SANDERS 2020 is seriously dangerous <3

[minime]

After 2016 Sanders consistently polled as "the most popular politician in America" by far. An independent run would have had meat. I'd kinda like to see him do it now.

What's the motivation here? Re-electing Trump?

[stickdog99]

IMHO, Sanders was convinced that he would be blamed for Trump's inevitable second term if he took the third party route. And he would have been blamed for this presumptively 24-7 by all establishment Democrats from the day he launched his campaign.

So he decided to pick his battles. He (or his advisers) did not think he could succeed with a full on attack on the corporate media (too Trumpian. don't you know), so he wrote off acceptance of the Russiagate nonsense and the "Trump is uniquely evil" party line as the cost of having any shot at persuading any cable news addicted boomers to support him in a general election.

Then he tried to thread the needle of gaining so much momentum that they would be afraid to rig the voting machines (and the Iowa caucus) against him just to stop US workers from getting a small slice of what most European workers get. But the 18 to 40 crowd did not respond by generating such unprecedented turnout that this could not be ignored without destroying all confidence in the accuracy of the vote counts. Only Latinos in Nevada managed that feat (and probably only because caucuses are so much harder to rig).

Now that Sanders has folded spectacularly, it is easy to castigate him and his strategy. But the idea that there is some sort of alternate timeline in which a Sanders third party campaign would not have allowed the same media, polling, and vote counting power brokers to reelect Trump while blaming him is bit naive, IMHO.

[minime]

Naive is the first word that came to me, which is why I asked for clarification.

Fewer than 270 votes in the electoral college throws the election into the House, one vote per state, giving the GOP roughly a 26-22 edge.

[JackRiddler]

A lot of Sanders' decisions can be argued, but the decisive ones to me in retrospect were to fear slashing the corrupt neoliberal competitors' exposed throats on their personal and political corruption, and to not aggressively dismiss, denigrate and counterattack hard on the slightest talk of Russian influence and "Berniebros." It was the hesitation on the offered kill. The surrender to the premise that he should play unity music when the party apparatchiks were bombing him was not as ridiculous and as interminably drawn-out over as many years as Corbyn's, but almost as bad when it counted. Teachout pointed the way on how to handle Biden. Legal corruption is corruption. He should have backed her move.

[minime]

A lot of Sanders' decisions can be argued, but the decisive ones to me in retrospect were to fear slashing the corrupt neoliberal competitors' exposed throats on their personal and political corruption, and to not aggressively dismiss, denigrate and counterattack hard on the slightest talk of Russian influence and "Berniebros." It was the hesitation on the offered kill. The surrender to these premise that he should play unity music when the party apparatchiks were bombing him was not as ridiculous and as interminably drawn out over many years as Corbyn's, but almost as bad when it counted. Teachout pointed the way on how to handle Biden. Legal corruption is corruption. He should have backed her.

What's the motivation here? Re-electing Trump?

[stickdog99]

A lot of Sanders' decisions can be argued, but the decisive ones to me in retrospect were to fear slashing the corrupt neoliberal competitors' exposed throats on their personal and political corruption, and to not aggressively dismiss, denigrate and counterattack hard on the slightest talk of Russian influence and "Berniebros." It was the hesitation on the offered kill. The surrender to these premise that he should play unity music when the party apparatchiks were bombing him was not as ridiculous and as interminably drawn out over many years as Corbyn's, but almost as bad when it counted. Teachout pointed the way on how to handle Biden. Legal corruption is corruption. He should have backed her.

I agree 100% on this. It's as if Sanders expected establishment Democrats and cable news to return the favor if he "played nice." LOL on that expectation of reciprocity.

But to some degree the "Trump is evil incarnate" and "All roads lead to Putin" psyops put Sanders between a rock and a hard place because Democratic voters consistently listed beating Trump as their top issue and cable news outlets stood ready to vilify any candidate who dared to "help Trump" by exposing Biden's obvious weaknesses. Believe it or not, I personally watched many lifelong Democrats physically recoil each time any Democratic candidate pointed out the weaknesses of any other candidate during any debate. ("Why are they making each other look bad by squabbling when we have Trump to beat?" was a common complaint.) So the challenge of somehow managing to tell the truth about Biden without alienating these voters was real.

[JackRiddler]

Yeah, I get that, stickdog. Saw it also.

The thing to do was to ignore these people. People who were totally into the process and thus knew a lot but who wavered between the various false choices on the basis of superficialities, they can't be the priority. They're like lifetime sports fans, or gamers.

Sanders understood flexibility, rapidity and seizing the moment on matters of policy. In that regard his moves tended to expand, not to compromise, and it was working. But he was terrible on the personalized and narrative dynamics. Personalized scorched earth is going to happen no matter what in the fall, so it's better to hit them hard now. That's certainly what everyone tried to do with Sanders, in the end. Put your opponents heads on pikes anyway, soon as you get a chance. Everyone yapping on TV and Twitter will be appalled or affect to be appalled, but guess what? A week later, no one remembers and the motherfucking heads are still on pikes. Biden, especially, should have never been allowed to be the placeholder as long as he was. One goddamn debate question acknowledging the "legality" of the Hunter business but pointing out that it is corrupt anyway (what Teachout did) would have initiated the unraveling, especially once Biden inevitably flubbed the response. You can't wait for a Gabbard to do that. Sanders didn't do it. And voila, no substitute appeared, and placeholder has become "candidate."

.

[Elvis]

After 2016 Sanders consistently polled as "the most popular politician in America" by far. An independent run would have had meat. I'd kinda like to see him do it now.

What's the motivation here? Re-electing Trump?

It's a calculated risk.

[minime]

Yeah, I get that, stickdog. Saw it also.

The thing to do was to ignore these people. People who were totally into the process and thus knew a lot but who wavered between the various false choices on the basis of superficialities, they can't be the priority. They're like lifetime sports fans, or gamers.

Sanders understood flexibility, rapidity and seizing the moment on matters of policy. In that regard his moves tended to expand, not to compromise, and it was working. But he was terrible on the personalized and narrative dynamics. Personalized scorched earth is going to happen no matter what in the fall, so it's better to hit them hard now. That's certainly what everyone tried to do with Sanders, in the end. Put your opponents heads on pikes anyway, soon as you get a chance. Everyone yapping on TV and Twitter will be appalled or affect to be appalled, but guess what? A week later, no one remembers and the motherfucking heads are still on pikes. Biden, especially, should have never been allowed to be the placeholder as long as he was. One goddamn debate question acknowledging the "legality" of the Hunter business but pointing out that it is corrupt anyway (what Teachout did) would have initiated the unraveling, especially once Biden inevitably flubbed the response. You can't wait for a Gabbard to do that. Sanders didn't do it. And voila, no substitute appeared, and placeholder has become "candidate."

Et voila indeed. Ruminations of a desperate man in desperate times. Something about keeping your head when all around you are losing theirs. something, something... I'm glad you weren't running the Sanders campaign. It would not have been forgotten next week. The damage to the zeitgeist would have been irreparable. And, hyperbolically speaking, in all worlds, for all time.

And now I'm depressed--the best and the brightest succumbing to the base emotions of chakras 1,2,3. Again. Again. But, after all, it's why you're here talking to the chairs. I hope you're at least cashing out, or something.

Otherwise, time to let it go, and hit the streets with that sandwich sign.

Have faith.
The beginning is near.

[minime]

After 2016 Sanders consistently polled as "the most popular politician in America" by far. An independent run would have had meat. I'd kinda like to see him do it now.

What's the motivation here? Re-electing Trump?

It's a calculated risk.

I'd like to see your calculations. Any scenario with Sanders getting more than 10% of the popular vote, while the voting-age children sit on their hands at home, is suspect, imo. Who benefits?

[JackRiddler]

Who would have thought that lurking behind minime's tedious facade of zen-ish koans and moans lay a conventionally calculating 1990s Democratic third-way strategist, a character with all the answers long ago digested, wagging his finger at leftists for talking about power? Shocked, shocked.

[JackRiddler]

After 2016 Sanders consistently polled as "the most popular politician in America" by far. An independent run would have had meat. I'd kinda like to see him do it now.

What's the motivation here? Re-electing Trump?

It's a calculated risk.

Not really.

.

[minime]

Who would have thought that lurking behind minime's tedious facade of zen-ish koans and moans lay a conventionally calculating 1990s Democratic third-way strategist, a character with all the answers long ago digested, wagging his finger at leftists for talking about power? Shocked, shocked.

I laughed. Chakra three with an impotent eruption.

There is no right answer. However, there are an infinitude of wrong answers. Is that a zen koan?

Really, I'm surprised you're so thin-skinned that someone would take exception to such an untenable position. Again, you're in the right place for it.

Bernie's failure, if I may be so bold, was not that he failed to properly condemn his opposition, but that he failed to lay his program out in detail. If he even had a program laid out in detail. Ask Elvis for details.

[JackRiddler]

There are legends of children abandoned in the wild and raised by wolves. You write more like you were abandoned in a think tank back-room and raised by an algorithm for word salad sprinkled with platitudes and generic insults.

[minime]

There are legends of children abandoned in the wild and raised by wolves. You write more like you were abandoned in a think tank back-room and raised by an algorithm for word salad sprinkled with platitudes and generic insults.

Chakra three shouting obscenities upstairs.

I'm for what (really, who) you're for, but I'm not against what (who) you're against. Is that zen-ish?

You know, there's nothing more zen than zen-ish. Is that zen or word salad?