had actually shown up to vote, it would have been more competitive. But, they didn’t. And that’s not a new phenomenon, in 1972 boomers didn’t show up to vote McGovern and we got Nixon.

And neither of them are Bernie supporters and they both vote. But I agree with you that it would have been wonderful if all of those young people who support Bernie had taken the time to vote, this would be a different race.

a millennial (almost on the border of Gen X) and I’ve voted since I was 18. I don’t know why people, in general, wait till they’re older to vote.

And good for your daughter’s in voting and supporting Biden!

My daughters vote and are politically engaged (especially the elder one) maybe because their wretched mother (me) made them open their eyes and pay attention. The elder daughter was also on the External Affairs Board at her grad school and had the opportunity to go to DC and lobby Congress so that they took the item out of the Tax Bill that would have required grad students to pay taxes on their tuition scholarships as income. They succeeded!

A young woman I know through a volunteer organization declared to me when I asked her if she was registered to vote "No way! I hate politics!" I did not pursue the conversation further because it would not have been appropriate at that time.

SMH

And it was hardly a question of 'boomers' not showing up. Few people born after the war were of voting age in '68. Mr. McGovern, a decent and honorable man, never stood a chance in '72, after the fractures within the Democratic Party between the remaining Roosevelt era stalwarts, the heirs of the Dixiecrats, and the New Left radicals. Some of us learned better, others, like Sanders, did not. It is basic strategy not to reinforce failure, and to know that an attack once repulsed will not succeed if repeated in the same form. Mere reinforcement, simple increase in energy, does not amount to a new form.

against George McGovern. Per articles from the era, many analysts expected young people to show up in droves to vote for McGovern and they didn’t.

I’m not blaming Boomers for anything. I’m just stating that, historically, the youth just don’t show up and vote.

And it is not really a theme I recall. Look into the '72 convention. It was tons of fun. The man never stood a chance. Between 'Acid, Amnesty, and Abortion' and 'Law and Order' and 'Secret Plan to End the War' the thing was over before it was properly begun, and it didn't even properly begin. The amazing thing about Watergate was how unnecessary it was. Best not to read too much of the present back into the past. Elections and campaigns were very different then.

I was just a twinkle in my Dad’s eye at the time so I’ll defer to your knowledge of the era.

Good to see you back, by the way. I had an account here years ago, from 2003-2010. Then, when I came back in 2015 I couldn’t remember my old username and password, so I created a new one. So I do remember you and have always enjoyed your posts, sir!

So many of us are so happy to see you!

Why is that an old person in a metaphorical Che Guevara tee shirt can claim without a shred of evidence, that young people today are as much of an asshole as he was in 1969?

His claim that "young people have let him down" is dishonest, since he clearly knows nothing at all about young people.

Is it just possible that young people are demotivated by contempt, or perhaps because they're just working too damned hard to chase after our hippie concerns?

a lot on this site. I’m a millennial and there is a lot of unfair maligning of people my age and younger. My only wish is that youth turnout would increase so we could finally make Republicans extinct.

My oldest son, also Millennial, and I disagree on the cause of low Millennial turn out, to the extent it is real.

I strongly object however to any claim that it arises out of laziness, intellectual or moral weaknesses, or general disinterest in the world. I do suspect an element of demoralization and a feeling of hopelessness because of all the bashing.

I was at a scientific conference recently and I met a young college student who expressed surprise that I was speaking in praise of young people. It broke my heart when she told me that "I almost never hear that." Jesus Christ! She was at a fairly high level scientific conference and she was feeling like that. I don't know anyone in my age group who was attending these kind of events when we were her age.

All I know is that we have left you a severely damaged planet, depleted resources, and now feel as if it is our right to bash you, even though in my experience, you have it in you to be a great generation. I am very, very, very, very impressed with young people today, and, to me, it has been a traditional role - not all tradition is worthless - for political liberals to praise and cheer for the young.

To the extent we fail to do that, and to the extent that we write scripts about what you are doing by projecting our own failings, we have failed to carry forth that tradition.

And no, I don't believe for a New York second that the collapse of Sanders' campaign is the fault of young people. It is not young people's fault that his ideas are the same as those he held in 1969 and that he is an uninspiring old grouch.

We boomers, spoiled children that we have always been, need to grow up and place blame where it lays, and much of it lays on us.

But a few articles I’ve read seem to imply that people at the time were expecting the youth to put McGovern over the top and they didn’t end show up to vote.

Yes, getting youth participation up to that level would ensure a Trump loss. He doesn’t poll well with people under 45.

in higher numbers than anytime since.

I was wrong.

Biden was sweating PLENTY before SC. And he has seemed to take that deeply to heart.

And he'll need to step on the accelerator big time in the general. I hope he understands that.

Showing what a competent President looks like.

that fear.

But having said that, amidst all the upheaval and uncertainty, I think it is perfectly understandable and probably the most rational thing we as a group could do -- favor the individual candidate who we are most familiar with, the candidate who has a long relatively stable record operating in an environment that used to emanate stability.

Of all things, we need stability and certainty first. Joe is the candidate who is perceived by the vast majority as the best option in this regard. So it makes sense and I fully accept it. I just hope all of those who favor a more progressive approach and urgency will realize the same and vote this November. We need all hands on deck!

You are not it seems. I’m okay with that. I’m moving forward.

He's worked long and hard for this.. he's still building coalitions for the GE..

Sanders had years to be competitive and build his coalition.. he didn't want to.. His campaign thought they had a path to the nom with "35%.. it didn't work that way and they had no plan B.. that's on them.

And, I couldn't be happier.. we have a monster to beat to save our Democracy and our Planet.. and Biden isn't on "cruise control" getting ready for that.

via his 2016 and 2020 candidacies. I am grateful for his presence and impact. We would not have had the platform in 2016 that we did absent his presence. The same would be almost true this time around. I say almost because my preferred candidate this time around also made a substantial dent.

Later!

Sanders has turned out to be not much more than a stone thrower.

Biden’s the real deal.

Biden’s the real deal in 2020!

And a ton of unnecessary nastiness that could have been avoided.

You don’t win elections insulting voters by trashing their honesty and integrity, simply because you resent them for not agreeing with you, and worse, for doing it by voting their disagreement in greater numbers than those who agree with you.

Trump was elected in 2016...and I will never get over the fact that IMHO Sanders did not do enough in the General to help Hillary. Viewing the platform as some sort of end all be all...a victory or even important when we f'ing lost, is foolish. We can enact nothing from the platform if we lose. We failed in 2016 and there is no silver lining when you lose to a monster like Trump. And the 2016 travesty of an election has lead to death for many Americans...we don't know yet how many.

I don't know how those who didn't vote for Hillary sleep at night. You can have the best most worthy ideas in the history of mankind...but if you can't win an election, it doesn't matter. And one would expect Sanders realizing how dangerous Trump is after more than three years of horror culminating in a pandemic that could kill millions would get out and help Biden...one would expect....but no, he doesn't.

Sanders employs pure bile. He does not so much run for the nomination of the Party, but to destroy its established leadership. He cultivates supporters who in many instances are even more radical in their views, encourages them, and proves either unwilling or unable to control them at need. This is not helpful at all.

"Do not call up that which you cannot put down."

It can sting a bit at first, for those not used to it, but that goes away in a flash of clear light, which allows you to see the Emperor has no clothes, and is merely a sad old 'new left' survival from a time when 'Hands off Cuba' and 'Dump the Hump!' were all the rage.

The green tinge will pass, and eventually the eyes will steady.

Spot on.

Again, welcome back (and I hope never to be fighting against you!)

Who can receive honest, constructive criticism without throwing a hissy fit?

“I know you are but what am I” belongs in a Pee Wee Herman movie, an elementary school or a Dotard rally.

son, even supporters giving up on him and doing autopsies, this guy has taken it from all sides starting BEFORE he announced. Oh and Castro on the debate stage treating him like he’s senile. Then the malicious insults to his mental capacity perpetrated by Bernie’s supporters. I think
he’s been well tested, and made well aware of how Trump will hit him.

What we need to do us rally around him and demand MSM giv3 him a fairer shake.

And the impeachment hearing nearly did him in. Amazing that he bounced back after Nevada. That one remains a head-scratcher but I think the impeachment timing played a big role there, plus the caucus arrangement which consistently favored Sanders.

is on "cruise control"?!! According to the OP.

https://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=676156

Or reporting facts about him?

Surely you realize that the press he gets is the press he’s either asked for—or earned. It’s one of the few things he has earned.

These are the reason the MSM might not have always been fond of him:

Because this is the guy who’s been bellowing since 2015 about identity politics. Know who does that? Sexists and racists who get exasperated when women and minorities have the temerity—the utter gall!—to think they have the right to demand that issues they care about get addressed, rather than letting white men decide what matters to them. And he’s running for the nomination of a party whose bare is...women and minorities. Gee, why would the press not notice that little paradox?

Because this is the guy who had multiple complaints from women on his 2016 staff who were underpaid compared to men and discriminated against, something he wouldn’t acknowledge and ignored for years, until he grudgingly said “my bad. And only this year. When he decided to run again and knew it made him look bad.

Because this is the guy who grumbles and groans about what Democrats don’t get done that he wants done, when he has nothing to show for his long career in DC but a localized bill and a bunch of plaques on post offices. Any monkey can co-sponsor the legislation of others and vote on it, you know. It takes work and, OMG, statesmanship to put your money where your mouth is by drafting and passing legislation. So where are the checks his ass has cashed? We’re wrong to point out his hypocrisy for expecting action from everyone else while doing nothing himself but running his mouth and putting forth the bare minimum of his job duties?

Because he thinks he’s entitled to the nomination and, as with his “policies,” everyone else should jump through hoops to hand it to him, rather than lifting a finger himself.

Because he’s a classic aggrieved entitlement spoiled man-baby who, when he doesn’t get his way, grouses and groans and grasps at insane straws insulting those disagreeing with him and alleging nutbar paranoid conspiracy theories about everyone being out to get him: “Centrists!” “Corporatists!” and, most amusing of all to women and minorities, “Establishment!” Do tell why the press would or should ignore the question of whether or not insulting voter intelligence and integrity works to influence people to vote for you.

Because he makes big claims that he either doesn’t or can’t or won’t follow through on. Example: He bragged for months that the D party had to get behind him because he would generate massive youth turnout that would guarantee a win over Baron von Fathead. It was the only way to get there and you’ll all be sorry if you don’t fall in line behind St Bern. How’d that work out? Like those of us living in reality thought it would, that’s how.

Interesting narrative to them and they failed to vet him.

The Bernie challenge is different, coming from an Independent who runs as a Democrat. It would have been better if one of the others, Pete, Amy, etc. had been able to be more competitive. Instead they were all Martin O'Malleys.

are rejecting in a big way the idea of running a Socialist as the Democratic nominee. It shows that a lot of the people voting remember their political history. That's a good thing.

Obama did not win in 2008 because his race with Hillary was close. He won largely because G.W. Bush did nothing to prevent terrorism before 9/11 happened, lied us into the Iraq War, and then turned the Iraq War into a debacle, played air guitar on the West Coast while people drowned in New Orleans, and encouraged agencies like the F.E.C. not to regulate Wall Street before the Great Recession happened. When American voters were presented with a great candidate like Obama, Bush had made the choice much easier. It was like offering America the choice between a new 1960 Edsel and a new 1966 Mustang Convertible.

I also said that Obama was a great candidate. Perhaps you would like to go back and read it again.

You are right I suspect, though I wasn’t fully invested in that particular contest. Obama was such a huge opportunity for change, it didn’t take me a lot of thought. But perhaps that does fit with your assessment.

So I don't agree with you.

A knockout punch was what was needed.

She is going to make a great first lady. And bodyguard!!

Clinton and Obama didn't have an incumbent to be compared with, so there was more freedom for them to focus on each other. There's less anxiety when there's no GOP incumbent chilling with his popcorn and taking notes.

There’s not much left to be said that we don’t already know. All that’s left is bickering and tear downs, which is not good for the eventual race.

Wake up. The scorched-earth kneecapping of Joe Biden continues still today. Bernie's own Briana Gray is STILL tweeting/retweeting the "dementia/alzheimers" bullshit about Biden. You think a divided Democratic party makes for a stronger candidate? Nonsense.

This is a dangerous game you want Bernie to play, with serious consequences.

Stop it.

JHFC

Is a horrible disease. My father died from it. He remembered the past, yet toward the end he never remembered me. It is sick that she would use this disease to smear one candidate to prop up her own. It is painful to every family that has suffered through it. This hurts.

I remember Hillary actually had a plan for it.

After 8 years of Bush and the GOP reckoning of '06, it was clear that the Democratic Primary winner was going to win the presidency. That's why it was so hotly contested. It was essentially a GE. When this primary began, it was not clear at all that Trump would be defeated - thus the focus on electability.

But then COVID-19 happened and the markets tanked so suddenly it's looking like 2008 again, but by the time things really went south for Trump, Biden was already the clear presumptive nominee.

...candidate for VP instead of a walking meme, it might have been different.

when he picked Palin for a VP. It was basically a Hail Mary pass borne out of desperation. But she scared the living shit outta many people and thankfully the pass fell harmlessly incomplete.

But she helped to cheapen and degrade genuine discourse and lowered the GOP bar yet another notch...and that only made Trump that much more acceptable to the Republican rank-and-file in the years to come...

John McCain opened Pandora’s box – Sarah Palin came out, but Trump was right behind her

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/26/john-mccain-sarah-palin-donald-trump

Jeff Flake, McCain’s Republican colleague from Arizona, told the Guardian: “He regrets not going with his instinct on that, which would have been Lieberman. I don’t know if it would have made the difference in that election but the Palinisation of politics kind of started there. It hasn’t been the best for the Republican party, I will say, but I don’t think he could have known. She was more a symptom of it than anything else.”

I doubt McCain would've been any more successful had he picked Lieberman like his gut was telling him to but at least he wouldn't have become a laughingstock. Some of the very people like Peggy Noonan and especially Bill Kristol who disgustingly fawned all over Palin but who are now horrified by Trump don't even realize they were some of the ones who helped put the GOP on their slippery slope in the first place.

general. Bush was hated, McCain picked Sarah Palin and the economy was in free fall...we sure as hell do not need a more primary. And yes most supporters are thrilled with a quick primary for their person.

Although, I would argue the debates with Trump will be the most consequential reality TV we have ever had thus far.

Bernie pushing Biden a bit stronger would have benefited him in the long-run. Bernie definitely pulled his punches, especially on issues that wil for sure be brought up by Trump in the general. I can understand and respect Bernie's reasoning they were not important, but they will come up int the general.

As big a concern for me, though, is Biden's choosing a running mate. Right now, my preference is Klobuchar. She sober, thoughtful, great experience and female, something Biden is a 'must be.' MN was a little too close for comfort in 2016, and she'd help keep it in the Dem column. After her, I'd go with Harris. female, woman of color, and great resume. And I think she'd eat Pence up in a debate. A con though is she wouldnt add to the electoral map. CA will go for Biden, no matter what.

Stacey Abrams will be in the mix, given her popularity. She's interesting and quite likeable, but lacks in experience for taking the number two job. And face it, given Biden's age, his #2 stands a better than average chance at getting a promotion within the four-year term. Certainly, her terms in the GA house good experience. But, that's the best she has. If she were governor of Gerogia today, she'd likely be my first choice. It's very likely she had numerous votes surpresed or stolen, although find it hard to believe her margin of loss was soley due to cheating. If truly thought the race was stolen, she shold have raised hell...a lot of hell. Anyway, her time will come, and I think she'll be a good 'un!

...voted for him over 45.

We can't be afraid of an honest debate. People pulling their hair and wailing that we can't afford a fight over the nomination lack faith in the Democratic process. Bernie staying in for long as he has has, in my opinion, made Joe Biden a much more effective debater. He went from stammering and clueless (prompting Bloomberg to jump in and waste half a billion) to a vigorous and disciplined debater right before our eyes. Barney also pulled Biden in a more progressive direction, for which I am grateful

In the debates I saw he did well. I saw the Harris gotcha and thought he answered it briskly and won the point. The media went with the "Joe's out!!" narrative but they are driven by RW bosses. When it came down to just Bernie, he did what he had to do. But the same Joe has been there all along.

ultimately tuning in and seeing the ultimate winner and becoming one of their supporters that actually show up to vote.

It's no wonder that Joe never had to break a sweat!

Because the circumstances then were far different.

Obama and Hilary wouldn’t have been running against an incumbent with a known proclivity to invite traitor interference from a foreign enemy.

They weren’t running under a gutted Voting Rights Act.

They weren’t running against mountains of hidden dark money thanks to Citizens United.

Our challenges this time are far more dire.

There is no room to waste on a self-serving egomaniac sucking up our time, energy and resources to assuage his petty vanity.