New Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows Sanders's strength going head-to-head with rivals
Bernie 48-Biden 44
Bernie 44-Warren 42
Bernie 53-Bloomberg 38
Bernie 54-Pete 37
Bernie 54-Klob 33
👀👀
New Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows Sanders's strength going head-to-head with rivals
Bernie 48-Biden 44
Bernie 44-Warren 42
Bernie 53-Bloomberg 38
Bernie 54-Pete 37
Bernie 54-Klob 33
man feels really fucking good seeing that bloomberg vs bernie matchup
Bloomberg isn't on any ballots until South Carolina, where currently he's at like 4% (thankfully).
Nevada is certified Bloomberg-Free™.
Edit: Apparently he's not on SC either, nevermind.
I was testing all of you!
New Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows Sanders's strength going head-to-head with rivals
Bernie 48-Biden 44
Bernie 44-Warren 42
Bernie 53-Bloomberg 38
Bernie 54-Pete 37
Bernie 54-Klob 33
That is really his only viable track, which I don't see working as Biden is still projected to have more delegates than him currently.I was testing all of you!
Seriously though whats his plan again? Hope for brokered convention? yuck.
Centrist establishment-representing media has some really ostentatious passive aggressiveness about it.Lol nothing Bernie can ever say will stop the daily rehash or the 'Bernie Bros'(formally known as 'Obama Boys') narrative.
They actually changed the IA process this year, it's a lot more similar to NV where candidates can only move forward if they're viable after the first alignmentNV caucuses have a small but potentially significant difference from IA:
In IA, supporters of two nonviable candidates during the first round could solicit support and make those candidates viable in the second round. This isn't possible in NV; only candidates that are viable after the first round survive.
Could make a difference on the margins.
Socialist Vs FascistYou couldn't write this shit, the socialist independent vs. the billionaire Republican for the soul of the Democrat party.
Considering the self-serving nature of for-profit media, they would side with whoever is safer for their bottom-line.
gotcha, I remember some campaigns making an issue of that in past caucuses!They actually changed the IA process this year, it's a lot more similar to NV where candidates can only move forward if they're viable after the first alignment
I remember hearing on NPR that Bloomberg apparently said he would spend huge amounts of money helping whoever the eventual Democratic nominee is win if he loses the nomination, so if that's the case I doubt he would run third party. I don't know what the actual source of him saying that is thoughI think Bernie would end up taking Bloomer as VP. If Bloomberg actually did run third party it would guarantee Trump wins.
He did say that, but I think that's an assumption that he won't get second. In the case he does, I'd expect his tune to change.I remember hearing on NPR that Bloomberg apparently said he would spend huge amounts of money helping whoever the eventual Democratic nominee is win if he loses the nomination, so if that's the case I doubt he would run third party. I don't know what the actual source of him saying that is though
bloomberg is not really campaigning against any of his opponents at the moment and is just running anti-trump adsI remember hearing on NPR that Bloomberg apparently said he would spend huge amounts of money helping whoever the eventual Democratic nominee is win if he loses the nomination, so if that's the case I doubt he would run third party. I don't know what the actual source of him saying that is though
Everything old is new again:
Hey, Obama boys: Back off already!
Young women are growing increasingly frustrated with the fanatical support of Barack and gleeful bashing of Hillary.www.salon.com
"You already see this idealistic longing projected on Obama," Bruch said. "People talk about him as a secular messiah who will bring us political salvation. There's no sense of what is plausible."
And they never got better. The End. [*closes bedtime story*]
To be fair they were right lol. Granted, Sotomayo in the SC and legalizing gay marriage were great, but Obama did not turn out to be the progressive he campaigned as.
Not true, the non-viable candidate in Iowa were able to form groups in the second round. What actually changed if that your group was viable in the first round, you cannot change to another group in the second round.They actually changed the IA process this year, it's a lot more similar to NV where candidates can only move forward if they're viable after the first alignment
He already threatened to run third-party at this time in 2016 when Bernie was looking strong against Hillary. I don't trust a word Bloomberg says.I remember hearing on NPR that Bloomberg apparently said he would spend huge amounts of money helping whoever the eventual Democratic nominee is win if he loses the nomination, so if that's the case I doubt he would run third party. I don't know what the actual source of him saying that is though
Not entirely right, what changed in Iowa was that if you were in a viable group in the first alignment, you couldn't move in the final alignment any more.They actually changed the IA process this year, it's a lot more similar to NV where candidates can only move forward if they're viable after the first alignment
To be fair they were right lol. Granted, Sotomayo in the SC and legalizing gay marriage were great, but Obama did not turn out to be the progressive he campaigned as.
Will THIS stop the endless Bloomsday prophecies in this thread? Bernie thrashes him one on one...New Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows Sanders's strength going head-to-head with rivals
Bernie 48-Biden 44
Bernie 44-Warren 42
Bernie 53-Bloomberg 38
Bernie 54-Pete 37
Bernie 54-Klob 33
Yeah I remember him having to work hard and compromise to hell and back to get the necessary votes for the ACA. A good chunk of that supermajority was not particularly progressive and/or from red areas where they'd have a tough reelectionObama had I think ~180 days of a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. His blunder was discussing anything with Republicans and not shoving through the entire Democratic agenda in that short span of time. Although I think there were some Democratic senators that weren't really interested in the Democratic agenda? It's kinda hard to fault a guy's domestic agenda when he's limited to mostly executive orders for 6 out of his 8 years.
Will THIS stop the endless Bloomsday prophecies in this thread? Bernie thrashes him one on one...
Yet there may be trouble ahead. Sixty-two percent of Americans — and a near-identical 61 percent of independents — say that Sanders is a "socialist." Only a quarter of Americans (26 percent) have a favorable view of socialism, while almost half (47 percent) have an unfavorable view.
New Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows Sanders's strength going head-to-head with rivals
Bernie 48-Biden 44
Bernie 44-Warren 42
Bernie 53-Bloomberg 38
Bernie 54-Pete 37
Bernie 54-Klob 33
Socialism doesnt poll well but sanders does. Which is why he polls well against Trump. And you knew that already.Another interesting quote from that article:
Bernie has zero chances of beating Trump, y'all know it...
So all the other polling is invalidated by this and there is ZERO chance, got it.Another interesting quote from that article:
Bernie has zero chances of beating Trump, y'all know it...
I don't know it.
Damn guess im voting for pete now that some random comment on resetera has opened my eyes to these unsource claims.
Another interesting quote from that article:
Bernie has zero chances of beating Trump, y'all know it...
I don't think trump has any chance of beating Bernie
Any of the Democrat candidates should beat Trump if the voters show up. Are you a Trump voter?Another interesting quote from that article:
Bernie has zero chances of beating Trump, y'all know it...
How have I not seen this before? Brilliant.
Another interesting quote from that article:
Bernie has zero chances of beating Trump, y'all know it...
Another interesting quote from that article:
Bernie has zero chances of beating Trump, y'all know it...
Another interesting quote from that article:
Bernie has zero chances of beating Trump, y'all know it...
THE AMERICAN ISRAEL Public Affairs Committee is helping to fund a Super PAC launching attack ads against Sen. Bernie Sanders in Nevada on Saturday, according to two sources with knowledge of the arrangement. The ads are being run by a group called Democratic Majority for Israel, founded by longtime AIPAC strategist Mark Mellman.
The Nevada attack ads, which will air in media markets in Reno and Las Vegas, follow a similar spending blitz by DMFI ahead of the Iowa caucuses. Like the ads that aired in Iowa, the Nevada ads will attack Sanders on the idea that he's not electable, Mediaite reported.
DMFI spent $800,000 on the Iowa ads, while the spending on the Nevada ads remains private. AIPAC is helping bankroll the anti-Sanders project by allowing donations to DMFI to count as contributions to AIPAC, the sources said. As is typical with most big-money giving programs, the more a donor gives to AIPAC, the higher tier they can claim — $100,000 level, $1 million level, and so on — and the more benefits accrue to them. A $100,000 donor gets more access to members of Congress at private functions, for instance, than someone who merely pays AIPAC's conference fee. A $1 million donor gets still more, which means that it is important to donors to have their contributions tallied. There is also status within social networks attached to one's tier of giving. The arrangement allows donors to give directly to DMFI, which is required to file disclosures naming its donors, without AIPAC's fingerprints.
"AIPAC is helping to fund a Super PAC launching attack ads against Sen. Bernie Sanders in Nevada on Saturday, according to two sources with knowledge of the arrangement."
AIPAC attacking the Jewish frontrunner is quite the bold strategy.