The Problem With Bernie Sanders, v. 2

[UPDATE]:

This is a classic example of what I’m talking about when I say Bernie has “a problem.”

Would someone please explain to me what the fuck he’s talking about here? Sanders criticizes Obama for not having “presidential leadership” in “bringing millions and millions of people into the political process.”

But then in the next breath he admits that Obama “turned out more voters, particularly minorities, than ever before.”

So what exactly is his problem?

————————————————–

As I noted last month, my big problem with Bernie Sanders’ campaign is that his policies are impractical, unachievable, and unrealistic.

When presented with this idea, Bernie’s response has always been that he’s trying to start “a revolution.” The idea, as he explains it, is that with him leading the Democratic Party ticket, he’d bring so many new people and “people who have given up on the process” into the polls — and they’d all stay engaged, naturally, as opposed to the typical Democratic voter who seems to forget that elections are every single year, not every four years — and they’d all vote for downticket Dems, so that President Sanders would have big majorities in both houses of Congress, and that’s how he’d usher in his ambitious agenda. Medicare For All, free college tuition, breaking up the Wall Street institutions, all will sail through the House and Senate because of his “revolution.” Easy-peasy!

Not only does that defy electoral realities, it appears that’s not even what’s happening — at least, not yet. Those “people who have given up on the process”? Yeah, they still didn’t vote in New Hampshire on Tuesday:

Those who don’t vote tend to be younger and less educated, according to the Pew Research Center. More than half of those who sat out the election in 2012 had no more than a high-school diploma and less than $30,000 a year in household income.

Those are the people Sanders has to get to the polls if he hopes not only to win the Democratic nomination, but also to lead troops of the party’s congressional candidates to victory in the general election, establishing the legislative majority his agenda requires.

At least in New Hampshire, though, younger, poorer and less educated people did not turn out in disproportionate numbers for the Democratic primaries, according to exit polling data gathered on behalf of major television networks and the Associated Press in 2008 and on Tuesday.

Nineteen percent of Democratic primary voters — which, as it happens, can include independents under New Hampshire’s rules — in New Hampshire were less than 30 years old, just one percentage point more than in the state’s primary in 2008. Thirty-one percent had less than $50,000 a year in income, compared to 32 percent in 2008. And the share of primary voters without a college degree apparently declined from 46 percent in 2008 to 40 percent on Tuesday.

Not exactly the hoped-for “revolution,” is it? So, how did Bernie Sanders win in New Hampshire? He did so by successfully making his case to the same people who always vote in primaries: the Democratic base. What he did not do was bring in significant numbers of disillusioned, disenfranchised or “new” voters. In fact, he didn’t even increase voter turnout:

In fact, Sanders won by persuading many habitual Democratic primary voters to support him. With 95 percent of precincts reporting their results as of Wednesday morning, just 241,000 ballots had been cast in the Democratic primary, fewer than the 268,000 projected by New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner last week. Nearly 289,000 voters cast ballots in the state’s Democratic primary in 2008.

This is a bit of reality that the Bernie folks are not going to like. But in fact it’s actually really good news for their candidate: hey, he got Democratic voters on board! Yay! But what should be good news does not bode well for him in the general election, nor does it bode well for a successful Sanders presidency, were he to win the general election.

Yes, you want the base to support you. But Bernie Sanders has been telling us that he’s going to generate energy and excitement among the disillusioned voting constituency, and that ain’t happening yet. If there’s going to be a revolution, it had better start soon.

28 Comments

Filed under 2016 Election, 2016 Presidential Election, Democratic Party, Democrats

28 responses to “The Problem With Bernie Sanders, v. 2

  1. Ray Heyd

    Do you really think that Ms. Clinton will have any easier time unless we give her Democratic majorities in Congress. Even then, unless she is more aggressive than Obama was his first time, nothing will get done. I am for Bernie because somehow, sometime we must change the way government works in the US. And, to me, Bernie at least offers a slim hope that this might happen. If Hillary wins the nomination I will, of course vote for her because the US under complete domination of nutty Republicans is doomed!

    • that’s a good question and one which has been asked here before but I think yes, there are a lot of mainstream Dems in Congress willing to work with Hillary who won’t work with Bernie. I’m thinking of my own Congress Varmint, Jim Cooper, who in a sane world would be considered a moderate Republican, not the Blue Dog Democrat he claims to be. I don’t see him voting for Medicare For All or a lot of other things on Bernie’s agenda. Ditto with several Dem Senators.

  2. Bob Fischer

    The cornerstone of Sanders Campaign is getting big money out of our campaign system, making college affordable, providing veteran services to those who have served, fair days pay for a fair days work and a universal healthcare access by all with a quite reasonable 2.2% flat tax across the board to finance it. In addition he supports pension reform and the regulation and break-up of the same banks that tried to melt down our economy. I would submit that a lot of people that one wouldn’t expect to back Sanders, people that wouldn’t back Hillary or Obama, low information voters, will back Sanders and if Cooper and his cronies don’t pay attention to who wins in November and work in a manner consistent with public opinion he could feel the bern next time he runs for office. Sanders coat-tails are already having surprising results.

    • “Sanders coat-tails are already having surprising results.”

      Examples?

      • Thanks for asking this one, Beale. Bernie is known for rarely supporting other Democratic candidates, and has few ‘favors owed.’ And I’m sorry to spoil some of his supporters’ purity tests, but EVERY President, every elected Executive, runs into a situation where he has to say to someone, “Senator Claghorn, this vote is vital, and I know you believe the same way I do. Your constituents will be very mad at you if you vote with me on this. But remember how I fought for you, last election? You know I’ll do it next time. Besides, don’t you owe me one?”

        That’s not corruption, that’s just an ordinary and good part of politics, because not every part of the constituency even in a very liberal state will support someone who ‘votes his conscience even against his constituents’ interest.’

      • “Bernie is known for rarely supporting other Democratic candidates, and has few ‘favors owed.’”

        Again I have to ask the question: why do we want to elect Bernie Sanders to lead a party he’s not a member of?

        And question #2: why is it that everything Hillary Clinton does, from visiting Flint, Michigan to gay rights to everything else, is written off as “political calculation,” but it’s not a political calculation for Sanders to run as a Democrat when he’s been an Independent and Socialist for his entire career?

        And how ironic that the one true Independent who’s running as a Democrat may face one or two Independent challengers (Webb and Bloomberg)?

      • Bob Fischer

        http://www.angrymillenials.com/?p=1892 Debbie Wasserman Schultz is being challenged by an upstart. People are beginning to squirm, both on the so-called left and right over the real possibility of a fundamental change in the way America does business and how and what will generate the wealth of the next generation. Those of us that are disillusioned and disenfranchised are the democratic base. We’ve watched Goldman Sachs steal our pensions and slide Hillary her cut to make sure we stay fucked with her blessing. We’re not leaving her. She’s running us off. Until she wakes up to what’s going on with her base, we would be just as well to vote for Kasich as Hillary. If the banks and the billionaires are going to starve us out, keep us from healthcare, enslave our children with debt for a shot at an education and steal everything we’ve earned in our life, at least with Bernie, we go down fighting. With Hillary, right now she’s asking us to peacefully walk to the gas chambers. She needs to wake up and get off her superior condescending ass and respond to those of us she purports to represent. I had high hopes for her when Bernie got into this race. She is a brilliant human and I was sure she would respond to this challenge by rising to the occasion and dedicating herself to becoming the greatest President in the history of this nation. Vast disappointment in how she’s handled this challenge is an understatement of how I see her reaction to Sander’s candidacy. The earth is warming, we are running out of drinking water and breathable air, we are being denied healthcare and fed hoodlike substances instead of food. The banks are stealing our pensions and retirement savings and congress is voting to let them. It’s not business as usual. We need leaders. If Hillary doesn’t want to stand up and lead, Bernie will. Let her throw her mud.

      • “Those of us that are disillusioned and disenfranchised are the democratic base.”

        That may be true but that’s not what the exit polling has shown, at least not so far. Unless you can do what Bernie SAYS his revolution is about — bringing new voters into the process, and bringing back those who have given up on the process — it’s all a lot of hot air. He’s not going to get the Congress he needs to pursue his aggressive agenda. He’s definitely not going to win a general election and it’s going to be McGovern all over again.

        “With Hillary, right now she’s asking us to peacefully walk to the gas chambers.”

        Umm …. yeah, that’s a little over the top, don’t you think? The thing with you Bernie folks is that you’ve got all this emotion but it’s not translating into practical results, and I’d say a thinly-veiled Holocaust reference like this is actually counter-productive. You may not like Hillary Clinton but the reality is, she and Bernie aren’t that far apart, and saying she wants to march people to the gas chambers is just the kind of offensive crap that turns off reasonable people. She doesn’t deserve half the shit that’s been thrown at her by “progressives.”

        I actually like Bernie Sanders as a Senator, I always enjoyed hearing him on Al Franken’s show back in the day, and I feel kinda sorry for him because his most ardent supporters are so unbearable. To use Bernie’s words, “We don’t need that crap.”

      • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

        Bob Fisher is a good example of two things, One is the reason why Bernie’s supporters are potentially turning him from one of the more respected Independent Progressives in recent history to someone who is becoming a joke at best, and, were he to manage to elect Trump or Cruz, a stench. The second is that the ‘fundamentalist’ attitude is not limited to believers or the religious sphere.

        Fundamentalists are people who so ‘know the TRUTH’ that when someone asks them about a fact that calls their certainty into question, they can’t respond directly or even quite hear the question. Frequently they simply repeat their original assertion, sometimes not even in different words. They see the world in terms of comic book heroes and villains, rather than real people, and they are BIG on stereotyping. “Get the PAC money out of politics, don’t vote for someone who has a SuperPAC — which no candidate — technically — does — and MY candidate doesn’t.” (But the SuperPac supporting him has given him more money than his opponent has received from hers, he has frequently — while denying he was a member of the Democratic Party, appeared and received funding from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Fundraisers that cost five figures to attend.) Response “Don’t vote for Hillary, with all her PAC money she is the prisoner of Wall Street.”

        (I think I could make a better case for Bernie than either he or his supporters, but I try and remember one thing he doesn’t even seem to realize. There is a difference between ‘corporate capitalism’ — which needs careful watching, but which is still important and a positive contributor to the economy — because it creates the products people buy and the jobs people need, because, for certain areas — and not others — it has proven to be the most efficient way of doing this, and because it was not from that sector that the collapse cake — and ‘financialist capitalism’ — the hedge fund types, the creators of new and usual ways of playing the Wall Street Casion, the inventors of ‘credit default swaps’ and the like — which creates few jobs, a few billionaires, and when the bubble created bursts — as it always does — creates disasters that fall on the general populace. If he made a point of that distinction instead of using the clichéd stereotype of ‘Wall Street,’ he could be a positive force. But then there would be the question of those evil ‘speaker’s fees’ tthat Hillary gets — from the same agency that has both H. Clinton and Bernard Sanders on the same client list.)

        Tell a fundamentalist Barnberner that the two elections so far have shown no increase in outside voting and we get either ‘but Bernie is leading a revolution that will bring outside voters into the fold and will bring people clamoring at the windows of the Congresscritters, FORCING them to go along’ or idiocy like pointing out that four times as many people voted in a contested election than in one merely ratifying an incumbent. (Proof? “It’s the obvious TRUTH som I don’t have to supply any evidence.)

        I want to go on for much longer, and expect to be spending a lot of time here, but some personal things are arising that may take me a while, so I’ll do the admittedly unfair thing of simply asking one of our Barnberners a half dozen quick questions:
        1: The interests of a particular district or state may differ from the interests of the country as aa whole. A President frequently has to ask/beg a Senator to go along with him instead of his constituency. (FDR even had to literally blackmail a Senator to support him on the war against the wishes of his Irish constituents — Ireland remained neutral during WWII if you didn’t know — by threatening to out him.) If Bernie continues to refrain from supporting down ballot candidates, where does he get the influence to convince a Senator he refused to campaign for.
        2: Over the last few years, the Congress has been a problem, but it has been the states that have been the real horror show, but Bernie has shown no interest at all in down ballot races. How is he going to prevent the horrors that state governments have been producing, gerrymandering, voter suppression, cutting benefits, privatizing services that need to be state-run, all the way to the second worst disaster in the history of the US, Flint, unless he works hard to get Democrats elected to state offices? Ideally, progressive Democrats, but at least sane centrists.
        3: Bernie — and I — want a SCOTUS that will repeal Citizens United, the Second Amenddment decisions, the gutting of thee voting rights bill, etc. But, as Nixon, Reagan, and the First Bush found out, you have to get your choices ratified by the Senate. If you don’t have a Demcratic Senate, how are you planning on managing it. Do you plan on, if there is a vacancy on Day One, to let it stay unfilled until your revolution brings in the new Congress of 2018 — especially if it is on the current progressive side?
        4: Given ‘swiftboating,’ Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, birtherism, ‘our Muslim President’ etc., you know how a Republican can twist the most innocent or praiseworthy act and use it as a weapon against a candidate. What does Bernie perceive will be the weapons used against him and how does he plan to fight them. And — since no one is claiming that Bernie is the most recent ‘sinless human being’ — what are the mistakes, errors, even crimes that he may have done, so that he can anticipate them being used against him?
        5:Wht is his foreign policy, anyway?

        More later, if I can squeeze out time.

  3. Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    Why does my computer every so often decide to eat my posts midway? (And, btw, for some reason the front computer, which I rarely use, has the ‘Jim “Prup” Benton” name, this ne uses my preferred one, but both me.)
    Anyway, for the 3rd Time:

    Webb is irrelevant and unimportant, but as someone who lived in Brooklyn during his entire Mayoralty, I can see myself supporting Bloomberg. He’s said he wouldn’t enter the race unless he was afraid that Hillary was too damaged to win — and when it comes to honest politicians, I’d rate him in the top quintile, at least. Even when he was running on the Republican lline, he always stated he was a socially liberal, economically centrist Democrat,

    His economic centrism, btw, is precisely that, not a mask for ‘trickle-down’ or ‘don’t tax the rich.’ (He doesn’t like unions much, admittedly.) He’s a good Administrator who can get things done, and the right things, usually. I’m sure there are horror stories, there isn’t a politician who doesn’t have them, and I’d certainly vote for Hillary over him.

    But if he gets in, I hope he uses most of that billion to actually create a New Party, not just to get elected. We CAN’T survive when one of our two parties is as literally insane — and as unconcerned with, you know, actually governing — as is the current GOP. Even last night close to or over 50 % — didn’t right down the exact results — voted for Trump, Cruz, Carson or Huckabee — on the ballot even though out of the race. And this was in America’s second least religious state — below only Vermont.

    • “Why does my computer every so often decide to eat my posts midway?”

      It’s called FYWP. Fuck You WordPress.

      Bloomberg has a reputation for being an authoritarian bully: ban sodas, ban smoking, etc. Of course his gun control activism, which I support, has made him enemy #1 on the right, and the NRA and 2nd Amendment freaks will go apeshit attacking him. I’m not sure he’s any more electable than anyone else.

      Can we just give Obama a third term?

  4. While noting a decrease in Dems voting compared to 2008, you left out that there were over four times as many Dems voting compared to 2012. Bernie won more votes than the top two R’s combined and every demographic except old and rich. 538 complained that Bernie ONLY won by 7% in the over $100,000 income range. Are you kidding me? Winning by 7% is pretty much a crush.

    As to your other argument, that Bernie’s ideas are unreasonable and unachievable so we might as well go with a candidate of lower expectations, I ask you to think back to Obama’s early proposals to Congress. His starting negotiating positions were well thought out and entirely reasonable and were entirely not achieved. Bernie has a long history of achievement in the Senate all while working with jerks on the other side. I am not going to buy into the position that we should start by settling for mediocrity in our goals.

    It is time to do things that are hard.

    • “…there were over four times as many Dems voting compared to 2012.”

      But you can’t be serious! In 2012 Obama was the nominee, there was no competition, no point in showing up for an uncontested primary!

      “Bernie won more votes than the top two R’s combined …”

      Again, so what? Look at how many Republicans were on the GOP ballot! That kind of comparison is completely pointless.

      “Bernie has a long history of achievement in the Senate…”

      Please give me some examples of his achievements. Because I keep seeing the same meme over and over that says he only passed 3 bills and two of them renamed Vermont post offices.

      The reality is, he and Hillary Clinton voted identically 93% of the time in the two years they were together in the Senate. For some reason, Hillary Clinton has to be held accountable for everything her husband did when she was FLOTUS and is single-handedly responsible for the Iraq War, but Bernie gets a pass on his own bad votes — of which there are PLENTY: voting against gun control FIVE times. Voting FOR Wall Street deregulation, twice. His “yea” vote in support of Israeli war crimes. Yes, Democrats voted for these bills, too. But it’s really hard to take seriously these calls for ideological purity when Bernie supporters overlook the warts on their own candidate’s record.

      • Bob Fischer

        https://www.congress.gov/member/bernard-sanders/S000033 This is a Bernie Sanders complete record. Feel free to peruse it. Secretary Clinton also has one of these https://www.congress.gov/member/hillary-clinton/C001041 . Here it is. Feel free to compare them. We want the money Wall Street stole from our pensions back. We want the people that voted to let them steal it out. We want our kids to have a chance. That’s it, a fair chance. When Hillary quits telling us we’re unreasonable and gets to work on our issues, we will be here to listen. This election isn’t about her. It’s about where we’re headed as a nation.

      • When did Hillary say you’re unreasonable? Or are you taking it as unreasonable when someone asks the very logical question, HOW DO YOU PLAN TO DO THIS? That’s a fair question. Bernie needs to do more than complain about stuff. He needs to actually be able to implement these things.

        I think the selective hearing of the Bernie Sanders crowd is a little ironic. Bernie voted TWICE to deregulate Wall Street, he voted FOR the Commodities Futures Modernization Act which is directly responsible for some of the casino gambling the big banks did that stole your pensions, and he did it not only as part of the omnibus bill but also as a stand alone bill. So that’s all forgiven, but Hillary’s Iraq War vote, at a time when anyone who was brave enough to ask for restraint, was publicly pilloried as unpatriotic, un-American, a terrorist-appeaser, not supporting the troops, etc. Obama was able to get away with it because he was brand new in the Senate. Sanders was able to get away with it because he was an Independent.

    • It is time to things that are hard? Going four years with anyone from the POG in charge is Riĺllllly hard.

  5. Randy

    ” I’d say a thinly-veiled Holocaust reference like this is actually counter-productive.” But in context that’s not at all what Bob Fischer was implying was it SB? You are an intelligent and astute observer of the political world but I submit it’s that kind of parsing and spin that corrupts the political dialogue in this country. I get it. You’re down with Hillary. She’s got opposition. Deal with it. Oh…and Fuck Wall Street.

    • Bob Fischer

      Thank you for taking the time to spell my name right. I’ve found that writers who pay attention to detail tend to have more believable arguments. And you’re right, it wasn’t a Hitler reference. Perhaps I should have used over the cliffs and into the sea in an allusion to Clinton treating the people of the party like a bunch of lemmings, but it was late, work was cold, my knee was throbbing and the comparison was the first thing that came to mind.

    • Seriously? Walk to the gas chambers isn’t a Holocaust reference? Is there some OTHER historical context that I’m missing here?

      Why do the Bernie people feel the need to go the extra mile to demonize Hillary Clinton? Especially when you seem so awfully thin-skinned yourselves. A friend of mine mentions that the GOP will throw a dump truck full of mud at Bernie Sanders if he gets the nomination and it unleashed a horror show of attacks and hurt fee-fees.

      C’mon, grow the fuck up. Doesn’t anybody remember how Obama was supposedly “palling around with terrorists” because he attended ONE barbecue with Bill Ayers? Bernie’s background is going to give these guys a field day. Right-wing magazines already portray Bernie has a Sandinista, Soviet sympathizer, etc. And remember: it doesn’t have to BE true. It just has to FEEL true. Obama is a foreign-born Muslim, remember?!

      Bernie is not electable, and that’s a real issue. But he doesn’t seem to be sparking a revolution, either. And that’s something that should worry his staunchest supporters.

      Where are the disillusioned voters? Not the ones who voted for Obama and got mad that he couldn’t close Gitmo and do all the other things he wanted to do but couldn’t because of Republican gridlock. I mean the ones who haven’t participated in the process for the past 10-15 years, the ones Bernie is always telling us about.

      And by the way: That gridlock is not going away under a President Sanders. And the only thing that’s supposed to prevent that are Bernie’s coattails which appear to be non-existent.

      • Bob Fischer

        Yes, the death penalty in the U.S., electric chair, gas chamber, the needle, the gallows, etc. As I said, It was late and I’d put in a full shift in less than optimum conditions. In my defense, it appears some readers understood what I was talking about.

        I’m not demonizing Hillary, but the same problems you say will keep Sanders from being an effective leader are the major problems Clinton faces, the difference is that with Sanders, people that consider themselves independent are going to be holding their reps accountable as well.

        I would also submit that Sanders electability will be determined in the primary. If he can beat Clinton, he can beat Trump.

        Obama is not Hillary, though the level of hate towards her by her enemies (which I’m not. I tend to view her positively, but I think she’s blowing the election by focusing on herself instead of detailing how she’s going to govern) far surpasses the current levels of hate generated by Bernie.

        And, for what its worth, Bernie was right about the Sandinistas.

        If Hillary and her supporters continue to browbeat people who would otherwise be inclined to vote for her in the general, it could affect the outcome in November. Frankly, marching in lockstep, (a reference to blindly following any leader lest I be accused of some nefarious reference), is not why I participate in our democracy and if that’s what’s being forced upon me, then I would be inclined to look for alternatives.

        As for gridlock, it will likely continue until Citizens United is overturned, something Sanders appears far more committed to than the other candidates. I believe Sanders is our best hope for a better America.

        As for mudslinging in the general, I think that battle will be largely fought in social media and we’re gearing up. How are we doing?

      • “If Hillary and her supporters continue to browbeat people…”

        WOW.

        Look in a mirror, Bob.

        How exactly is Hillary making this campaign “all about her”? I heard someone on CNN say that today, too. She’s being personally attacked. Sounds like it’s her detractors that are making it “all about her.”

  6. Bob Fischer

    When was HR 4541 passed by the Senate and signed into law? I’m having a hard time tracking your reference to Sanders ultimate sin. All I can find is that the bill died. Where am I missing the connection?

    • ? I’m not sure I understand your question. I provided the link. The bill became law in 2000. Wikipedia is your friend.

      Sanders now blames Bill Clinton for his “yea” vote, says it was a mistake. For his part, Clinton also says he didn’t realize the far-reaching implications of the law and has said it was a mistake. So mistakes were made, things happen, I get it. But Hillary saying her Iraq War vote was a mistake isn’t good enough somehow?

  7. Bitter Scribe

    Sanders is a candidate for purity trolls. He wants to be the presidential nominee of party he’s too good to formally affiliate with.

  8. Prup (aka Jim Benton)

    Is it POSSIBLE for us to remember that the alternative is almost certainly going to be Ted Cruz or Donald Trump? This is the biggest opportunity we have had as a party in years, but also, if we blow it, it will not be like losing to George Bush, even if you argue that he was the worst President so far in our history — and there’s a good case for that.

    I really don’t need to talk about Trump, he’s had enough bandwidth already. But Ted Cruz is something else entirely. When we think of ‘Republican Preachers’ we think of semi-huckster publicity hounds like Falwell and Robertson, who will be satisfied with a photo op, a few phony, unpassable bills, and in exchange will be a GOTV machine. Even Bush, who converted to evangelicalism was relatively mainstream.

    Cruz keeps telling us that he really believes tthese things, and he has been joining with the most extreme of the new — overall more extreme — generation of political preachers. (And, for those of you who don’t know me, I try and use words carefully in a piece like this. When I refer to someone as a ‘dominionist’ I am not merely calling him a ‘nasty religious nut’ I am referring to a specific group of preachers who preach ‘seven mountain dominionism.’)

    Remember when John McCain begged for the endorsement of a preacher, got John Hagee, and had to drop him because he claimed that ‘Hitler was a hunter sent by God to drive the Jews back to Jerusalem”? Mike Bickle (of the International House of Prayer) makes the same claim, and Cruz parades his endorsement proudly. (There are a lot of other things about Bickel worth knowing, but there are limits to even Beale’s bandwidth.)

    And can you imagine a major party candidate accepting an invitation to appear with someone who is, with no exaggeration, calling for the return of the death penalty for gays — and who said this during his own speech and had books on sale with this as the main topic? Cruz did, with Kevin Swanson.

    Then there’s David Barton the pseudo-‘historian’ who is one of the majn arguers that the “United States is a Christian Nation.” Tony Perkins and Glenn Beck are firmly in his corner. And I could list close to a page of other endorsers, but I’d have to explain who they are. And yes, many of them are dominionists who hold that Christians should be in control of the ‘seven mountains’ of society, including government, business, entertainment, and I don’t have the rest memorized, sorry.

    (And today he added Jerry Boykin to the list. And I didn’t even mention his crazy father and surrogate.) He isn’t using these people for GOTV, he shares their beliefs. He keeps warning us of this, and the other day his wife stated he was ‘running to show the face of the God that we serve.)

    With this as the most iikely opponent, what are doing arguing some of the things we aare. We might disagree, but we have to stop handng the Republicans weapons they can use to keep our voters at home.

    Because it isn’t just a danger, it is an opportunity. The mmre this comes out, the more chance we have of grabbing vote after vote, if we only keep on message and stop pretending there is a gulf between our candidates wider than them and the Republicans — which isn’t true even of Kasich.

    Yes, I hope Hillary wins and have worries about Bernie, and for some of you it is vice versa, but both are capable of leaving the country in one piece after four years. Cruz? I’m not so sure, and I am not using rhetorical exaggeration.

    • Prup (aka Jim Benton)

      Cruz had defended his appearance with Swanson on Nov, 30th, and just today reaffirmed — after Jewish protests — that he welcomed Bickle’s endorsement.