It is what 'Bernie' looks to for hope in his jihad against the 'Democratic Establishment'.

There is no question 'Bernie' knowingly presents our Party with the threat that a number of his supporters will not vote for anyone but him, and therefore he should be given concession after concession. The problem is that 'Bernie' really couldn't bring them along if attempts to buy him off were made. He deliberately tries to inflame supporters to such a heat that if he did try and bring them along with an endorsement of the winner, some would surely just denounce 'Bernie' as a sell-out. He has 'called up that which he cannot put down'.

That said, a number like this is unlikely to hold through to November. Some of this just reflects the heat of battle, and will have cooled considerably by the time the actual choice, Mr. Biden or the cheap thug Trump, is present in the voting booth.




"From Bernie’s perspective, dropping out of a race once you have no chance of winning is peculiar behavior that can only be explained by the work of a hidden hand. For most politicians, though, it is actually standard operating procedure. Only Sanders seems to think the normal thing to do once voters have made clear they don’t want to nominate you is to continue campaigning anyway."





"When things are not called by their right names, what is said cannot make sense. When what is said does not make sense, what is planned cannot succeed. When plans do not succeed, people become uneasy. When people are uneasy, punishments do not fit crimes. When punishments do not fit crimes, people cannot know where to put hand or foot."

turned on him in outrage when he insincerely and very belatedly "endorsed" Hillary.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287690670

These people, whatever their actual proportion, are what 'Bernie' looks to for hope in his jihad against the 'Democratic Establishment'. Do not pretend you do not know this. The pretense of not knowing what any fool can see disfigures those who pretend such blindness.

There is no question 'Bernie' knowingly presents our Party with the threat that a number of his supporters will not vote for anyone but him, and therefore he should be given concession after concession. The problem is that 'Bernie' really couldn't bring them along if attempts to buy him off were made. He deliberately tries to inflame supporters to such a heat that if he did try and bring them along with an endorsement of the winner, some would surely just denounce 'Bernie' as a sell-out. He has 'called up that which he cannot put down'.

That said, a number like this is unlikely to hold through to November. Some of this just reflects the heat of battle, and will have cooled considerably by the time the actual choice, Mr. Biden or the cheap thug Trump, is present in the voting booth.




"From Bernie’s perspective, dropping out of a race once you have no chance of winning is peculiar behavior that can only be explained by the work of a hidden hand. For most politicians, though, it is actually standard operating procedure. Only Sanders seems to think the normal thing to do once voters have made clear they don’t want to nominate you is to continue campaigning anyway."





"When things are not called by their right names, what is said cannot make sense. When what is said does not make sense, what is planned cannot succeed. When plans do not succeed, people become uneasy. When people are uneasy, punishments do not fit crimes. When punishments do not fit crimes, people cannot know where to put hand or foot."

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/03/29/bernie-sanders-supporters-vote-trump-over-biden-poll/2936124001/

If former Vice President Joe Biden secures the Democratic presidential nomination, 15% of Sen. Bernie Sanders' supporters will vote for President Donald Trump's reelection, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll. If accurate, that would represent a slightly larger defection than occurred after the bitter battle between Sanders and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2016, when 12% of Sanders voters broke for Trump in the general election.The good news for Biden is that in spring 2016, an ABC News poll found 20% of Sanders supporters said they would vote for Trump over Clinton, and far fewer ended up doing so. And 80% of Sanders' supporters said they would back Biden over Trump, according to the poll.

The 15% who said they plan to vote for Trump represents just 6% of Democrats and voters who lean Democratic, according to ABC News. Trump won 8% of Democrats in 2016. Biden holds a more than 300-delegate lead over Sanders, who has said he intends to continue his fight for the nomination despite the tough odds of overcoming Biden's lead. The ABC/Post poll found Biden with a 16-percentage-point advantage (55%-39%) over Sanders among registered Democrats and independents who lean Democratic.

In a hypothetical general election matchup, Biden narrowly topped Trump by 2 points (49%-47%), which is well within the poll's 3.5-percentage-point margin of error. That signals a dramatic tightening of the race from October, when an ABC/Post poll found the former vice president with a 17-point lead over Trump among registered voters.

Supporter enthusiasm for Biden is lower than Trump

Trump held a solid advantage over Biden in voter enthusiasm. Fifty-three percent of Trump's backers said they would be "very enthusiastic" to cast their votes for him, while 24% of Biden's supporters said the same for their candidate. That is the lowest for any Democratic presidential candidate in 20 years in an ABC/Post poll. Among Sanders supporters who said they back Biden in November, just 9% said they were very enthusiastic about doing so. The president also held an edge over Biden when it came to the economy, where 57% said they approved of Trump's performance. When asked who they would trust more to handle economic matters, 50% said Trump and 42% said Biden.

snip

What more destruction do they want?

Yeah, his staff/surrogates are a big part of what I have disliked about his campaign. The 15% figure itself doesn't really bother me, as it is in line with what we see in every presidential election, in terms of how many of your primary voters you can expect to lose to the opposition in the general. It's true for both parties, and has been the general truth for (AFAIK) as long as such things have been polled for.

It's really no surprise that the followers of someone who has spent his career taking shots at Democrats and the Democratic Party wouldn't want to vote for a Democrat other than Bernie. Why would they want to vote for someone that Sanders has convinced them is corrupt?

I'm not sure why that surprises anyone, frankly. We should probably be more surprised that the percentage isn't higher.

"From Bernie’s perspective, dropping out of a race once you have no chance of winning is peculiar behavior that can only be explained by the work of a hidden hand. For most politicians, though, it is actually standard operating procedure. Only Sanders seems to think the normal thing to do once voters have made clear they don’t want to nominate you is to continue campaigning anyway."





"When things are not called by their right names, what is said cannot make sense. When what is said does not make sense, what is planned cannot succeed. When plans do not succeed, people become uneasy. When people are uneasy, punishments do not fit crimes. When punishments do not fit crimes, people cannot know where to put hand or foot."

shameful behaviors had come out of the cracks to support Hillary (!) in 2008 against Obama (apparently seeing him as the greater evil) and in the GE backed various choices against Obama/Democratic Party.

Then in 2016, a similar percentage, again hiding in the forest of regular Democrats but exhibiting the same-old identifying combo of "highest" principles and nastiest behaviors, joined Sanders against Hillary, and their victory is history.

BUT before that, in every election, strikingly similar noisy factions of similar minor percentages behaving in strikingly similar ways surfaced to support whichever LW candidate was likely to do most harm to the Democratic Party. Like Nader. When their candidate loses, most vote third-party or Republican to continue their righteous resistance against the evils of the Democratic Party.

They're only noticed when their sabotage threatens to be successful, otherwise mostly ignored and quickly forgotten. But they're the same sorts in every decade, old ones dying off, new ones coming of age. They'll change what they claim to support fervently with the candidate, but these ones are wired to dissidence, insurgency, opposition to "the establishment." -- i.e., the mainstream LW majority who always outvote fringe groups. That doesn't change.

Again, like their counterparts on the trumpian right, they are of course always motivated by only the highest principles, and their need to save the nation from corrupt Democrats justifies the nastiest and most ruthless actions they always must take. And the same for the leaders they find to support, who know that to have them they must feed their needs. Hillary in 2008 was a notable exception, but they used what they had against Obama spoiler.

Not our most self-aware sorts. They can and do spend an entire lifetime passionately opposed to the Democratic Party impervious to truth and without ever questioning their own motives or realizing that people and leaders who think and behave as they do should never be allowed to get power.

I switched from Hillary to Obama pretty easily after the caucus, as Obama is an inherently lovable figure.

We need more lovable politicians. We need AOC to run for president someday. We need lovable politicians.

I switched to Obama happily enough because I liked and admired them both and, quite frankly, felt there was relatively little difference between two good liberal choices.

Btw, did you know that while Hillary was secretary of state and U.S. senator her approval ratings were usually in the upper 60s-70%s? And of course there were all those years she consistently polled as the most admired woman in the nation and on the planet. She didn't get a personality transplant to run for president, yet her approval ratings plummeted both times. Same person always, very unlike those who change with whatever's in the political water they're being served.

No need to wait for the future, btw. For lovable we have Biden right now. He likes everyone who can be liked, and doesn't betray those who trust him by lying to them or about anyone. Great, huh?

I love her, but she would get bashed in the Primary forum for being a Justice Democrat.

behaviors you support go directly to your own character and judgement. It'll be long days before I'd vote for someone who supported Sanders' attempt to try to overthrow our democratic choice of nominee. HUGE red danger flag about fitness for office in a democracy.

However, long days are just what she has. After a couple decades of scrupulously ethical and honorable behavior and a proven pattern of being strongly protective of our democracy, I'd consider trusting her with significant power. Right now as 1 of 435 representatives of the people, if she didn't shape up she'd do herself more harm in the house than anyone else, and if her district wants to keep while she continues to reveal what she's made of that's fine with me. Their choice.

I'm saying I like her where she is right now. She's definately my favorite of the big three Justice Freshmen Democrats (AOC, Rashida Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar). By far the least polarizing too.

We'll know how she does, i.e., including hints of what we don't know, by how the leadership brings her along or don't. Their job, after all, is to always be looking for the more promising among the new offerings voters send to congress every year.

Ocasio notably arrived with proven ability to connect to a national audience, especially with young people who've grown up, like her, in a nation soaked with poison Kool-Aid, so we know they'd want it to work out.