Bernie Sanders 2020 campaign megathread v2 (pg 77 - declares victory in Iowa)

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Bernie was stronger than any other Democrat in the general election in NV, MI, and TX polls today.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

This was a fun chant!

https://twitter.com/GaryGrumbach/status/1191164654489423872?s=19

[Landslide Lyndon]

This was a fun chant!

https://twitter.com/GaryGrumbach/status/1191164654489423872?s=19

Unless they are Armenians.

[Cinemark]

Bernie was stronger than any other Democrat in the general election in NV, MI, and TX polls today.

And weaker than Biden in AZ, PA, WI, FL, IA and NC.

[James Monroe]

This was a fun chant!

https://twitter.com/GaryGrumbach/status/1191164654489423872?s=19

Dump Trump!

Flush Trump!

Traitor Trump!

Or anything besides their tired old sh**t.

Mirroring Democratic rallies after the Magat Nazi sh**tshows is not a good direction to go in I think.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287334579#post17

[Donerail]

Dump Trump!

Flush Trump!

Traitor Trump!

Or anything besides their tired old sh**t.

Mirroring Democratic rallies after the Magat Nazi sh**tshows is not a good direction to go in I think.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287334579#post17

Atlas user James Monroe hates winning. Too bad!

[Gracile]

Dump Trump!

Flush Trump!

Traitor Trump!

Or anything besides their tired old sh**t.

Mirroring Democratic rallies after the Magat Nazi sh**tshows is not a good direction to go in I think.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287334579#post17

Yikes. This is a big reach.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

Dump Trump!

Flush Trump!

Traitor Trump!

Or anything besides their tired old sh**t.

Mirroring Democratic rallies after the Magat Nazi sh**tshows is not a good direction to go in I think.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287334579#post17

Imagine taking literal Internet forum comments as serious punditry lol

Christ knows I disagree with MacArthur, but at least he doesn't get his political takes from the equivalent of YouTube comments.

[Arizona Iced Tea]

Bernie isn't going to get the nomination. At this point the only thing he stands for is his policies. Mayor Pete can even overtake him and get into thrid place now.

[Eraserhead]

Bernie isn't going to get the nomination. At this point the only thing he stands for is his policies. Mayor Pete can even overtake him and get into thrid place now.

Good luck with that.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

>Mayo Pete

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

GO BERNIE!

[Libertas Vel Mors]

GO BERNIE!

Aren't you a blue dog?

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

GO BERNIE!

Aren't you a blue dog?

I may or may not have a lost a bet that may or may not have been related to ky gov that may or may not have involved me having to do this.

[Suburbia]

I have a feeling so.

Yesterday, I was in Sayreville, NJ, and a middle-aged white woman told me, "No Bernie, no vote. Pretty easy to understand".

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

If he is only getting 13% in primary,  there isnt much support there; nevertheless,  college and young voters will be galvanized to vote Trump and Leader McConnell out

[Adam Griffin]

No - and they largely didn't stay home last time*.

Furthermore, more than 90% of his primary supporters who did vote in 2016 also voted for Clinton (a very impressive number given how many "independents" he attracted, which included a large number of otherwise irrational/ideologically-inconsistent types).

* Talking about people who would generally be expected to vote; not Nouveau Perotists etc

And if we're talking specifically about people who would vote for Bernie but otherwise not show up, I expect that number would dwindle even more so this time given the fact that 2016 happened. Most people who voted third-party and/or stayed home didn't expect Trump to win; a good analogue of what to expect is looking at the overall turnout and third-party support percentage changes for 2000 vs 2004 (overall turnout increased 15%; Nader vote share plummeted 85%).

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Depends on who's the nominee.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Yeah, it depends.

 For instance, if Warren is the nominee, with the exception of jfern and Shadows types, I fully expect Sanders' base to back her and be at least somewhat enthusiastic about her. She may not be their first choice, but they seem to still like her. That's one reason why, even as I am still not behind any candidate 100%, of the top three candidates I am the most favorable towards Warren-she seems like the best candidate to keep the Democratic Party united.

If it's Biden, I expect them to turn up their nose and rationalize that another four years of Trump will somehow be more worthwhile than a Biden presidency because midterms or whatever. Biden definitely looks like the most likely candidate to pick up a lot of Sanders' exclusively anti-Clinton ancestral Democratic vote from the 2016 primaries though.

Sanders overall has been at least somewhat less divisive this time though, so he will probably make more of an effort of backing the nominee that isn't him sooner and with more gusto in an effort to get his base to support them in the general election, especially if it's Warren.

I'm not going to bother going through the other candidates since they basically have no chance at the nomination.

[OSR stands with Israel]

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1192478435693780992



He literally just literally has no idea how wealth is calculated.

[The Other Castro]

Obviously he's not literally suggesting that Gates be taxed $100 billion, and his actual wealth tax plan is nowhere near that level. He's pointing out that, minus $100 billion, Gates would still have more than $2 billion. It's a hypothetical taken to an extreme, not a policy suggestion.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously he's not literally suggesting that Gates be taxed $100 billion, and his actual wealth tax plan is nowhere near that level. He's pointing out that, minus $100 billion, Gates would still have more than $2 billion. It's a hypothetical taken to an extreme, not a policy suggestion.

That's literally what he's saying though

[Adam Griffin]

How can you spend years on a political forum and still retain a third grade level understanding of politics?

[The Other Castro]

Obviously he's not literally suggesting that Gates be taxed $100 billion, and his actual wealth tax plan is nowhere near that level. He's pointing out that, minus $100 billion, Gates would still have more than $2 billion. It's a hypothetical taken to an extreme, not a policy suggestion.

That's literally what he's saying though

Again, he has a wealth tax plan that's public, anyone can see for themselves the rates he's suggesting as actual policy. The $100 billion number he's talking about is a point about billionaires in general, and the accumulation of wealth.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Obviously he's not literally suggesting that Gates be taxed $100 billion, and his actual wealth tax plan is nowhere near that level. He's pointing out that, minus $100 billion, Gates would still have more than $2 billion. It's a hypothetical taken to an extreme, not a policy suggestion.

That's literally what he's saying though

Again, he has a wealth tax plan that's public, anyone can see for themselves the rates he's suggesting as actual policy. The $100 billion number he's talking about is a point about billionaires in general, and the accumulation of wealth.

"Bill Gates was taxed $100 billion"

Idk, I prefer to listen to his own words