On Tuesday, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont announced he was running for the Democratic presidential nomination. This is no surprise to anyone. Back on April 30th, he told everyone he was a candidate for that nomination (and started collecting campaign funds). Tuesday was just the "official" announcement.
I know a lot of my progressive friends like to think Democrats will flock to the Sanders candidacy, and that he will be able to raise the money to run an effective campaign. I doubt it though. Currently Hillary Clinton is extremely popular among Democrats nationwide, and is sitting on a huge campaign chest.
Will Sanders' official announcement start that flood of voters to support him. Probably not. The chart below shows the results of the three national polls that have been taken on the Democratic race since Sanders' first announcement -- a YouGov Poll, a Public Policy Polling survey, and a Fox News Poll. That announcement didn't cost Clinton any support, and this one won't either.
If Sanders is to have any chance in this race, it will be in the Democratic debates. Almost immediately after Sanders announced in April, Clinton generously agreed to participate in three debates. I expect millions of Democrats nationwide will be watching those debates, and that will be Sanders' best chance to win them over.
But Hillary Clinton's popularity is not Sanders' only problem. Martin O'Malley says he will announce his own candidacy next Saturday -- and he will be trying to win over the same liberals that Sanders is going after. If they split that vote, it will be bad news for both of them.
His support has doubled since his announcement (unless you consider the Fox news poll you added to your graphic, of course). As for money, Hillary Clinton didn't say how much she raised in the first few days of her campaign announcement, did she?
ReplyDeleteShe should have plenty of Super PAC dough, though. Not to mention all of the Foundation millions from foreign nations for war machines.
You really don't want a challenger in the primary. Very undemocratic, don't you think?
And what if President Clinton named the equivalent of GHWB's David Souter -- a slam dunk conservative, according to John Sununu. There goes that argument down the toilet.
I would think you'd be more comfortable about Clinton's prospects without having to run down Sanders so much. Sanders isn't playing that tear-down game; maybe you've noticed.
I just don't know, Ted. Maybe you should go back to posting more of the Clinton family portraits from thirty years ago.
I have never run down Bernie Sanders, and you know that. I simply said I don't think he can win. I respect Bernie, and I have no problem with him (or anyone else) being a candidate. In fact, I think I show a lot more respect for Bernie on this blog than you do for Hillary Clinton on your blog. But that's Ok. Politics is a contact sport.
DeleteI like a lot of what Bernie stands for and his innate socialism does not scare me as it does so many, including most Dems.
ReplyDeleteI think this will limit his chances of going that far. And same for Warren. I think the ruthlessness of Hillary is better to fight the rePUKEians and have people like Warren & Bernie help keep her on target and honest.
Well said.
DeletePoorly deflected, but let's not parry that further. Perhaps you might just read what Egberto Willies wrote and tell us what you think.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was silly, and slanted to denigrate Hillary Clinton. We should ALL be in a continual process of re-educating ourselves.
DeleteAnd I still say I have NOT "run down Sanders". I honestly believe he won't appeal to a majority of voters (either in the Democratic Party or the general election). That's not denigrating Bernie (who I love). It's just my assessment of the reality.
Delete