Bernie fans: if he were more conservative than Hillary, but acting the same...

[Blue3]

Let's say all results were the same, except Bernie was actually very conservative/libertarian instead of progressive/liberal. Instead of single-payer healthcare, he wants complete privatization of healthcare. Etc. Maybe one thing that stays the same is that he still doesn't take money from anyone besides individual small donors.

Hillary's positions are the same as they are right now.

But Hillary is still ahead by millions of votes, and hundreds of pledged delegates, and superdelegates. She has still won the same states, by the same margins... same with Sanders, etc. Though that's mostly beside the point.

My point is... would you still be saying the process is rigged, happy that he's going to fight all the way to the convention, influencing the party platform despite his losses, and defending Bernie saying he wants to flood the convention with his people and defending Bernie saying that it might get messy because "that's democracy"


Sanders is the clear loser of the primaries. Down by a wide margin in votes and pledged delegates.

Yet he's still having his way with the convention with the party platform and with his people, and with not unifying the party before the convention either.

What if the country, and the party, makes a big rightward shift in the near-future? Do you really like the precedent this might be setting, giving a loser in the primaries so much power? Maybe 45% of Democrats in 2028 vote for a guy who wants to privatize healthcare and social security, and make racial/religious/gender discrimination legal nationwide again. He loses. But he gets his views put into the platform, and gets to control a lot of the convention, despite 55% voting for the other person.

[Blue3]

HELL NO!

The only reason I like Sanders so much is his great true progressive left policy (that he actually means) and his unwavering commitment thereto for the past 5-odd decades. It's sad how many people voted 'Yes'.

I also still take exception to the word 'fans'.

I think you may have misread the question.  I read it not as asking whether you would vote for a conservative sanders or not, it's asking whether or not you would approve of his tactics if he was someone you didn't agree with ideologically.

This is correct.

I support the right of candidates to run in any election they like. They should not have to drop out just because they are going to lose. The idea that they should is bizarre and no one has ever put it forward except Hillary supports at this current moment.

I'm not saying he should drop out before the primaries end. Neither is Hillary. I'm just saying he shouldn't fight it at the convention itself, or try to control the agenda when most people didn't vote for it.

I'm asking... do you really think so many concessions should be made to someone who got a minority of the vote and the pledged delegates? It might help the progressive movement now, but it could hurt it later.

HELL NO!

The only reason I like Sanders so much is his great true progressive left policy (that he actually means) and his unwavering commitment thereto for the past 5-odd decades. It's sad how many people voted 'Yes'.

I also still take exception to the word 'fans'.

I think you may have misread the question.  I read it not as asking whether you would vote for a conservative sanders or not, it's asking whether or not you would approve of his tactics if he was someone you didn't agree with ideologically.

Oh, I got energized a bit too early to read much more. My bad. REDACT that previous comment. Yes. All the primary voters have a pseudo-right to be represented at the convention, including Martin O'Malley's supporters. Even if they were spouting theocracy crap.

This is why I allow change of votes on all my polls -.- (+1 to Yes, -1 from No)

I'm not saying Sanders shouldn't be represented.

I'm refuting the idea that Hillary should concede on policies to him... when she is going to have a majority, and he's going to have a minority.

No I don't vote for people just because I like their attitude or how they present their arguments, I vote for people because of their policies. I don't support Hillary because she is way to conservative, and I certainly would never support anyone that is more conservative than her.

I think you're misunderstanding the topic too. This isn't about policies.

No. My support is based on policy, not attitude.

You've misunderstood it too.

I believe it is a healthy precedent not to take money from big doners and a healthy precedent not to succumb to party bosses who demand you drop out and endorse their chosen candidate. There is no law that demands a candidate drop out to "unify" the party. Apart from that, anything that threatens our two-party duopoly is fine by me.

That being said, no, I don't believe very many Bernie fans would approve of him if he were running on a platform of healthcare privatization and spending reduction.

This isn't about policy.

This is about Sanders (a minority) trying to decide things for the whole party that the majority has rejected.