Did Sanders & Warren competing against each other hurt progressives?

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Did the entry of both Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren split the progressive vote and essentially guarantee the nomination of a Moderate?

Especially compared to how the more moderate candidates rallied around Joe right after Iowa.

[TML]

In the initial stages, probably not, but in the later stages, definitely. If Sanders had been consistently trailing Warren during Q1 2020, he would likely have dropped out and endorsed her. Her refusal to do likewise indicates that she doesn't really care about the progressive causes she claims to espouse, especially if you take into account her actions in Q4 2019 and Q1 2020. I believe that had Warren dropped out before Super Tuesday and endorsed Sanders, Sanders would have won MA, ME, MN, and TX on Super Tuesday, which would have changed the narrative to him being in the driver's seat instead of Biden.

[Kamala's side hoe]

No- even if "leftists" within the Democratic party were united, they still would've lost to Biden, because they're outnumbered by "moderates/pragmatists". From last March:

I think it’s time for the left-wing Berniecrats to acknowledge that they overestimated themselves.

In 2016, the ratio of Hillary Clinton’s vote share relative to Sanders’ was about 5–4, which suggests that over half of Democratic voters (who vote in primaries) identify more with “moderate” Democrats than with more left-wing Democrats.

Now that the field has been reduced to a showdown between left and center, with all the other candidates dropping out and picking sides, the same 5–4 ratio is starting to show.

You could still trace out the 5–4 ratio when other candidates were still running; if you added up the poll numbers of all the non-leftist Democrats (Biden, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Bloomberg, et al.), you got a vote share that more or less resembles what Biden has now (more than 50%), whereas if you added up the poll numbers of the more left-wing candidates (Sanders, Warren, Yang) you ended up with a vote share of more than 40% but no more than 50%.

The leftists need to be honest with themselves — they do not have the upper hand in the politics of this country, and the policies they want implemented are not going to happen right away, and certainly not without resistance. The changes they dream of are just going to have to wait.

[brucejoel99]

Given the general composition of their respective bases, the most evident answer is that Bernie hurt Warren but Warren didn't really hurt Bernie. The clearest evidence of this lies in Warren's base practically splitting evenly between Biden & Bernie when she dropped out, & it's precisely that half-moderate/half-progressive base of hers which made clear that she was capable of building a coalition by constructively articulating her message & being nimble enough to pull in key support from other candidates/internal party constituencies, in contrast to Bernie's observed failure to build a coalition that could help him win against a unified moderate lane. Had Bernie not run or at least been out of the race by the time at which actual primaries began, there's nothing to indicate that she couldn't have ably held onto that & ran away with the primary on the back of her coalition of progressives (which would now include most Bernie supporters) & more liberal moderates.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

If Warren had dropped out prior to South Carolina and endorsed Bernie I think he would have had a lot of momentum and at a minimum been a strong favourite. Biden needed a dominant win in SC to even have a chance so even a strong 2nd from Bernie would have been enough to hold his position.

If she dropped out after South Carolina but at least a few days before Super Tuesday I think it's a tossup. States like MA, ME, MI and TX going Bernie's way would have done a lot to avoid Biden taking all the momentum and would have completely flipped the script from "Bernie only wins out West" to "Biden only wins in the South".

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Not sure if it would've mattered that much. Bernie would be more competitive but I still think Bernie prevails, but that Warren is kinda selfish is a notion i agree with and that she perhaps doesn't care all that much about progressive values at all.

[Motorcity]

Probably not.

Warren has no reason to drop out. In early March, there was a high possibility (said the pundits) of a contested convention. Warren staying and getting 3rd place allows her to be a compromise candidate at a contested convention between the moderate and progressive fractions. Plus, if she stays in and splits the progressive vote, Biden might reward her with VP.

But let’s say Warren drops out before Super Tuesday and endorses Bernie. And let’s assume Bloomberg stays in (BIG IF). And ALL of Warren voters vote for Bernie (A BIGGER IF)

Bernie would barely win Maine, Massachusetts, Washington, Minnesota, and Texas. And if literally every Warren supporter voted Bernie, he could win Oklahoma by a few hundred votes. Less than a percentage point.

Ok, now Bernie has momentum. But Biden still leads in delegates.  But than Bloomberg drops out. Than Biden wins a majority in every stats after that. In the long run I don’t know if anything changes. COVID will still happen. Biden gave Bernie everything he wanted despite losing

[dw93]

Too hard to say. Both were front runners at one point during the primary campaign, with Bernie being one during the early primaries and neither one could secure it, and the nominee ended up being a guy who rode into South Carolina on fumes. I could see one sitting out helping the other, but with all of what I said in mind I could easily see it not making a lick of difference.

[ShamDam]

Given the general composition of their respective bases, the most evident answer is that Bernie hurt Warren but Warren didn't really hurt Bernie. The clearest evidence of this lies in Warren's base practically splitting evenly between Biden & Bernie when she dropped out, & it's precisely that half-moderate/half-progressive base of hers which made clear that she was capable of building a coalition by constructively articulating her message & being nimble enough to pull in key support from other candidates/internal party constituencies, in contrast to Bernie's observed failure to build a coalition that could help him win against a unified moderate lane. Had Bernie not run or at least been out of the race by the time at which actual primaries began, there's nothing to indicate that she couldn't have ably held onto that & ran away with the primary on the back of her coalition of progressives (which would now include most Bernie supporters) & more liberal moderates.

People's electoral preferences rarely neatly align with ideology. Yes, the politically engaged lefties in Bernie's coalition would have supported Warren, but there were also voters who were primarily anti-establishment who might've sat out or voted for one of the wacky cranks (Yang, Gabbard, Williamson). Not to mention people who just kinda liked his vibe that might've had Biden as their second choice. You just can't assume most supporters of any given candidate will move to the most ideologically similar alternative.

Yes, Warren's ideological position put her in a potentially advantageous position to coalesce the party, but it also opened the possibility that she would end up being very few voters' first choice — which is what ended up playing out.