If he had faced off against the Demented Dorito, he could have won. Hilary got the Democratic nomination because she made a party deal to let Obama take the lead last time. She wanted her turn at the wheel, and the machinery was going to put her there, by God.
Her hubris lost her the 2016 election. The Demented Dorito does know how to put on a show to win the adulation of the masses, especially after The Apprentice built him up in the minds of many.
While I would have loved a Bernie presidency, I don’t think he would have had as much popular appeal. Keep in mind she beat the other guy by 2% of the votes and lost to the electoral college system.
That’s a loss on strategy, but definitely not an unpopular candidate choice.
Then I’m not sure I’m getting your point. She was popular enough to win the general vote, so in that sense she was the right candidate. But she lost to the swing states, do you think Bernie would have fared better in that regard?
My point is simply “being more popular than Trump isn’t particularly meaningful”. Maybe she was popular, or maybe she was “better than him” to most people.
The problem is that Bernie is too left leaning for the right of the Dems. Its highly likely people who supported and funded Hillary would have withdrawn their support and money, and some may have even given it to Trump instead. You can see with Mamdani how that’s playing out, they’d rather field Cuomo as a spoiler candidate than let a progressive win.
Dont get me wrong, it was clearly manipulated to steal the nomination from Bernie, and Bernie would have been the better candidate and president than Hillary, but I no longer think it would have been the slam dunk that I did at the time he would get in, simply because hes against both sets of interests at the top of the Dems and the Repubs.
Bernie (and Hillary for that matter) would have done well by getting out and doing grassroots connections. Bill Clinton even suggested it to his wife. She didn’t do it, and the Dementia Dorito won a few key states.
Hillary probably didn’t do it because shes not very likeable, it would have been another Jeb Bush style mistake. Jeb made himself look worse, so sometimes not bothering is the lesser hurt. Hillary is a long way from her husband in that regard when he was at his peak. Bernie would make it work, that’s obvious, but then he would never had not done it.
The problem is that you don’t just need one thing, you need as many things as you can get, and what you certainly do not need is your own party’s management working against you. Winning when they cut you off becomes very difficult as you lose the biggest funding hose.
If he had faced off against the Demented Dorito, he could have won. Hilary got the Democratic nomination because she made a party deal to let Obama take the lead last time. She wanted her turn at the wheel, and the machinery was going to put her there, by God.
Her hubris lost her the 2016 election. The Demented Dorito does know how to put on a show to win the adulation of the masses, especially after The Apprentice built him up in the minds of many.
While I would have loved a Bernie presidency, I don’t think he would have had as much popular appeal. Keep in mind she beat the other guy by 2% of the votes and lost to the electoral college system.
That’s a loss on strategy, but definitely not an unpopular candidate choice.
Getting more votes than Trump doesn’t really mean she was “popular”, people were just willing to vote for her against him.
Then I’m not sure I’m getting your point. She was popular enough to win the general vote, so in that sense she was the right candidate. But she lost to the swing states, do you think Bernie would have fared better in that regard?
She was shoved down our throats, not chosen by the voters.
If I remember the polling correctly, a lot of people viewed Bernie favorably. He even polled better than Trump in the Red states.
But almost nobody viewed Harris favorably. They only tolerated her.
You mean dick cheney isn’t the voice of the electorate?
My point is simply “being more popular than Trump isn’t particularly meaningful”. Maybe she was popular, or maybe she was “better than him” to most people.
The problem is that Bernie is too left leaning for the right of the Dems. Its highly likely people who supported and funded Hillary would have withdrawn their support and money, and some may have even given it to Trump instead. You can see with Mamdani how that’s playing out, they’d rather field Cuomo as a spoiler candidate than let a progressive win.
Dont get me wrong, it was clearly manipulated to steal the nomination from Bernie, and Bernie would have been the better candidate and president than Hillary, but I no longer think it would have been the slam dunk that I did at the time he would get in, simply because hes against both sets of interests at the top of the Dems and the Repubs.
Bernie (and Hillary for that matter) would have done well by getting out and doing grassroots connections. Bill Clinton even suggested it to his wife. She didn’t do it, and the Dementia Dorito won a few key states.
Hillary probably didn’t do it because shes not very likeable, it would have been another Jeb Bush style mistake. Jeb made himself look worse, so sometimes not bothering is the lesser hurt. Hillary is a long way from her husband in that regard when he was at his peak. Bernie would make it work, that’s obvious, but then he would never had not done it.
The problem is that you don’t just need one thing, you need as many things as you can get, and what you certainly do not need is your own party’s management working against you. Winning when they cut you off becomes very difficult as you lose the biggest funding hose.
Yeah, but she has never shown any indication that she knows this.
War criminal and Epstein buddy Bill?
And I don’t want to see Hitlery, the other Clinton warcriminal ghoul’s face ever again.