There Is No Evidence That a Sanders Victory Would Hurt Downballot Democrats. It’s Likely The Opposi

[eridani]

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2016_01/there_is_no_evidence_that_a_sa059314.php

New polls showing Bernie Sanders tied with Hillary Clinton in Iowa and ahead in New Hampshire are causing some consternation among conservative and corporate-friendly Democrats on Capitol Hill. Speaking as usual for the triangulating Third Way wing of the party is Steve Israel:

“There’s definitely an elevated concern expressed in the cloakroom and members-only elevators, and other places, about the impact of a Sanders nomination on congressional candidates,” Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) said.

Israel, a former chairman of the Democrats’ House campaign committee, said that a Sanders nomination “increases the level of anxiety that many of our candidates have in swing districts, where a Hillary Clinton nomination erases that anxiety.”

Insofar as this statement is even true among swing district Democratic House members, there is little evidence to suggest that it is a valid concern. In fact, there are many reasons that a Sanders nomination would actually be helpful to Democrats up and down the ballot:

1) Most modern elections are base elections, and base-oriented populism has proven quite effective in recent years. The Republican Party has already learned from the 2010 and 2014 midterm elections that there is essentially no cost to pursuing an aggressive brand of politics tailored to their base. The only reason GOP extremism hurts them is that in the long run their base coalition is disappearing while the Democratic base coalition is demographically ascendant. But if the GOP could lock the country into the electoral demographics of 2004, they could essentially run successful raw base elections indefinitely even as Democrats would lose by playing to the middle. There is precious little evidence to suggest that progressive populist campaigns have hurt Democratic candidates in the past decade. In fact, the reverse has been true.

2) The “independent voter” is mostly a myth. The vast majority of supposed independents vote like partisans or even hyperpartisans, and far from being sober analysts who carefully weigh their choices and vote for the best candidate regardless of party, the few true independents that remain are actually among the most fickle, least knowledgeable and least likely to vote in the electorate.

[draa]

1. It's just more fear mongering by the establishment.

The fear these immoral assholes are showing is so wonderful I don't even...

I believe Bernie will grow our party, and that alone will grow Democrats in all areas of government. Either way, it can't be any worse than what DWS and the neoliberals are doing to it now.

[ypsfonos]

2. Triangulation is so...

20th century!

[mikehiggins]

3. You may not love Bernie Sanders but millions hate HRC

The ability of the talking heads (Apologies to the singers) to ignore that fact amazes me. Ever since Arkansas the Clintons have been the focus of incredible animosity. There may be reasons for that (Bill was a dirt poor white trash upstart who didn't know his place) but now it seems more habit than anything else. When HRC ranted against a vast right wing conspiracy how could people deny that? It was spread all over the political world the same as the racist (oh, we just disagree with O, its got nothing to do with his skin color) hatred for the President. These are facts of life, not Beltway legends.

If HRC is the nominee it will be the last chance for these troglodytes to strike a blow for 'murrica and I have no doubt they'll be lining up to take it. Add to that the voter suppression and the redistricting crimes of the GOP, largely attacked by Democratic politicians (but ONLY verbally), and recipe for disaster is just bubbling away on the stove.

Up-ticket, down-ticket, side-ticket, whatever, the hounds will be on the hunt. So far, IMHO, the only thing we have going in our favor is the fratricidal madness of the Clown Car. If that gets resolved by anyone even close to sane the GOPukes can count on millions of people who will come out in droves just to vote against HRC. Sanders, for all him being an -ist, and a New Yawker, and a JEW, still won't generate the passion and fanaticism against him that HRC will be the focus of.

Sanders is anti-bank, anti-foreign wars, anti-welfare for the rich, and numbers of other positions that ring true with poor and working class people across the country. And he comes across like everybody's grouchy old uncle.

HRC is the embodiment of the Establishment, the financial people and the people who want to put OUR kids boots on the ground AGAIN in the Middle East.

Who would be the best candidate for the Democratic Party? Why, Hillery, of course.

Of course I only came to that conclusion after experimenting with some legal pot. (Sorry, Wasserman)