The only candidate not playing into ISIS hysteria is Bernie Sanders, and he's surging in the polls


#1

[Read the post]


#2


#3

Only if we get out there and vote.


#5

“Well we’ve got one problem, it’s Isis,” Sanders said, launching into a sarcastic impression of the “they” on television this week.”

Bernie’s hitting right out’a the ballpark!


#6

Yup.

Bernie’s raised quite a lot of money, and as far as I know hasn’t spent that much on advertising so far. I’m hoping that the money is instead going towards a massive national GOTV campaign.


#7

[quote=“Wanderfound, post:6, topic:72187”]
I’m hoping that the money is instead going towards a massive national GOTV campaign.
[/quote]You don’t think a hybrid approach would work? Spend some percentage on ads that assist the GOTV campaign, for example?


#8

In their defense, the Republicans have made an earnest effort to go as far to the right as possible to avoid any resemblance to Hilary.


#9

I’m getting worried that Bernie will win the nomination and then we will be stuck with Cruz or Rubio or, god forbid, Trump as President.


#10


#11

Sure.

But I do think that the emphasis should be on GOTV rather than trying to convert non-Bernie voters. Hopefully it is; I’m not inside the Bernie campaign (wrong continent for me), so I wouldn’t know.

I suspect that face-to-face GOTV would suit Bernie’s strengths (lots of volunteers, high preexisting favourability ratings) better than a TV blitz (which relies on how many dollars you have, instead of how many supporters you have, and rewards PR slickness rather than authenticity), even if that TV blitz was targeted as a GOTV campaign. But I have faith that Bernie understands how to run an effective campaign; he has been so far.


#12

Funny, that’s basically pretty much the scenario that comes to mind when I imagine Clinton getting the nomination.


#13

I think Bernie’s response on ISIS is spot on. However, when it comes to Hillary and Libya, so Gadaffi had an army marching on a group of people who had just thrown off the shackles of a mad dictator, and promised to hunt them all down like rats. What happens if the US decides not to get involved? And then is the attack on Hillary that she did nothing while tens of thousands were slaughtered? It seems like a no-win…


#14

Your fears are totally misplaced. Sanders actually polls better than Clinton in head-to-head matchups with any potential Republican nominee:

What’s most significant is that Sanders isn’t just outperforming Clinton
in state polling matchups. He now outperforms her in aggregate polling
data of hypothetical head-to-head matchups in the general election.

Which means that Bernie has a better chance of winning the Presidency than Clinton.


#15

(My emph) Or it may just mean that B is more likely than H to lose the election to T. Is the point being made. I think.


#17

We’ll be living in a textbook of propaganda and persuasion.

(We are already but it is still relatively tame, compared to what’s going to be unleashed.)


#18

I don’t give Sen. Sanders more than a 30% chance of getting the nomination. Hillary ain’t all that bad, and considering how deep Wall Street is in GOP hands I don’t take remarks of her being Wall Street’s darling seriously.

What I do take seriously is how Sen. Sanders’ attitude resonates with the primary voters, as even if Clinton wins the nomination she will have to acknowledge the strength of that sentiment amongst voters.


#19

My hope is on Jerry.

Here is hoping that Jerry Hall marrying Murdoch is some elaborate ploy of the Rock & Roll Generation to distract the old man. For once providing the Anglo-Saxon media with the necessary breathing space to actually do their job and report and inform the populace on things that matter. In short, facilitate the democratic process.

I can see no other reason why any woman would be willing to walk into that lion’s den (Except, if at this point Miss Hall is so cynical regarding the male of the species, that she really is just after the money. In which case Mick and Rock and Roll is to blame for everything!)

The one reassurance is that once the old man is gone there will be enough interests battling out his legacy to hopefully ensure that the whole empire crumbles and something better fills the vacuum.


#21

we derailed into British and US Republican politics in another thread!


#22

Funny, because all the polls appear to have Bernie over 40%, your generous spirit aside.

Over 50% in NH and Iowa, but why count them?

I respect Clinton as a career politician, but as with Gore before her, there is no way I am voting for that shape shifting corporatist puppet. I would honestly prefer a President Rubio or Trump. And no that isn’t hyperbole.


#23

I am referring to the chances of winning the nomination after all caucuses and primaries have been held. For example, my voice won’t be counted until March, when I participate in the Democrats Abroad primary for expatriates.

Iowa has been an iffy indicator at times, and polls even worse (I recall Howard Dean also polling will before the Iowa caucus, and the defiant yell became the Dean Scream when he failed to do as well as the polls suggested he would).

As for your preferences, well, I just want to remind you that the next president most likely be nominating up to three US Supreme Court justices. Think of who Clinton would nominate, and now think of who Rubio, Cruz or Trump would nominate. If you aren’t scared by that then you were never a serious Sanders supporter anyways.