs and splits the "not as bad" vote.

40% if Biden doesn't run.

As is always the case in politics things can change rapidly through happenstance, revelations, misstatements, Faux-pas, or bad luck.

As another poster said, I think this election is going be far more entertaining than the usual Politics-as-usual charade.

41 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	100%
	3 (7%)
	90%
	4 (10%)
	80%
	1 (2%)
	70%
	2 (5%)
	60%
	6 (15%)
	50%
	7 (17%)
	40%
	4 (10%)
	30%
	5 (12%)
	20%
	4 (10%)
	10%
	5 (12%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[whatthehey]

1. Not high, but better than before and improving

Finding out where the ceiling is, maybe even that there might not be one, will be very interesting.

But the more info one has on exactly how delegates are allocated and how different states are more or less positive about him, the more it becomes clear that this will be a truly herculean task. 10000 people in Portland don't get you many Midwest and Southern delegates. Decades of machine politics are a hell of an advantage.

I went 20% but I'd be closer to 15. And I'm a Sanders donor. The longer he runs, the happier I'll be, but I wouldn't bet on him winning at this point.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. I'm more optimistic. Went from longshot to maybe.

[hifiguy]

17. Bernie has a considerably higher upside

than most think.

The ideas and policy proposals he stands for are already popular according to a lot of opinion research. The more people hear him and about him the more they realize that he is serious as hell about what he talks about. His specifics don't hurt him either.

[HooptieWagon]

3. 50/50 this far out.

What Bernie has going for him is increasing popular support for his policies, his lengthy track record in supporting those policies, his record of being 'right' on issues and votes well before his opponents had to 'evolve', and that's theres no ethics lapses to provide ammunition to his opponents.
What he has working against him is the vast Third Way machine, it's Wall St backers, and it's media...who, combined, have virtually unlimited resources and control of the levers of power like DNC chairmanship. They will go all out to keep a liberal populist candidate from gaining office and threatening corporate control of government.
Even so, despite the influence of money, it's still votes that count. Bernie stands a 50/50 chance right now. That can increase, we shall see.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. I agree. I think he has a pretty good shot against the machine.

[Armstead]

4. At this point, I'd say 35 - 40 percent.

But politics is volatile and things can always change one way or the other.

[Capn Sunshine]

31. agreed

Volatility is key. If Hillary does something stupid. I wonder what the odds are of that? Better than 50-50? We actually were discussing this possibility last night. War Gaming.

If Bernie does something stupid. What are the odds there? Less than Hillary I think, from a gut feeling, but it's the Presidentials, all bets on expecting normal behavior are off.

[Half-Century Man]

6. Gotta go 90%

He keeps getting better media coverage and more supporters.
70%-30% in the general elections is my current guess.

[seaglass]

7. I wouldn't predict until after the first debate. Who knows, O'Malley could do such a great job

that he could be the ABH candidate. Look what the first debate did for Ben Carson.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. That's why I said "at the moment".

Almost anything can happen. A loud and smelly fart by the candidate in an elevator crowded with reporters could sink his/her chances in a puff of fumes.

[seaglass]

9. OK, I don't have any evidence to predict now, only feelings and that seems like a stupid basis

for a prediction.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. That's fine. I'm not chiding you.

[Fawke Em]

19. But Sanders isn't the ABH candidate.

During the last NH poll, 96 percent said they were voting FOR Bernie, not against Clinton. In fact, most of those people said Clinton was their second choice.

[RufusTFirefly]

26. Yes. It's so important to stress that Bernie's support is overwhelmingly positive

It may come as a shock to some folks, but not everything in this country needs to be framed in terms of how it affects Hillary Clinton.

I'm sure many well-intentioned people still have a Hillary-centric view of Bernie. Frankly, that's understandable given that it's practically the only way that the media are willing to spin things.

Reminds me a little of when Al Franken proclaimed the 1980s as "the Al Franken Decade." (Sorry, but I could only seem to find it on Hulu and unfortunately, it's not even the original skit.)

[brooklynite]

11. 25% chance of winning IA; 40% chance of winning NH; 10% chance of winning SC; downhill from there

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. You could be right. But, I don't think so.

I think he'll win NH and has a good shot in Iowa.

[brooklynite]

16. His challenge is turning rally crowds and polling into actual votes...

...and I don't think he'll have the field staff he needs for Statewide efforts, much less covering larger States where TV is an integral part of messaging.

[ieoeja]

18. Rally crowds is his advantage in Iowa.

Con: He was not a Democrat. A lot of party officials are not going to like him jumping to the head of the line and are going to caucus against him for that reason. And I am betting that a lot of people go along with the local party officials whom they know and trust.

Pro: The enthusiasm he generates.

Con: The enthusiasm he generates. Pushy Deaniacs allegedly turned off older caucus goers in 2004.

I think he appeals better to Iowans. While I think the process favors Hillary.

If Hillary loses I think she runs the risk of being viewed as a non-viable candidate. Viability is a big issue with a lot of primary voters. Hillary starts out losing again, a lot of voters are going to decide she is not viable and look elsewhere for someone they think can win.

[brooklynite]

21. ...and this is precisely my point.

Clinton has staff in every County to target and turn out Caucus-goers on a cold winter night. Sanders will not...

Rally crowds were Howard Dean's "advantage' as well. His problem was that older Caucus-goers were turned off; it was that the younger voters didn't show up.

[Le Taz Hot]

12. 50%

because there is the Party Machine and those super delegates who could, and will try to steal the election from the electorate. THAT'S what we have to battle and THAT'S why we have to come out overwhelmingly for Bernie. Six months ago I would have given him 1% so I'd say 50% is outstanding, all things considered.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

14. First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. Mahatma Gandhi

I agree. I have it pegged at around 50% too. Especially if Biden jumps in and splits the "not as bad" votes.

[Capn Sunshine]

32. That same argument was used in 2008

The Party Machine and super delegates want to WIN. They aren't going to do some deal where they give it to someone who didn't get a majority of the delegate votes. They understand that momentum is hard to come by, and is a quantifiable advantage in any election.

Your perception of them as a bunch of dull toadies is really insulting. But that's DU.

[NorthCarolina]

15. 100% sure hell win, but voted 90% due to the establishments Diebold advantage.

The most votes doesn't always mean a "win" in democracy American style.

[Garrett78]

20. 1% maybe?

60% of respondents say he has a 50/50 chance or better. Wow. That's a lot of wishful thinking for ya. I'd put his chances well below 10%.

[Skwmom]

22. If his chances weren't good, they wouldn't spend so much effort and money

trying to derail him.

[Garrett78]

23. But that effort and money...

...is a big reason why Sanders has almost no chance of being nominated. Plus, it's not all about the primary. It's about building support for the general election.

[Skwmom]

24. A Corporate Democrat, a Corporate Republican - they deliver the same results.

Though I think they get a perverted pleasure in using the corporate Democrats to destroy the working class.

[Garrett78]

29. Not precisely the same results. And voting still matters. But...

Last edited Wed Sep 9, 2015, 06:13 PM - Edit history (2)

As Robert Jensen wrote, "No matter who votes in elections, powerful unelected forces—the captains of industry and finance—set the parameters of political action. Voting matters, but it matters far less than most people believe, or want to believe."

Those parameters are set not only during the general election but also during the primary season. And a truly leftist/progressive vision sits outside of those parameters. Sanders knows that and said as much. His campaign, in my mind, has never been about winning. It's about trying to force Clinton at least a little to the left and inspiring a grassroots movement that will, as I said before, broaden the parameters--so that the captains of industry and finance lose influence.

Clinton would still be better than whoever the Republican Party nominates, but I'm afraid her administration would be a little to the right of Obama's. Maybe Bernie's campaign will inspire enough people to hold her accountable. Or at least make it so she doesn't embrace her corporate allegiances to the fullest extent possible. I honestly think that's the best we can hope for. Clinton has always been a hawkish neoliberal with views on social issues that make her the lesser evil.

[Capn Sunshine]

35. So, President Gore would have been the exact same as President Bush?

President Romney would have been the same as President Obama? Really?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. Marginally better than Andre Berto's chances of upsetting Floyd Mayweather this Saturday.

eom

[CoffeeCat]

28. He's following the a similar trajectory as Obama (but slightly better)

Sanders is behind Clinton by seven points, currently, in Iowa. At this same point in the run up to the 2008 Iowa caucuses--Obama was not doing as well against Clinton.

That is key. It's significant. Obama won the Iowa caucuses--but Sanders is doing better than Obama was.

I think Sanders is on a trajectory to obliterate Clinton's campaign. I think that is why the Biden run has been floated as a trial balloon. Hillary has lost 20 points in Iowa since May. This is incredibly significant, because the polls in these early primary states matter the most. This is where the campaigns are in full swing--with ads, public appearances, and full marketing campaigns locked and loaded.

That is revealing--for a candidate to put all of their fire power behind their campaign--and to lose 20 points to a candidate who is largely being ignored by the media.

I think the idea of Biden running is being floated --to gage how his candidacy might affect the Dem numbers. Would he take away from Clinton and weaken her further OR would Biden siphon off liberal-base votes from Sanders and prop up Clinton? Those questions are still unanswered. The DNC wants one of their own in the White House, and definitely not Sanders, that is clear.

The trajectory of this race, especially when it comes to Clinton dynamics, are almost identical to the 2008 primary. Clinton was (in 2007-2008) winning handily in national polls. She looked unbeatable. And when you looked at polls in states with later primaries, she was winning by large margins. However, as the campaigning heated up in states with impending primaries--Clinton's numbers began to sink with her challenger (Obama) gaining. It appears, at least in Iowa and NH, that we're seeing a replay of those exact dynamics.

For this to happen again--with a candidate like Sanders, who is ignored by the media--is really telling. I don't think the voting states are buying her inevitability. I think this reveals just how weak and vulnerable the Clinton candidacy is.

I'm in Iowa and I can tell you that there is very little enthusiasm for her. When you run again--you're either going to have renewed enthusiasm among the electorate or a "Oh, it's you again" fatigue surrounding the candidate. I definitely feel the latter, when it comes to Clinton--among the public.

The electorate has aged and fewer younger voters are impressed with her, especially with Sanders in the mix, a candidate who appeals to the base and to younger supporters.

Just my take on things...

[Garrett78]

34. Obama won states that Sanders won't win.

The closeness of Iowa and the potential for Sanders to win New Hampshire doesn't overcome Clinton's still-enormous lead nationally, even when Biden is included in polling. In the most recent national poll I saw, Biden actually came in 2nd. He takes way more support from Clinton than from Sanders, yet Clinton still holds a huge lead. That's very telling.

[CoffeeCat]

40. Yes, but Clinton had those same enormous national leads...

…in 2007/2008 national polling.

Those national polls really don't matter.

It's the state polls that decide this election. As the primaries for each voting states draws near, the campaigns heat up and people in those states really begin paying attention and making up their minds.

Of course, we don't know how all of these states will vote.

However, Hillary had what seemed like, insurmountable leads in national polls. However, when each state voted, Obama began winning many of those primaries.

Obama was barely a blip on anyone's radar screen, at this point, during the campaign. In Sept 2007--he was trailing a distant third in Iowa and barely registering in national polls. Hillary was the "inevitable" candidate with the national leads that looked unbeatable.

There are many parallels!

[Garrett78]

42. Obama was an upcoming rock star.

Obama gave the keynote address at the 2004 convention. He was young and incredibly charismatic. And there was the possibility of finally having a black president. Again, Obama won many state primaries that Sanders simply won't win.

[marlakay]

41. It will be interesting to see what media does if Bernie

Wins the first few states. Remember Obama became the media darling, first black president and they all kind of fell in line except fox talking that way. It helped him win and it was close with Hillary to the end.

I really like Bernie but I am not seeing the support Obama got. If Elizabeth Warren backed him it would help a lot. Makes me wonder what Hillary said to her.

[madokie]

30. My feelings is that Bernie will be our next President

Americans are wanting a change and he is the only one offering one that I can see. As People become more and more familiar with him they like what they see and hear. Both good

Bernie is the real deal, so real that the powers to be have pretty much shut him out of the news cycle. In spite of that he is climbing mountains like they aren't even there. Busting over the top still full of breath. I love the man

[Vattel]

33. About 10%. I wish I could give better odds.

[Bill USA]

36. the GOPers will continue the McCarthyist campaign against HRC in Hopes that Bernie will be nominated

I love Bernie, but let's not be idiots. The GOP would very much prefer to run against him than Hillary.

[taught_me_patience]

37. 1-5%

Closer to 1% than 5%. He has nearly no chance, but you never know if there is a complete and total meltdown by Hillary. If that were the case, I still think someone like Biden would step in and beat Bernie handily.

[Garrett78]

38. Yep.

If not Clinton, it'll be Biden. Or some other neoliberal, establishment candidate. As I said above, what the Sanders campaign can do is try to keep Clinton honest and accountable to her progressive primary rhetoric. And raise awareness of plutocracy. But actually win the nomination? That was never realistic.

[TheKentuckian]

39. 37.25% and rising.