I know it's popular to knock down Bernie Sanders BUT

[BigBearJohn]

If he's still the most popular politician in America,
do you REALLY want to make opponents of all his supporters? Don't we need them in the next election or do you think we can just afford to ignore them ? Why cut off your nose to spite your faces? I'd rather we all join hands and find things we all can agree on or suffer the consequences in the next election.
What am I missing? He is popular for a reason.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/national-party-news/348519-opinion-sanders-is-the-most-popular-political-leader

[clu]

1. they're not making enemies of all of his supporters

as disheartening as it is to read some of the anti-sanders comments, I think most of the vocalization is directed towards people who voted for jill stein. this cannot be more than a minority of democratic voters, but if that voting occurred in MI/WI/PA, it was a pretty bad idea. that is in fact legitimate criticism.

what disturbs me more are posts that imply that imply progressive candidates cannot win, cannot pass legislation, and are not viable candidates. i'll admit Kucinich was unelectable, but he would have gone beast mode in the presidential debate. however, if we have a good progressive candidate in any race and the DNC finds a reason to back someone else, then some debate and introspection are in order.

edit: IIRC my sister voted for jill stein but she's in CA. if someone can link me to one of these polls showing 4%-10% of democratic voters having voted for Jill Stein, any honest criticism of that will restrict the poll sample to MI/WI/PA. If anyone tries to use the national vote count as the total, they are intentionally or unintentionally buttressing a weak argument. People in solid blue states could afford to vote for jill stein, and any stein vote counts in a solid blue state should be interpreted correctly as a vote against both Hillary and Trump.

[Voltaire2]

9. Kucinich was re-elected until they gerrymandered his district away.

He was declared unpresidential by the media, which is ridiculous under the current circumstances. Mostly he was an actual Democrat espousing new deal democratic socialist programs, and that was what was unacceptable to the "leaders" of the Democratic Party.

[clu]

10. i am sorry but if you don't support the democratic candidate

then go join a third party and burn for spoiling our vote

edit - this is my Stephen Colbert impression

[Voltaire2]

11. is that a response to anything i wrote?

[clu]

12. it was a bad joke

directed at the wrong post

[Voltaire2]

15. I saw your edit as soon as I posted my response. No problem. I like Dennis, even with his elf ears.

[lunasun]

31. Dennis Kucinich FOX News spokesperson?Russian collusion doesn't exist Respect trump Kucinich?

[clu]

37. let the dude alone

he's just trying to get paid. if he's saying respect trump i'm certain there's a financial gun to his head and the fact that he's saying it is a testament to the state of media and politics in the US.

[bettyellen]

41. "Financial gun to his head"You mean he's a paid shill now?

[emulatorloo]

77. Watch Fox News or we will hurt this cute puppy

[emulatorloo]

76. Got it. Like poor little KellyAnne, he just needs to make a buck or two.

[MrsCoffee]

74. He is full on right wing these days and a Russian puppet.

So yeah, I'm glad he never made it to the White House.

[clu]

97. i will have to watch a few clips

that would be pretty reprehensible but I will still use the financial motive as a way to beat down any conservative opinion about him.

[MrsCoffee]

133. So it's okay if he is doing it for money?

That's ridiculous. Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell just sold our Democracy to Russia for god knows how much financial motive. You gonna beat down any conservative opinions about them too?

[Motownman78]

93. I thought Dennis has gone over to the right

He is on Fox news quite a bit.

[Hortensis]

138. Our liberal and moderate forefathers created a progressive democratic republic.

Those who deny that deny the great progressive heritage of our nation and weaken progressivism itself. That's what scares me.

It's not just a word for a left-wing populist movement to adopt to differentiate themselves from the larger body of liberal progressive Democrats. The association of this word with the far left will help the Frank Luntzs turn the concept into a label that is frightening and repellent to a majority of voters. Commie, Fascist, Progressive...

Progressivism at the national level is the method by which We the People achieve governance of, by and for the people. The only way for us to be if we are to continue.

[MaeScott]

2. I feel the same way. Let's move the hell on. Find common ground and move on.

[Hortensis]

139. Let's meet on the high ground.

[pnwmom]

3. He's not the most popular politician in America. In a poll that listed only 4 Democrats, Bernie,

and a handful of Rethugs, he was the highest.

This was a poll that didn't even list Joe Biden, for one. It's wrong to extrapolate from that poll to say that he's the most popular out of thousands of politicians in America who weren't on the list.

Sure, we need his supporters. But we need Hillary supporters, too. And Biden supporters. And O'Malley supporters. And Warren supporters. So why keep pushing Bernie to the fore? He's going to be 79 in 2020.

We need some new blood.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

13. Bernie is the most popular

and there are several polls in the last several months verifying that. Now whether you want to throw in currently active politicians or not, which is splitting hairs, one can not deny the pull Bernie has. Nobody else is selling out crowds all over the place. Nobody else brought more young people into the political process during the primaries. Nobody else is out there standing by unions and fighting for workers (Nissan in Mississippi). On and on. Bernie really is THAT popular and it's for good reason & well deserved.

Age is just a number. Only that. It's about issues and Bernie is on target with them. I don't care how old someone else. Liz and Joe aren't young either, and? The reason Bernie is at the forefront is because he is the one out there fighting openly & loudly. Where's O'Malley for instance? Personally I'd love to see the guy to be vocal but does anybody even know where he is?

We need a coalition. And we need to organize in order to win. The time has come to do just that as midterms are coming.

[pnwmom]

14. There isn't a SINGLE poll showing that. All any of them can show is that he's

the most popular out of whichever names they choose to compare him to.

If you think otherwise, then show me the poll. I'll wait.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

16. There are several

Here is but one.
Do you honestly think what I said isn't illustrative of someone who is popular? Selling out venues and what not? Lines wrapped around buildings? They weren't there to see Tom Perez.

[pnwmom]

18. Your one poll says: "some people in the news" and "As I read each name:" and then lists them.

So the poll only shows that he's the most popular out of whichever handful of politicians they choose to compare him to -- not all the politicians in America. So you haven't proven he's the most popular of all politicians in America.


Why is this so hard to understand?

And rally attendance doesn't prove much either. Hillary got 3 million more POPULAR votes than DT even though he had more people attending rallies. Trump didn't win because people liked him more or because more people went to his rallies. He won because of the rigged Electoral College (rigged to give more weight to votes in certain largely rural and white states), plus Russian meddling, plus voter suppression, plus Comey's two letter bombs. And even despite all that, his winning Electoral College margin only came to 70,000 votes spread over 3 states.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

21. Bernie is the most popular

Can you show us anything where he isn't? Show us ANY currently serving politician that out polls Bernie?

The rallies prove a lot. A whole lot actually and it goes further than just popularity; it illustrates that people are fired up and engaged. These are GOOD things and it's a GREAT THING that we have the most popular politician in America on OUR side fighting for us! Am I wrong? Is that bad? I don't think it is especially since Bernie brought in more young voters to the political process during the primaries than Trump and Hillary COMBINED, by a lot! https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/06/20/more-young-people-voted-for-bernie-sanders-than-trump-and-clinton-combined-by-a-lot/

Want another poll? Here you go. In the mean time can you show us something indicating that he isn't?

[George II]

52. From which poll did that graphic come?

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

54. Says it at the bottom

[George II]

56. I googled "Crosstabs" and "HCAPS", no hits.

[GoCubsGo]

135. It was also taken back in March.

[pnwmom]

66. It only asks about three other Dems -- so it's fails to prove the point he's making

that Bernie is the most popular politician in America.

[BeckyDem]

61. Some people only believe what they prefer.

Says Bernie Sanders "is the most popular politician in America today." Politifact: Mostly True.
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2017/apr/27/mike-crute/despite-losing-nomination-hillary-clinton-bernie-s/

[pnwmom]

67. That was a judgment that makes no sense. They acknowledge that that question

wasn't included in the poll and that the list only included a very short list of politicians.

All that can be truthfully said was that his popularity rating was higher than the other politicians they included (which failed to include, among others, Joe Biden -- who has not ruled himself out of politics.)

[BeckyDem]

71. I don't think politifact is the one not making sense.

[pnwmom]

81. That's because of your bias. Joe Biden is a very popular politician and the fact that he was left

Last edited Fri Sep 8, 2017, 01:22 PM - Edit history (1)

out of the poll renders any conclusions meaningless.

And this is the proof. Joe Biden IS an American politician. The polls didn't prove that Bernie is more popular than Joe Biden. Therefore the polls didn't prove that Bernie is more popular than all politicians.

[BeckyDem]

136. Politifact is biased according to those not appreciating their conclusions.

[pnwmom]

143. I don't think they're biased. But their "mostly true" rating came down to a judgment call,

not a factual call. Their analysis gives the facts.. They should have called the claim "mostly false" because it isn't supported by the facts they listed.

Joe Biden is a politician. The facts don't show that Bernie is more popular than Biden. Therefore the facts don't show that Bernie is more popular than all politicians.

[BeckyDem]

62. Donald Trump Is Not Popular, But Hillary Clinton Is Even Worse- Newsweek

By Tim Marcin On 9/7/17
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-not-popular-hillary-clinton-even-worse-approval-rating-polls-661070

[pnwmom]

64. There are THOUSANDS of politicians in America. This study named FOUR. So being more

popular than these three other people does NOT prove your point.

You are the one making an assertion -- it is up to you to back that up. You're asking me to prove a negative and logically that's not possible. But you still haven't put forth a single poll that shows he's the most popular politician in the US.

[Demsrule86]

73. I hope Sen.Sanders does not run, but if he does, I would bet he will lose the 2020

primary early and decisively. I just don't think after 16 he is as 'popular' as you think...time will tell...although hopefully he will not run for president in 20.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

112. lol you really think that would be the case?

I don't. Nobody else has the draw he does. We all know this. We all see it. And yes he is as popular as I think. You should have seen the lines here in Colorado when he spoke, it was double wrapped.

I hope he does run in 2020 because he's going to win! And decisively against Trump at that too! There is no other candidate who can stick it to Orange Cheeto like Bernie. The debates would be pay per view material

[Demsrule86]

141. Yes...there is the age factor and there is no question, he has ticked off Democratic followers.

My kids,hubs and I all went down and voted for Sen. Sanders in the Ohio primary...I was OK with either candidate so it was fun to do it as a family. But I have changed my mind since...for a number of reasons. I would never vote for Sen. Sanders in the 2020 primary. And I don't think I am alone in my opinion. I would vote for whoever the Democratic candidate is in 20, but I doubt it will be Sen. Sanders;if it is I believe we will lose the general.

[lapucelle]

91. Argumentum ad ignorantiam

The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

[lapucelle]

90. Four people in this case.

[brush]

114. Try the results of the 2016 primaries. If he was most popular he would've won.

Popularity that doesn't translate to votes means nothing.

[DesertRat]

32. Selling out venues?

Since when are members of Congress paid for speeches?

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

33. You know what I mean

In the case in which I used the tern, it's a figure of speech to illustrate this continuously happening.....

[Fla Dem]

35. Although the banner of this article reflects today's news the article is over 2 years old.

Article is from August 15, 2015.

https://www.postandcourier.com/politics/bernie-sanders-popularity-means-moving-to-a-bigger-venue-for/image_f27d3b0d-8fd3-5ca4-89c5-734c8eec00da.html

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

36. And that speaks volumes

And that is a GOOD thing!

[pnwmom]

69. Yes. It proves that his big rallies did not indicate he'd get large numbers of votes.

He lost the primaries -- the ultimate popularity contest -- by 4 million votes.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

103. There are reasons for that

and yet as stated above; Politfact. http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2017/apr/27/mike-crute/despite-losing-nomination-hillary-clinton-bernie-s/

[George II]

45. Two years old?

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

48. I fail to see why that's funny

It only shows how popular he is and for how long he has been.

Link to tweet

[pnwmom]

70. In between the date of your article and now he lost the primaries by 4 million votes. n/t

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

104. And how he's the most popular politician today :)

Pretty awesome huh. Expected though now that everybody knows Bernie and most of America agrees with his policies.

[Demsrule86]

142. I don't think that is accurate.

But why must you and others push Sen. Sanders on us constantly. Most of us won't vote for him if he runs in 20 and you do not help his case with these posts.

[lapucelle]

89. According to your poll,

BS is #1
HRC is #2
Paul Ryan is #3
Mitch McConnell is #4

At least Bannon doesn't make the list in this poll.

[melman]

20. So you're saying the poll results

involve the people actually included in the poll. Thanks for the insight.

[pnwmom]

95. Yes. They don't extend to the larger group of American politicians -- thus they say nothing

that indicates Bernie is the most popular politician in America, as the OP claims.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

106. I've shown you several polls

Can you show us one where it says Bernie isn't as popular as it seems?

[melman]

130. Right

You're saying the poll is meaningless if it doesn't include every single city council member etc in the whole country. It's a ridiculous argument.

[brer cat]

38. And the same polls show that Pence is the second most popular politician.

That poll is on the internet so I'm sure it is true.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

46. There are many polls showing Bernie as the most popular

I don't get the disconnect here. It's a good thing he is and we have him on our side.

I linked to 2 polls above that were NOT internet polls.

[Amimnoch]

39. Agreed that we need a coalition.

And that's always been Bernie's biggest weakness, and the main reason he'll never be the same as the man in your avatar.

FDR knew how to build a coalition.. a HUGE one.. the likes of which this country hasn't seen since.

You can't build a coalition while heckling everyone from the outside.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

49. I disagree

Bernie has built a very large coalition and with that, he has gotten more younger involved in politics than ever before. That's the future and THAT is a beautiful thing! Do Dems themselves seem concerned? Nope they aren't. Our party leadership, if they were, wouldn't have offered him a leadership roll.

[lunamagica]

58. Too bad that youth could not bother to vote

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

59. There's reasons for that

but I don't want to break the rule of re-fighting the primaries

[bettyellen]

84. Yeah, they're young and impatient, don't know enough how things work

And generally fee like they have less of a stake in a lot of issues- except tuition

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

98. Wow way to disparage a whole generation

That will surely help us win in midterms and 2020.

Millennials are very engaged politically and many know exactly how things work. What you said is honestly offensive to many of us who are that age

[bettyellen]

115. And sooo easily offended. I'm sorry, but many have been engaged a short period of time and think

They think they know it all- it's pretty much a built in feature of youth. We all remember feeling that way in our teens and twenties, much to our chagrin years later. Unless a person is a literal idiot, they do learn more about the world as they get older, from having more experience.

That's literally how things work for everyone- until they get very old. It's not disparaging young people to speak the truth here, as they do have a lot of other things going for them, of course.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

116. I'm of the age group that you just used a stereotype against

Jeez listen to what you are saying! Betty stop!

No it isn't how things work for everyone, I'm sorry. Not in the least bit. Why are you driving a wedge here, with the largest voting block in America no less? Just because they haven't been around long doesn't mean they aren't politically aware of educated on the issues, in fact, millennials are very political aware.

I suggest you read this from PBS Newshour.

Millennials are more informed than you think http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/millennials-informed-think/

[bettyellen]

119. It's great that they're getting more engaged- Much more so than Xers were at that age for sure!

I applaud that, totally. But it's true you'll actually learn a lot more and you'll see things through more experienced eyes. It's such a rite of passage to learn you didn't know it all, and some day you'll be there too. In the meantime, I'm certain there's no convincing you otherwise, but that too is a feature of being young. It is a very disturbing time, politically and it's sad the crap that is being normalized. It's gotta be freaky only living through the Obama years and now this. I can't even imagine!

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

122. Not always sorry

You don't know what people have been through and what they have seen. No clue. It's an assumption & only that. Why are you still disparaging people with this narrative of that they "know everything"? Not cool and that only turns off the voters we so very much need and sends the message that they are not welcome by any stretch. We don't need that. Your putting the blame here where it doesn't belong using stereotypes and that is just the flat out wrong thing to do. We need outreach not hitting people in the butt with the hot poker from the BBQ

[bettyellen]

123. Young people will know or remember very little of the Bush years, let alone Reagan.

It's a bit different to have participated and lived through the changes in the zeitgeist than it is to hear about it second hand or read it in a book. Of course I know they didn't experience the 80's, lol. Calm down. If you think me saying these things is a "hot poker" then you do have some growing up to do. There is a difference between being appreciated and welcomed as opposed to coddled and lied to. Lose the ego.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

125. Excuse me? I don't have an ego

On the contrary. And yes you are saying these things I would urge you to go back and read what you've written and perhaps maybe annotate that you don't mean this as a personal attack against millennials because it sure is one as it stands right now.
Millenneials are now coddled and lied to? On and on it goes. Still disparaging a whole generation......sigh

[bettyellen]

126. You want to believe you won't learn things or have a wider perspective as you grow older? It deeply

Offends you, despite it being a very basic and universal
truth? I really can't help you.


But if you insist, you can PM me in ten years and proudly tell me you've learned nothing at all.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

128. What I'm saying is

You disparaged a whole generation of voters. It isn't cool Betty and we need to be practicing outreach not making people unwelcomed.
I've met people who young and old, smart or stupid doesn't know 80 or 30. If it did, Trump voters would be geniuses considering his voters were older than Hillary's. He won age demographic from 45 up. http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/ Hillary won younger voters.

Ole!

[bettyellen]

137. You're right - except that they don't turn out. When they do it's awesome, but...

They never have, and no it's not my fault either. I've registered thousands of voters and worked on loads of campaigns over the years, I do love seeing young people get involved. But they do t have more impact because they generally don't- that's not a stereotype it's backed by studies.

[southerncrone]

118. Welcome CloudsInMyCoffee! Perfectly stated !!

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

121. Thank you. I don't get it

Why are people disparaging an entire generation of voters? Jeez these are people we NEED to win!

[Ninsianna]

96. Well we have to look at those reasons so we can fix the damage done

when someone told them that the parties were the same, that things were rigged and that they didn't need to educate themselves at all or register to voter or show up and pick from the valid candidates and not treat it as mad libs or a protest that screwed themselves over.

[Amimnoch]

60. Energizing a youth base is not the same as building a political coalition.

co·a·li·tion
[ˌkōəˈliSH(ə n]

NOUN
an alliance for combined action, especially a temporary alliance of political parties forming a government or of states:

No argument at all that he's energized a large number of youthful voters. That doesn't make a political coalition, and it takes a political coalition to make real progress. In his own words he is a political outsider. Kind of the exact opposite of someone who's built a strong political coalition. Now, let me clarify, political outsider isn't a bad thing. In fact, it can be a very useful position to be in, and Senator Sanders does use that position very well to get positions and topics needed attention. It's a primary benefit of him remaining independent as well.

He couldn't even get his political coworkers whom he's worked with for decades to endorse him. So, I'm sorry, but you are incorrect. He didn't build a very large coalition. He's built no coalition at all.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

102. I disagree

A coalition means putting together a force far and wide for the greater good in order to defeat the ultimate evil; The GOP.
Bernie has done that. Very much so. People cross over from all areas for him and that is a very important thing.

Look at DSA as an example and their followers who are staunch Bernie supporters and they are NOT Dems but would vote for him in a heart beat should be the nominee in 2020. I see it each and every day with how diverse people are who support Bernie. It'sa wonderful thing and that shows us the direction which we are headed; winning!

[Amimnoch]

145. disagree all you'd like. You don't get to change the definition to fit your narrative.

I provided a definition.

You've provided your opinion.

Aren't alternative facts, and denying facts supposed to be a right wing thing? Just because you don't like the actual written definition doesn't empower you to change it. I've given you the full credit of accuracy that he has energized a huge base of his own, I've also acknowledged that is a great thing. I've actually listened to what you had to say. Would appreciate the same courtesy.

I provided the actual, and factual definition of coalition. He has not built one by the very definition of it. He has built a energized base, but not a coalition.

Your opinion of what a coalition could be is cute, but it is not how the word is actually defined.

[George II]

87. His leadership role is a relatively obscure position with virtually no responsibilities.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

107. And yet he has a leadership position regardless

I think Schumer knew what he was doing.

[George II]

110. Yes he did. Schumer is a shrewd politician.

[George II]

44. Which polls are you referring to...

The poll that only rates politicians by their own constituencies (i.e., Vermont's 650,000 vs. New York's 20 million vs. California's 40 million)? That poll doesn't rate them nationally.

Or are you referring to the poll that included only 12 politicians (the Harvard-Harris), one of whom was non-politician Steve Bannon, who had already been fired by trump when the poll was conducted, and was a online poll?

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

51. Look at my posts above

I screen capped them. Those are just a couple of many

[George II]

53. No links and no names.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

55. They all have the names in them

I don't know why we are arguing over this to be honest.
There are many polls, many liberal websites with news articles saying he is and then there are the crowds wrapped around buildings, venues needing to be moved, all the new people politically aware that are young Bernie has brought in.

On and on.

I know what I believe. All the info there is backing it

[lapucelle]

88. The Hill commissioned the Harvard Haris poll

in exchange for exclusive use rights. It's the same poll with the same questions every month. Respondents are paid with Amazon gift cards.

Did you know that Steve Bannon is the 12th most popular political figure based on that poll and that Mike Pence is second most popular? Jeff Sessions clocks in at number 6.

Not a single POC made the "most popular" list, not even President Obama.

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

109. I wasn't taking about the Hill poll

There's also CNN. NBC Marris. Gallup and others saying Bernie is the most popular.
Every month for several months it's the same thing, this has been going on awhile now. I'm thrilled he's on our side and out there fighting like crazy!

[lapucelle]

131. I read all of the data from the CNN/ORB poll

rather than the one page you so helpfully provided. It asked respondents to assess exactly five different political figures.

In the alternate universe where the set "all political figures in the United States" is limited to these five people, your conclusion holds.

There's a reason why those of us who deal in data analysis immediately think of H.L. Mencken's observation when laymen make absurdly broad claims based on extremely limited evidence:

"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."

[CloudsInMyCoffee]

132. So then every poll is meaningless, right?

I don't think so. I also don't know why some of you refuse to believe the reality that Bernie is the most popular politician. Every month there are polls released indicating this. Do you honestly think that there is another currently active and serving politician who is more popular? If so, I'd like to know who exactly. Because there simply isn't. Name one.

Here's another poll:

[lapucelle]

144. I'm always a little leery when non-experts

present partial data in suppport of catagorical claims. And while the data itself might be valid and reliable, the reasonability and cogency of conclusions and inferences based on that data are contingent on the quality and expertise of the mind that is reaching them.

I have no problem with complete sets of data. Facile and superficial analysis based on limited data in the service of flawed narratives is another thing entirely.

[Ninsianna]

111. Yes, he's the most popular elected official, in a list of 16 people of whom 9 were politicians.

He's the most popular group of Paul Ryan, Mitch Mcconnell, Trump, Pence etc.

So looking at the questions asked, and the people included in the list is kind of important when evaluating polls. So these polls don't verify anything other than the fond beliefs of fans.

One can actually deny the pull a politician has, when the people he endorses don't win, when bills are not sponsored or co sponsored and nothing much is accomplished.

Hillary Clinton is selling out crowds all over the place, so it's not a true comment to state that. Her book is placed higher on the Amazon lists than Sanders book, and her tour is going pretty well.

He didn't bring people into the political process, he sold them a bill of goods and spread disinformation about the parties, how basic government works and has tainted a bunch of them into not even bothered to register. Lots of Democrats are standing by unions and fighting for workers, for citizens etc. It's a dishonest disservice to pretend that Demcorats are not doing this or that they have not been doing this. Bernie really isn't THAT popular, but there is a lot of false hype about his supposed popularity and all the things he's doing. His own constituents would like to see him, even if it's just for a book signing, but he keeps bypassing Vermont for some reason.

It's weird that when it's about Bernie, age is just a number, but when it's about anyone else, it's a whole lot of whining about "teh olds". Bernie isn't really at the forefront, but the many, many Democrats who actually are out there on the issues, whose names don't figure in popularity polls, and who are actually outfront doing their jobs ARE.

We have a coalition, we know how to build them, and we're organized, we just have a bunch of loud, whiny people demanding that we "bend the knee" and disenfranchise the Democratic base by excluding them from participating, if they're older, disabled, have jobs, have children, etc. The time has come to stop the silliness and the popularity BS and concentrate on the party and the people who are doing all the work rather, we've got a great many talented and POPULAR leaders who are in the party, not trying to divide anyone and working hard to fight gerrymandering, voter suppression, to register voters and educate them. It would be great if Bernie would join them, and direct all that influence over his own people to help and not hinder our efforts. We'd welcome their efforts, but we won't be "bending the knee" or bending over backwards. Get on board and do the work or get out of the way, we don't have time for popularity contests and tantrums.

[clu]

5. he lost by 4 million votes!@

nt

[clu]

7. no need to even go there

I am with you 100%

[mythology]

24. This nonsense again?

He lost the primaries by a substantial margin.

[MyNameGoesHere]

8. The only thing I want from

Senator Sanders is to say, I am a Democrat, I want to be part of this party and make it better. I officially change my party affiliation to Democrat today and will work to make it better than it ever has been.

He won't of course. It's easier to be disruptive and divisive. It's easier to criticize from the outside. It's hard work to get in there and make change.

Whoever the next candidate is for the Democratic party is the one I will vote for. Not the independent running as a Democrat. Senator Sanders supporters can do as they wish and suffer the consequences again along with the rest of us.

[Barack_America]

17. Because it helps book sales?

It's kind if of hard to tell Hillary fans not to attack Bernie in the interest of party unity, after Hillary released a book sharply critical of him and largely broadbrushing many of his supporters.

Now I'm realizing why we heard so many stories about Dem leaders being upset with Hillary and her publisher's choice to release the book now. But, from a purely sales standpoint, this was probably the best time for her to do so.

[pnwmom]

19. The earlier, the better. How would it have been better for her to release her book before the 2018

elections? Or the 2020? They weren't suggesting she should wait till after 2020, were they? That would be nuts.

[Barack_America]

22. It all depends on what your goals and priorities are.

But, yes, some people hold off on publishing books for years, if the damage the content could do to self/family/country, etc. is a greater concern than taking a hit on sales. I doubt we'll soon see a much-deserved book from Obama, analyzing being the first black president, and excoriating the country's racists and their treatment of him. But that's Obama. Different person, different situation, different priorities and "duty to country".

I would imagine that, in order to get the deal she got, Hillary had to publish within a certain timeframe. Her deal would have likely been much less lucrative if she had requested a deal with a TBD publish date. That's the game of publishing these days.

[George II]

47. Some would prefer it not being released at all.

[Weekend Warrior]

29. Hard to take that seriously when Sanders had done at least one book stop this week.

And has a standing record of attacking the party.

"Hillary released a book sharply critical of him and largely broadbrushing many of his supporters."



How many of the hundreds of pages are dedicated to attacking Sanders and his "fans"? You seem to have read it.

[emulatorloo]

65. You've read two pages of a 500+ page book.

Consequently your very very authoritative description of what the book is all about really doesn't carry much weight.

BTW, knock off with the "fan" bullshit.

I didn't care for it when asshole conservatives called Obama supporters "fans."

I don't care for it when Sanders primary supporters like me are called "Sanders Fans"

It is a shitty way to trivialize and demean people who share core liberal and progressives values.

[Orsino]

25. If he really were the most popular, he would have won the primary.

But if he had no popularity, we could bash him without consequences.

[clu]

26. 60k voters

were purged from the NY dem primary - Russian election interference where?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Democratic_primary,_2016

here are some choice quotes:

The Democratic vote was marred by major irregularities at polling places across Brooklyn. The city comptroller's office announced that the Board of Elections had confirmed that more than 125,000 Democratic voters in Brooklyn were dropped between November and this month, while about 63,000 were added — a net loss that was not explained. Mayor Bill de Blasio described 'the purging of entire buildings and blocks of voters,' while the comptroller, Scott Stringer, said his office would audit the Board of Elections.[4]

...

In terms of political ideology, Clinton won 62-38 among Democrats while Sanders won 72-28 among Independents, who were 14% of the electorate. Clinton won both liberals and moderate/conservative voters. She won among union households 58-42, and won both married and unmarried voters. In terms of religious affiliation, Clinton won Protestants 65-35, Catholics 62-38, and also won the Jewish vote.[27] Sanders won agnostic/atheist voters 57-43. While Clinton won voters who said Wall Street does more to help the economy, Sanders won among those who said it hurts the economy.[28]

[bettyellen]

42. Those lost votes were mostly Clinton's... thats been known since it happened.

Where does this bullshit come from?

[clu]

72. i only returned back recently

can you please provide a cite? i'm just waking up for work and i'm trying to nap for another hour before i run a laundry list of quick chores before my shift starts.

[pnwmom]

82. Yes -- from a district that polls showed heavily favored Hillary -- like the other NY boroughs.

Regardless, Hillary won NY by more than 300,000 votes.

[clu]

99. with his criticism of wall st

this is no surprise. is this the thread where I linked a Wikipedia article about the NY primary and sanders' broad support among independents? how does that even work in a state where your party must be declared to vote in the primary? are there that many people in NY registered as independent?

[pnwmom]

101. Only registered Democrats could vote in the NY primary, so if Sanders's independents wanted to vote

in the primary, then they needed to change their registration -- which is similar to what he did when he signed up to run as a Democrat.

[clu]

113. help please

Do you think that's what they did to end up in a Sanders independent vote total for the NY dem primary? The Wikipedia cite in post#26 could be an indicator of broad independent support - even outside of NY. nevermind I should check the Wikipedia cite myself.


edit: I will stfu since this is turning into primary

[PubliusEnigma]

27. If Bernie runs as an Independent in the next election, we will suffer more consequences.

What am I missing?

[delisen]

28. Sanders is a personality, I expect people to discuss him.

Political personalities are like popular culture personalities.

If I were to spend time on popular culture sites, I would expect to see Kim Kardashian discussed and critiqued.

I understand the desire to control the image but think you need to accept that commentary will be mixed. People don't all think alike.

[George II]

40. He's "the most popular politician in America" among a very select, small set of "politicians"...

...chosen by the pollster, if that article is using the Harris-Harvard poll, although the author doesn't say what he's basing it upon.

If so, that poll included only 12 politicians, one of whom was the non-politician Steve Bannon (who was fired even before the latest poll was released that included his name)

Or, it could be based on that highly-questionable poll that rated politicians among their own constituencies, not nationally. I.e, Sanders was rated by a subset of only Vermont voters (200,000 total voters), Chuck Schumer was rated by a subset of only New York voters (7.5 MILLION total voters), Kamala Harris was rated by a subset of only California voters (a total of more than 14 million)

In fact, both New York and California each have more black and Hispanic voters than Vermont has voters. By "rating" politicians only by their constituencies, they're certainly not rating them among a cross-section of Americans.

This shows the fallacy of these "most popular" polls that we see bandied about here in DU.

And reminder, the headline of that link is prefaced with "OPINION".

[Weekend Warrior]

43. The small percentage of his supporters being attacked....

Are politically worthless, not worth going after, and the most inconsistent voters. Then there are the good people who simply take everything personally and like to hear their name called out in a crowd. Those we should and do target. Then you have the Democrats who supported him. They are already on our team.

Non-voters and holding our base which has nothing to do with Sanders should be our goal. Most Sanders supporters are damn good people and really respect the party platform.

I don't get this new trend of Sanders supporters making other Sanders supporters look weak. That is just what has been done here. Their perceived persecution complex couldn't have been highlighted anymore than was done in your op.

[CakeGrrl]

50. "Vote for the Democrat to defeat the Republicans"

Why does that have to be so difficult?

Republicans have all three branches of government and can stack the SCOTUS for years because they seem to have figured this out. Yes, it's pretty certain there was Russian interference last November, but as with Florida, it was - but shouldn't have been - close enough to steal.

[underthematrix]

57. I am TIRED of white folks dragging Sanders and Clinton

White folks did this. They created this nightmare and Ta-Nehisi Coates explains why in his ATLANTIC article titled:
The First White President https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/10/the-first-white-president-ta-nehisi-coates/537909/

An excerpt:
To Trump, whiteness is neither notional nor symbolic but is the very core of his power. In this, Trump is not singular. But whereas his forebears carried whiteness like an ancestral talisman, Trump cracked the glowing amulet open, releasing its eldritch energies. The repercussions are striking: Trump is the first president to have served in no public capacity before ascending to his perch. But more telling, Trump is also the first president to have publicly affirmed that his daughter is a “piece of ass.” The mind seizes trying to imagine a black man extolling the virtues of sexual assault on tape (“When you’re a star, they let you do it”), fending off multiple accusations of such assaults, immersed in multiple lawsuits for allegedly fraudulent business dealings, exhorting his followers to violence, and then strolling into the White House. But that is the point of white supremacy—to ensure that that which all others achieve with maximal effort, white people (particularly white men) achieve with minimal qualification. Barack Obama delivered to black people the hoary message that if they work twice as hard as white people, anything is possible. But Trump’s counter is persuasive: Work half as hard as black people, and even more is possible.

Stop blaming Sanders and Clinton for what you did. Take responsibility.

[LovingA2andMI]

108. YES!!!!

And it amazing how many folks will never read that essay/article. Probably WAY TOO MUCH truth in it, for their sensibilities.

[underthematrix]

124. Thank you. We need to focus on a DEMOCRATIC PROGRESSIVE agenda. Infighting is bullshit and

doesn't win elections or policy fights. Sanders, Harris and Warren are sponsoring a MEDICARE for ALL bill which is something we can all get behind. And Schumer and Pelosi are werking it HARD so the bill gets to the Senate floor for a vote. This is what we should be about. I voted for Clinton but I sure as hell support senators (including Sanders) who are working together on behalf of the American people. That's what Sanders, Harris, and Warren are doing. Let's join them.

[emulatorloo]

63. HRC's popularity was at 66% when she left the State department. So don't get too married

to the idea of popularity. It can come and go, especially when Republican millionaires start their slander machine against you.

[Hortensis]

140. Rose also as a U.S. Senator but not as much as SoS because she was relatively

out of sight then. Between and after the two, during each presidential run, the slander machines -- with the beltway media employed as its biggest delivery vehicle -- managed to drop her numbers like rocks.

Same woman the whole way through. She didn't change except to get better at presenting herself.

[wryter2000]

68. It's not about knocking down Bernie Sanders

It's about asking him to quit knocking down the Democratic Party

[XRubicon]

75. At this point it's about sides not candidates

Who can win. I am for Bernie, Hillary, Franken whoever.

We need to stop nitpicking and elect Democrats. We can fight later.

[Warpy]

78. The conservatives think they'd be happy if the left all disappeared

Should the Republican Party collapse under the weight of its corruption, they will eventually get their wish as a new party is created by progressives to fight for issues dear to their hearts. It's happened before, it can happen again.

Remember, the Republicans arose out of the ashes of the Whig Party, it's major issue abolitionism. Once that fight was over, the progressives became less political and the rich eventually took it over and made it into another Hamiltonian minority party.

[applegrove]

79. We need to learn from all the mistakes made during the election. Otherwise

how do we win. I love Bernie but felt it was a mistake of him to hold back his support as the convention approached. That is just me. There are at least 20 reasons why we lost. We should know them all.

[NurseJackie]

80. LOL

[Raine]

83. Yes, exactly! nt

[yuiyoshida]

85. Ohh boy...

[NanceGreggs]

86. These polls ...

... claiming that Bernie is "the most popular politician" are pointless. To be anywhere close to accurate, every single politician in the country would have to included - and countless adjustments would have to be made to account for size of constituencies, etc.

They are as pointless as the "Bernie beats Trump" polls that some people still cling to as "proof" that he would have won the GE.

As for cutting one's nose off to spite one's face, that should be directed at those who contributed to Trump's win by voting third party, writing-in Bernie, or refusing to vote at all because their candidate-of-choice wasn't the nominee.

The primaries were the ultimate test of "popularity", if you will -- and Bernie didn't come close to winning the nomination. That pretty well puts the "most popular politician" idea to rest.

Sure, Bernie is "popular for a reason" - the "reason" being that he promotes popular ideas - like single-payer and free college. The problem is the follow-through, which is where Bernie continually falters, always unable to explain how his grand ideas are to go from wishful thinking to actual reality.

It's easy to say "I'm for world peace, wiping out disease and ending world hunger" - it is quite another thing to come up with a viable plan to actually accomplish those things.

[BigBearJohn]

92. I don't care who's more popular. My only point was that we shouldn't alienate all his supporters.

Bernie never claimed that "He" was going to be the one to push through all this change. He always emphasized the word "WE."
IMHO he is trying to start a revolution.

[Starry Messenger]

94. Real Bernie supporters are Hillary supporters, since they voted for her

12% voted for Trump, I'm not worried about alienating them. Since the third-party voters insist nothing could induce them to vote for a Democrat, who are we worried about?

Only an asshole would vote for Trump again. I don't chase assholes.

[clu]

100. amen nt

[southerncrone]

117. I have serious trouble accepting the fact that ANY Bernie supporter would vote for Drumph.

Their positions are diametrically opposed to one another. I suspect the "polls" that state 12% of his supporters voted for him are purely propaganda tools. JMHO

I do know that many did vote for Stein, mainly the environmentally concerned.

Democrats need to do some sincere soul-searching. I agree that the "leaders" of the party must allow a variety of progressive views to become a part of the Democratic platform. We also must return to our roots of representing the working class, instead of courting Wall Street for funds for our coffers. THIS is the reason Drumph won, not because of disgruntled Bernie voters. Drumph harnessed this group, albeit w/lies, and they are a huge voting block. Coming off an economically-devastating era, in which many hard workers in the country lost, not only their jobs but also their homes, this pool was ripe for the Drumph message.

If we want to take back our country, we must relate to the majority of the voting public. That public is increasingly young, progressive, & non-white. In other words, the Berniecrats. Big John Bear is correct in stating we must UNITE & MOVE FORWARD, instead of perpetuating this idea that we are a divided party. Any real American would do what is necessary to improve the country, not dwell on past differences, or play the blame game. None of this matters now.

What does matter is defeating the Republicans. Time to move on and focus on that goal & stop wasting valuable energy on perceived injustices.

BTW, this Berniecrat voted for Hillary w/no problem.

[clu]

120. i would like to see a link for any such poll

claiming 10%-15% sanders supporters as abstaining to vote or voting for stein/trump. you must exclude "rebellion" stein votes in CA and NY and consider why people voted that way.

[Starry Messenger]

146. It was in the news late last month

http://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/545812242/1-in-10-sanders-primary-voters-ended-up-supporting-trump-survey-finds

[SoCalNative]

127. No, we don't need them

Petulant children. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

[pansypoo53219]

129. UNITED we STAND, divided we fall.