Pre-Super Tuesday Presidential poll

Black voters didn't give a fuck who Pete is sleeping with at night. He wasn't popular with black residents in his own community and isn't because he was gay, it's because unemployment and poverty for black residents of South Bend was not significantly better during his tenure there. He had the nerve to lie about it during a debate and he seemingly didn't give a shit otherwise until he became a legitimate Presidential candidate.

 

A lot of assumptions here.

 

Of note - Elizabeth Warren is now: 1) The only woman left in the Democratic primary, 2) The youngest candidate left in the Democratic primary, 3) The person who has been an elected official for the least amount of time (just barely less than Bloomberg).

She should hype all of those points beginning immediately.

I wonder if we could have a result similar to 1992 or 1972. In '92, Clinton - the eventual winner, obviously - only won one of the first 11 states and just 3 of the first 15.

In '72, you had three viable candidates - George McGovern, Hubert Humphrey, and George Wallace - plus an establishment favorite in Edmund Muskie. Muskie was the target of Nixon's dirty tricks campaign and never really got off the ground, though he did win five states. Wallace looked like the insurgent candidate, but was shot. Humphrey, McGovern and Wallace all had similar vote totals, but McGovern eventually won and was nominated at a heated, divisive convention.

Feels pretty familiar to me.

 

She's been a Senator for eight years. Not exactly a newcomer.

 

Sanders has been a senator for 12 years and was a member of the House for 16 years before that. Biden was a senator 36 years and then VP for eight. Bloomberg was mayor for 12 and an active political donor in the 7-8 years since he left office.

She's a newcomer in the context of the remaining candidates.

 

Of course, total longshot that Sanders bails and supports Warren. A lot of Bernie folks think Warren has stabbed Sanders in the back repeatedly. And I don't think Sanders is enough of a politician to make such a move, nor would all of his supporters follow.
But, doing so would conceivably keep the party from drifting to the center, keep Universal Healthcare alive and wealth inequality in play. If Bernie's campaign is doomed in any event, what is the better play? Why repeat 2016? Make a bold move. Him supporting her has a better chance of changing the dynamic than the other way around.

 

Never gonna happen.

 

I don't see it unless Sanders' health becomes an issue.

 

Bernie's ego is too large to not fight this until the bitter end. And when he loses at the convention, he and his supporters will whine some more.

I used to be worried about them staying home and thus re-electing Trump. But fuck them. I'm not going to be held hostage on the off chance they'll actually show up without other demo turnouts being depressed because they're disgusted by Bernie and his supporters.

Bernie maybe, MAYBE, would beat Trump. But he'd be death for downballot races.

 

I think it's actually more likely that Sanders fields an independent campaign this year than it was in 2016. I do think that if Biden wins, Sanders and Warren will grudgingly support him with the caveat that he bring on a more progressive VP and progressive staff. There could be some bargaining there, but I could see it working out.

If Bloomberg somehow wins, though, I think Biden might fall in line but Sanders and Warren would not. I could see either one of them running in the general as an independent. And that would be fascinating from an electoral math standpoint.

 

Bloomberg will never win and the DNC would never choose him at a brokered convention. I wouldn't even worry about Bloomberg.

 

I'm not necessarily worried, though I do hope he has a much worse Super Tuesday than polling indicates. Just theorizing about different possibilities.