Amy Klobuchar has been widely quoted as saying, "I thrive in chaos."
Any psychologists or psychiatrists care to weigh in on the personality type of someone who possesses that trait?
1
What's at stake? Almost nothing.
Why?
Because our problems are more fundamental than policy can address.
“In simpler times, judging a policymaker based upon values or claims made sense. Today they can’t tell what their actions will cause.”
“In the environment in which we live, the complexity progressively becomes higher and higher and it’s basically like we’re making random choices.” Yaneer Bar-Yam
eg
As the dominant, short-term drivers of evolution, humans have been generating vast relationship structures in-&-across Geo Eco Bio Cultural & Tech networks — essentially doing selection for centuries — with world culture's dominant information processing mechanism or app: humans deploying monetary code.
App lacks sufficient information processing Reach Speed Accuracy Power & Creativity — ALL of which are Fundaments of passing selection tests.
That app can’t work now, even as a heuristic, for the computation & weighting of complex relationship-value information.
If world culture’s converting the Sky & Ocean into terrorists, arming ‘em with weapons of mass extinction, then our cultural coding — Relationship Infrastructure — is fundamentally sick. That is, it’s non-selectable.
Most economists, pols & journalists are like Homicide Detectives chasing bad lead after bad lead. Leads are bad because of a failure to get fundamental.
eg
Use the 4.54-billion-year sample space of evolution for your pattern recognition cause:
“Initial conditions rule in complex systems.” Stewart Brand
@anthropocene2
Just because we have little certainty about long term effect of any of your actions, does not mean that we should not try to guess.
For example not voting for a democrat in November, probably bad for the US and the world.
So lets at least try to make decisions base on what seem morally right in the short term.
“It’s hard to say why Senator Michael Bennet is still in the race.”
I think that can be said about Yang, Gabbard, Steyer and Patrick, don’t you think?
If Bernie is the nominee and he rolls into PA, OH, MI, and WI with AOC, Susan Sarandon, Michael Moore, Cornell West and Cynthia Nixon on the stump demanding an economic revolution while the economy is strong, then Trump is going to steamroll him.....bigly.
Hey Democrats,
Try something new - run Buttigieg.
Go for it. I bet the country is ready to have a male homosexual as their president.
Wonder when the DNC will step in and gift Biden the Super Delegates to make him The One.
Bernie should have been allowed to win. A Sanders/Bloomberg ticket would have been a winner. But not like the DNC would ever allow that to happen.
For Warren, I would suggest to bow out gracefully now, before the results come in and her nose dive become headlines.
For the bottom 4, just go home, you're embarrassing yourselves.
Iowa who? New Hampshire what? Who cares what happens in these mostly-white enclaves that do NOT represent our multi-ethnic, multi everything country. What a stupid, anachronistic method to choose a nominee for POTUS. No, I don't have a better way but I bet somebody does! And we should do THAT and not THIS.
I'm seeing a lot of "boomer" in these comments.
Our enemies exploit these tags/insults to create more division, and more scapegoats, so they can keep getting away with destroying the middle class and becoming oligarchs like their Russian idols: "boomers" "illegals" "Muslim terrorists" "Mexican criminals" "special snowflakes" "triggered" "freebies" "socialists" "libtards" "welfare babies" "bernie bros" etc...
We all need to agree to stop this insanity and scapegoating and blame the monsters in government who have sold out the constitution and the american people to get more money than they, and the six generations that inherit it, can possibly spend.
For me there are only two candidates in it for the right reasons and actually getting the work done. The same two people the New York Times endorsed-- who are getting completely ignored-- to sell drama and newspapers.
I am a liberal democrat, but if I was in New Hampshire, my vote would go to Amy Klobuchar. She wins in all the places we need, she is smart, tough as nails, can cut Trump down while smiling and making a joke, is young enough to handle eight years of conflict and 24 hour days, is NOT taking money form PACs, and actually has a proven track record of winning and working with EVERYONE to get stuff done. If you are sick of the bellowing, bragging, and over inflated egos, and really want a functional government and not a reality TV show, I highly recommend you keep her in this race.
Bernie has my heart and my vote now and always. I'll write him in if he's not on the ballot. I'm over corporatist mouthpieces and I'm over compromise. Let the shaming comment thread begin.
I’m afraid the Trump administration is really a continuation of the Obama administration which was a continuation of the Bush2 administration.
Remember, it was Obama who refused to hold Bush accountable for his criminal actions and thus set the precedent that President’s have the right to do what they wish without fear of punishment.
Hence Trump.
Both only care(d) about the big corporations and very wealthy. Both have bought into the “American Exceptionalism” myth. And both are warmongers, killing people all over the earth to prove America’s greatness and to profit the weapons industries.
There is nothing “radical” about Bernie’s proposals.
Indeed, they are quite normal.
I am convinced that most Americans would prefer guaranteed healthcare, free education, an end to endless wars and higher taxes on billionaires.
Who in their right mind would prefer another corporate warmongering centrist like Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden?
Or Bloomberg, another racist Republican billionaire from NY?
Or the completely manufactured, poll-tested and CIA-approved, platitudes-spewing empty suit Buttigieg?
Bernie got DNC-ed in Iowa.
Just like he did in 2016.
The DNC will do whatever it takes to prevent him winning.
However blatant and transparently rigged, it doesn’t matter.
This is a fight for the damaged soul of the Democratic Party. Will we completely capitulate to the billionaire Bloomberg and/or their lap dogs like Buttigieg and Biden or will we return to the Democratic Party of FDR.
4
@Chris
Actually, while I'm loathe to defend anything about Trump, in defense of the truth, lets point out the reality that Trump has not "kill(ed) people all over the earth." For whatever reason, he is reluctant to go wars which, as you rightly point out, establishment politicians of both parties are fond of.
As for another bit of reality, Bernie Sanders is not going to win the election, and would destroyed by Trump if he got the nomination. Though his supporters are passionate, there are not nearly enough of them. And voters don't get extra credit for passion.
Bloomberg is the way to unseat Trump, and the only way. And he's not a racist.
The DNC once again has shown it is not ready for prime time. Iowa and New Hampshire should not be the first at bat states. By some magic wand the candidates that get through the almost totally white states are going to be embraced by the diverse states? I believe if Hillary would have run with a person of collar she would not have lost by 73000 votes in three states.
1
The reason none of the candidates are particularly inspiring is because none of them can compare to Barack Obama.
2
Too funny.
I voted in N.H. today. I was the first person at the poll.
I voted for 66 billion dollar elephant in the room.
" Michael Bloomberg is a gift to the democratic party. "
Mark Shields on PBS News Hour
Brooks & Shields
1
Amazing work on this morning's live updates -- 6 paragraphs on Kevin Costner; 2 sentences on Elizabeth Warren
4
@Maggie Mae That says it all. If you don't think centrist media bias exists, you haven't been paying attention. It's only a matter of time before the shine wears off Mayor Pete and praise is heaped upon a certain "more experienced" former mayor. Sigh.
I'm assuming at this point that Deval Patrick (and maybe Tom Steyer) are running for vice president.
1
More than any election in decades, the Democratic contest is remarkably fluid & unpredictable. Each state's votes will shake the race up even more. Yesterday's conventional wisdom becomes obsolete overnight.
It's way too soon to declare this a 2-person race.
Biden is fading rapidly, as he just doesn't offer a persuasive reason why he's the right person for the job now. Buttigieg is
having a brief run, but he's all fluff & no substance, so he is not a serious contender. Bernie has a core of 30% who are intensely loyal, but he is so widely despised by almost everyone else that it would be impossible for him to expand his base enough to win in November. Klobuchar is hanging on by a thread.
Bloomberg's money makes him the wild card in the deck, but having one NYC billionaire running is enough.
Don't count Warren out yet! She has a strong organization & plenty of money. Her candidacy is built for the long haul, which is necessary in a race which may remain undecided for several months. It is a very real scenario that Warren emerges as the compromise candidate, since she is the only one palatable to both progressives the Democratic establishment. Once the "Anybody But Bernie" forces dig in, she may be the only hope for progressives, the only one who can inspire the huge turnout needed to win in November.
3
I am a Republican, ready to turn around and cast an eye on a Democratic hopeful - and its Klobuchar for me. She is calm, eloquent, moderate and seems even-tempered, just what we need in these tumultuous times when yelling and screaming seem to be the norm. When she talks, people listen, and that is an important step in building consensus.
2
Why is there this hurry in the press to wrap up the nomination. Large numbers of very big states have not yet held primaries. There's a long way to go before the election. The push to have NEWS is rushing things unnecessarily. Let the process take it's course and the voters make their decisions. We always take far too long to some to the election in this country anyway; and there is a predisposition in all news sources to see the Democratic party as multi-faceted and a mess while the Republicans are overfocused. Perhaps a national primary in which all states voted the same day might be good. But stop the rush and the concentration on conflict already!
3
I guess Biden was sacrificed to impeach/weaken Trump.
Now Buttigieg is used to eliminate/weaken Sanders.
The DNC’s end play candidate is Bloomberg.
And if this strategy backfires there’s always ‘the Russians did it’ narrative.
14
@Lupito
I don’t think the limousine liberals and the donor class of the Democratic Party have a problem with Trump.
They dislike his crudeness and lack of decorum, as well as his lackluster appetite for WW3 with Russia, but fundamentally they like his agenda much better than what Bernie represents.
2
here's my question which i posed to a good friend of mine that is also firmly progressive. Who is being polled? I've NEVER been polled, and I don't know anyone that has. No my wife, not any of my progressive friends, not my wildly progressive daughter and her boyfriend. No one. My concern is that the polls don't reflect reality, they shape it.
5
Gabbard, Steyer, and Yang should all be out right now. Klobuchar is borderline. Warren and Biden have until Nevada to generate momentum. The reason most of these names are still in this race is 1) Iowa ruckus and 2) Mike Bloomberg.
All things considered, I think Iowa will amount to nothing. The distraction doesn't alter primary dynamics outside possibly Buttigieg. Bloomberg though? I think Democrats are really going to regret allowing Bloomberg into the race.
Bloomberg gives basically everyone an excuse to stay in the race until Super Tuesday at least. Democrats therefore bifurcate the nomination. Nothing spells unity quite like a brokered convention. Bloomberg is a disaster in waiting.
Saving Democrats from themselves requires a massive shift in donation funding. The only way to get candidates out of the race right now is to bankrupt them. That seems likely for more than a few names. You still can't get rid of Bloomberg though. If he makes even a reasonable showing, he's heading for the convention ... and Trump's reelection.
The odds of Bloomberg winning the nomination without a brokered convention are about the same as me throwing a marble over a house and hitting the neighbor's cat by mistake.
A brokered convention with a non-majority moderate candidate though means everyone in Camp Bernie is upset. Democrats lose. Like I said, Bloomberg is bad news.
9
@Andy
The only person who can save the Democrats from themselves in this election, hence the United States, is Bloomberg.
Bernie will not become president. Buttigieg will not become president. Biden will not become president. Warren will not become president. Etc.
Bloomberg has a very good shot of becoming president if the Democrats finally take the old fashioned definition of "politics" - winning elections in order to wield legislative power - seriously enough.
1
I understand the drift away from Biden. I almost want to say 'could have told you so.' I understand Klobuchar's rise -- a strong, serious candidate with a great legislative record. I get Mayor Pete's sudden ascendancy -- a voice of brilliance, not just reason, and the ability to forget new, unexpected alliances across urban, suburban, rural voters.
I do not get why Bernie is still even a thing. An old hand-waggling socialist coot from an outlier state with no particular legislative record -- whose main competition, Elizabeth Warren, is a bazillion times smarter -- who doesn't even like people and has absolutely no chance of turning America into whatever Che Guevara-lite vision he holds, no matter how much it costs. That I just don't get at all.
20
@raven55
' I understand Klobuchar's rise'
From 5% in December, to ... 8% in January. Oh my. Tremendous.
'I do not get why Bernie is still even a thing. '
From 20% in December, to 26% in February. Catching Biden in National Polls, some say topping Biden. And you cannot see why he's 'a thing'?
I am not a BernieBroet, but I can tell where the wind blows. And it's not blowing for Klobuchar.
1
Hey media, it’s 2020 not 1994. The number of registered Democrats in the City of Los Angeles alone exceeds the entire population of the state of New Hampshire by half a million people. This primary doesn’t matter in the long run, and I am not basing my vote on the results of New Hampshire and Iowa.
9
@Native
Its just appearances, which gets attention thats all. but thats not nothing
how many in the states bases their vote on LA? zip
2
Evidently, "virtual tie" is the new descriptive phrase being deployed this morning....as it is littered throughout many of the election articles today.
Example from this article:
"The two of them finished in a virtual tie for first place in Iowa."
I don't recall the same media outlets in 2016 repeatedly declaring that Trump and Clinton finished in a "virtual tie".
In fact, I believe the media made a point of pointing out that Clinton received 3 million more votes than Trump.
I wonder what changed.
Evidently, a 6,000 vote win out of 180,000 votes cast is now considered a "virtual tie".
Isn't that interesting?
9
I'm a-feared for Biden's candidacy. After stumbling in Iowa, both Bill and Hillary came out of NH as "comeback kids," as it were. No such renewal awaits Biden tonight. And the similarities I see with Hillary Clinton's 2008 campaign also don't bode well for Joe: the lackluster campaigning, the presumption, taking it all for granted ... Worse, Klobuchar is the better communicator of Biden's message than he is himself. Modern, 21st century Democrats just are not interested in an ol' pol like Joe.
Having said all that, I sometimes wonder if Trump is, as he piles on one outrage after the other, goading us into a far-left nominee. Hm. After fixating on Biden last year, Trump is now telegraphing his desire to run against Bernie Sanders. Trump - deeply unpopular - may end up swallowing a tankard of Be Careful For What You Wish - You Just Might Get It.
2
Epstein and Ramic are mistaken regarding Iowa's "traditional role." It has been to enable a candidate to emerge from the pack to challenge the early leaders (e.g., Obama in 2008 and Hart in 1984). It fulfilled that role regarding Buttigieg. Candidates rarely drop out after Iowa - they stick it out a bit longer to see how they do in the first primary (New Hampshire). A few candidates dropped out before the caucuses, so we've already seen some winnowing.
1
@Geo You will see more drop out soon. Early losses impact fund raising.
As Yang would say focus on the math. Iowa and New Hampshire amount to only 65 pledged delegates of the total of 3,979 or less than 2% of it. Neither could be considered representative of the nation due to their size but also their particular circumstances. The Iowa caucus (41 delegates/1% of total pledged delegates) requiring a significant commitment of time to cast your ballot favors the activist based candidate like Sanders. New Hampshire having only 24 delegates is favorable due to name recognition to Sanders and Warren as senators in a neighboring states and Patrick as a neighbor state governor. The results from these 2 states hardly is the basis to select the democratic nominee or even predict a trend or a movement. Even after the the Nevada caucus and South Carolina primary only 155 delegates or 3.9% of the total will be decided. It's not until super Tuesday March 3 with 1,357 delegates or 34% of the total covering 13 states around the country do you get a good sample of the democratic vote of the nation.
So lets stop letting the media hype the early small state results in February to predict which candidate will be the eventual winner. It may not be clear for a month or two which in itself is not a bad thing.
12
@P Locke Running the long game campaign for the nomination still requires money, however. I don’t think the problem is that number of delegates remaining is an issue as much as amount of campaign funds. Early losses signal to potential donors that the potential nominee may not be worth the contribution.
1
@P Locke It's not about the delegate count, it's about public perception. Put simply, people like winners - that's why you saw Buttigieg get a 7 point bump in New Hampshire when the news about him winning the Iowa SDE race broke. Iowa and New Hampshire are not meaningful in and of themselves, but they give candidates the momentum they need in public support and fundraising to win.
Like the public, donors like to back winners too, which means that campaigns that don't perform well in the early states simply can't raise enough money to carry on. If Joe Biden doesn't perform well in Nevada and South Carolina his campaign will likely be over, regardless of how well he's polling in the Super Tuesday states -- he simply won't have the funds to compete in them.
1
What's at stake? At this point nothing except what MSM makes of it to keep their dollars flowing by creating unnecessary drama and noise.
One sound - Shhhh!
8
Since Iowa and New Hampshire have negligible black populations, how is Buttigieg doing so poorly among African-American Democrats? Oh, that's right: polls! Can we please stop looking at polling as though it's the real thing? The only polls that count are those in the voting booth.
6
While it is not clear who will win the Democratic line up, one thing is clear, Biden will not be one of them. For once the Democrats should nominate the one that excites the party members, not one who might beat Trump. The latter is based on hope and not on facts. I was aghast about Bernie being a US President 4 years back. I am ready for Bernie. After all the house and senate will moderate his policies but at least he will do what is right for the citizens, particularly in the area of health where Trump promised much and delivered a 0.
11
@Ben
"the area of health where Trump promised much and delivered a 0."
Actually, Trump has delivered less than zero. Millions have been knocked off of their plans, and his actions have attacked the protections for preexisting conditions. Of course, true to form, Trump claims he is doing the opposite.
4
@Bob4713
We Americans know Trump is an inveterate liar and has ruined the US already and will do much much worse even in the little time he has until his time is over this term! Those who are clinging to him do not seem to have much in the way of critical faculties, that is, able to make objective analysis, and for politics these days it is crucial to be self-questioning.
1
I think we already know that Bong Joon Ho will win the New Hampshire Primary.
5
I have always felt Trump would be a one term President. However, for the first time since Trump’s election, I am feeling pessimistic about Trump losing the re-election. Why? Although I like some of the Democratic candidates and will support whoever the nominee is , I just don’t see anyone of these candidates taking Trump on and the unification seems to be lacking within the party and voters; the dysfunction within the Iowa caucus didn’t help either but it’s still early.
On the other side, Trump and the GOP have stacked the cards against the Democrats with their rhetoric, lies and mistruths and are continuing to do so. They have weaponize the White House to attack those that oppose them. When you have a President who obstructs and uses the Presidential office for self-serving needs whether for political or financial gain, is giving a pass by the senate and exonerated by voters for his actions and his poll numbers increase…..something is drastically wrong.
I am hoping I’m wrong but this is how I feel. One thing is for sure……..our country and Democracy cannot survive another 4 years of Trump.
10
@A.A.F. - Don't worry, we'll be fine.
I think all these people realize the threat another four years of Trump means to our system of government. And I think each candidate believes they are the best one to beat him. Therefore all are reluctant to cede their hopes of winning.
The big question will come after one candidate is chosen and whether those who lose, along with all their ardent supporters, will continue to fight as hard as they have to defeat Donald Trump.
7
All the events clearly demonstrate that Democrats are having an extremely hard time deciding for whom to vote. This is understandable considering there is not a single viable candidate running. It's sad and unproductive to have spent all your time and resources entirely on deposing a single man instead of representing the American People.
5
@Tommy2 Before you can set your sails, you better attend to the giant hole in the hull of your boat. America is our boat, and Trump is a Giant hole. I suspect attending to he hole is not wasted time.
Strategic Trump voters should be voting in the Democratic primaries for Sanders and Buttigieg.
President Trump correctly recognized Biden as his most formidable opponent when he asked Ukraine to smear Biden. The president was so concerned by Biden that he set up a shadow foreign policy to pursue the smear, resulting in his impeachment. Democrats would be wise to take note of this.
I have knocked on thousands of doors in Wisconsin and Michigan during the last three presidential elections, and I have very serious reservations about whether the voters I met in those states would support either Sanders or Buttigieg as opposed to Trump. Those voters, and voters like them in Pennsylvania and North Carolina, will decide who the next president will be. I prefer the proposals of Sanders and Warren, but these voters aren't buying them.
Those voters will not favor Sanders' sweeping economic proposals and will be concerned by Buttigieg's lack of experience.
At this point, President Trump will be hard to beat unless the country suffers a serious economic recession before November.
Beating President Trump in these four key states will require massive turnout in urban areas, particularly African American voters, as well as suburban women and younger voters. Biden is the best candidate in those states to achieve that result.
Democratic primary votes should think about the general election and vote as though they live in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina.
1
@South Halsted Bernie won Wisconsin and Michigan in the 2016 primary. Along with a swath of states that voted red in the general.
2
@South Halsted which presidential candidate are you knocking on doors for this year?
It is too bad Tom Steyer isn't polling better, he is smart, articulate, and the only one that looks like a President!
1
Dear New York Times,
I am somewhat confused by your coverage. On the one hand your poll, and just about all polls in the Real Clear Politics database show Sanders leading by about six to seven points (the former is RCP's average, the latter is the poll you select). Yet, in your commentary you keep saying that Sanders and Buttigieg are running about even or are "the top contenders" cutting off the third top contender and avoiding calling Sanders the "front runner." The data you present and the narrative are either misaligned or appear to show a kind of bias.
9
Buttigieg will not be the "establishment's choice". It's already Bloomberg, with his vast fortune.
4
“ . . . remember Hillary Clinton surging ahead of Barack Obama in 2008.”
What makes us think there is some correlation between 2008 and Now? The problem with politics in America is that politicians are so fearful of saying the wrong thing’s they speak in abstraction.
The rest of us outside of news media, political pundits, and Corporations, remain frustrated because there are no straight answers! So what is the answer?
The outcome of the next election will be determined by the best explainer. Simply put, say what you mean and mean what you say —— sophistry or verbal deception is like selling umbrellas during a hurricane!
“ What’s at Stake in the New Hampshire Primary”?
Only the choice, for ‘we the American people’, of democracy over Empire.
2
Senator Bernie Sanders is the new National leader, with two Democratic National Polls giving him 25% of the vote. The Quinn Aipac poll out today shows Sanders taking an 8-point lead, and he's also beating Trump by 8 points in a general election matchup poll. Go Bernie!
The #NotMeUs grassroots movement has raised $95 million to support Sanders, and will support his presidency in every way possible to bring about REAL CHANGE, by putting the needs and success of the PEOPLE FIRST vs the sold-out Washington D.C. lawmakers, who have been putting the needs of Corporations and the Wall Street big-donor investments crowd first.
9
@mjpezzi , I like Bernie, and I stumped for him locally in 2016. I still like him. I think our country needs his answers. That said, everyone needs to realize that beating Trump in the general election is not our goal.... because we already did that and it didn't work. We have to beat him in the Electoral College. Three million energized new voters in New York, Mass, Vermont and Cali do us no good in winning the presidency. I wish Bernie could do that in Michigan, in Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio Wisconsin., but I'm also looking to see if maybe Amy Klobuchar can, or Liz Warren. If we don't pick up votes in those swing states, then we are destined to 4 more years of a tyrant.
New Hampshire will eclipse the debacle in Iowa. And I wish that we all, pundits included, will look to last week’s caucus proverbially as “water under the bridge.” NH is taking its role as the first of our primaries seriously. I trust this New England state to give us its all. But we must remember there are 48 states to follow, and from what I read and observe in my own state, too, is that Democrats are looking to their final nominee as a step toward the end of an autocracy and the rebirth of a Constitutional democracy. God bless whoever we choose. He or she will need not only help from above but also the united support of over half of America.
6
All of you boomers talking about how we better not nominate Bernie because he's a socialist should reflect on the socialist benefits you've received in your lifetimes. You were born and raised in an era of strong unions, big government programs (establishment of medicare, medicaid), housing help through the GI bill and rent control, big government spending on our infrastructure like the interstate highway system and the space race, low-cost, high-quality education via public colleges and universities, etc. etc.
The millionaires and billionaires funding Buttigieg's campaign have also benefited hugely from socialism in the form of corporate welfare - and if he gets elected he'll give them handouts left and right.
The millennials and zoomers would like some socialism, too. If you want to beat Trump, nominate someone who will make a difference in the lives of young people, like Bernie, who is polling best of all the democrats against Trump (even after everyone knows he's a socialist). If you want another term of Trump, nominate a centrist again, and lose to him again. The choice is yours!
31
@calantir Gen-Xer here; all of those programs are great, but they all had to get paid for. And it won't be the boomers paying for Bernie's programs, it will be people like me who likewise graduated into a poor job market with tens of thousands in loans, and I will still be paying those off while also paying for your free college, because Bernie has no plan for someone like me.
6
@PennGirl24 1) Those programs were paid for with high taxes on the rich and on corporations. Look up tax rates on millionaires and large companies in the 1950s and 1960s. You'll be amazed! So yes, rich boomers will be paying for Bernie's programs. By the way, how did we pay trillions for Trump's tax cuts and endless war in the middle east? I am still curious about that one. 2) The free college isn't for me - I graduated from college in 2005, into an even worse job market than yours. My wife and I have spent the past fifteen years paying off $90k in student loans since then, with a combination of hard work and frugality. The free college et al is for future generations because, ya know, we actually care about the future of the human race.
5
@calantir
Okay, let's make a deal; as a boomer who supports Sanders, I'll stick with him until the end, whatever that may be, if all other Sanders' supporters, both boomers and non-boomers, will support and actually vote for the candidate who gets the nomination, unlike 2016 when many Sanders' supporters bolted and voted for Trump, or didn't even vote. Any of the Democratic candidates will be more pro-socialism than Trump!
1
Moderate voters of New Hampshire and other privileged "early" states who actually get to choose a candidate: I plead with you to coalesce around one candidate and do it soon. Bernie persists in "first" place because his support is a concrete block that will neither shrink nor grow. and the message is clear that the vast majority of the party does not want to risk such an extreme candidate. Further, to supporters of Bernie OR Biden -- the country deserves the opportunity to see its future in the hands of a new generation, or at least someone who hasn't literally made their life in Washington D.C. Please, please PLEASE let it go.
4
@PennGirl24 Bernie polls best against Trump with independents. Last I checked that's the deifinition of electable.
5
@PennGirl24
I do not buy the idea that Bernie's programs are not paid for - are wars paid for? are tax cuts paid for? Bernie is talking about a change of priorities and that resonates with a majority of voters making him the most electable candidate! To vote for a younger person just because they are young makes as much sense as voting for an old person just because they are old - a woman just because she is a woman or a person of color just because of their ethnicity! Come on! Vote for the ideas you believe in!! How else will we ever achieve great things??
2
I'm soured on polling given the projected results of our last presidential election. The New York Times and everybody else in print and electronic media is continually quoting polls; I cynically return to the 2016 election predictions...sorry. I'm also afraid that all of the debates are going to cause voter fatigue and that this will play into Trump's reelection.
4
My question, which isn't a read on the two more left-leaning candidates but merely out of concern and curiosity, is how does a Sanders or a Warren nomination affect the down ticket candidates specifically on the state and local levels? Should either of them become the nominee, then any Democrat running at any level will likely be labeled a socialist by their Republican counterparts. Does that label spook those on the fence? The Gerrymandering Olympics fast approach, does a socialist label on a candidate ensure a Democratic loss and hand state legislatures and the power to redraw the map to the Republicans?
Maybe I'm thinking too simply and omitting nuance here, but these are the things that keep me up at night. Trump is deplorable, but the results of this election will far outlast him.
2
@Zach very good points and I have the same fears.
2
@Zach I think they would label any democrat a socialist since that is what they've done in the past many times. If you look at the data for progress poll from last week, it showed that Bernie does best with voters when they're reminded he's a socialist vs just a dem. If Trump only calls Bernie a communist and that's his only attack I think Trump will have a hard time winning.
2
Yesterday 11,000 voters turned out to hear Trump ramble on in NH.
The Dems couldn't even get 2,000 to turn out.
Currently, we have a Socialist candidate who is winning the nomination in most polls.
There is no way that we will get rid of Trump and win back the Congress unless we bring in the big guns.
Mike Bloomberg is our only hope.
If we don't get that then we not only lose the presidency but many of the other races as well.
Mike will get it done.
4
@Simon Sez Bernie Sanders had the largest crowd in New Hampshire among all candidates yesterday, at around 7,500 people. Did Trump get more? Sure, but there's a difference between a candidate that a party unilaterally agrees on and a candidate running in a crowded primary field when other candidates are hosting events at the same time as well.
Bernie has the enthusiasm required to beat Trump in the General Election, and no other candidate stands even close. Mike will not get anything done by wasting his money in the primary field except by weakening other moderate candidates, which is good for Bernie in the end.
13
@Marco
'Bernie Sanders had the largest crowd in New Hampshire among all candidates yesterday, at around 7,500 people. Did Trump get more? Sure, but .... (random verbage follows)
'Bernie has the enthusiasm required to beat Trump in the General Election, and no other candidate stands even close'
You are right. Sanders did have 7.5K to Trump''s 11K. Sounds like a blow out already.
And Bernie does have the fire, but the DNC won't ever let him win.
He does not need fire, he has it, he has the fans and people support behind him like a gale behind his sails.
But he needs his party behind him, and that is not happening.
1
What's at stake is our republic. This horse race needs to shut down with the candidates and the DNC picking the one doing the best at the end of this month and launch a full-throated campaign for the White House and the Senate. We can't afford to wait until the convention and let Trump have the campaign field all to himself like he did last night. We have to be honest with ourselves. This is not a normal election cycle. The GOP has a green light to cheat however they want. We have to put all the campaign money, energy and talent into one ticket and not let the GOP go unanswered.
4
good luck to the candidates in yet another, small, unrepresentative State that receives a disproportionate amount of attention.
I couldn't care less about Iowa and New Hampshire voters.
The process has been exposed as seriously flawed, but at least it makes for good tv.
3
Yet again with a ~92% white population and a total population well under 2 million (less than %0.5 of US pop), no one should care about New Hampshire primary! I hope no one drops out.
4
@Henry Mann We should care about Iowa and New Hampshire because we have an electoral college, and both states are swing states. Whether you like it or not.
New York and California are not going to go Republican in the General, and South Carolina is not going to go for a Democrat. Iowa and New Hampshire are small states where retail politics is still possible. They give lesser known candidates a chance to build support on a relatively low budget. Then, they hold very large, relatively accurate "polls" as part of their respective delegate selection processes. At most, they are influencers, not deciders, for the voters of other states. Not unlike many other political influencers. They are not deciding who should stay and who should drop out. The candidates themselves decide that, based on data.
I will vote for whoever is the candidate eventually. Personally, I am appalled that Mayor Pete is a front runner. He has no experience, We have had four years of a vitriolic novice in the White House. I want experience, vision and a progressive mindset. It has to be Bernie or Elizabeth for me. Pete Buttigieg's arrogance in entering this race is why I distrust him.
7
@Joanne12
Pete's demeanor is clearly that of an individual who is confident that the oligarchy has his back.
6
@Joanne12 , Why not Amy K? Experienced but not old-guard, appeal in the swing states, has both worked across the aisle and has been tough. Take a look; I'm not sold either, BTW, just looking.
@Joanne12
Buttigieg: the guy rich white neo-liberals think would get the Millenial vote.
1
If it's, as it appears, Bernie and Pete once again--one an old, ailing, unelectable socialist; the other an inexperienced moderate, then I, an old (79) progressive, am ready to say, "I Like Mike!"
1
Seems as though we have two potential voting blocks to address. It seems to apply to both parties although more so to the Democrats. We have those who will vote against Trump and those that are looking for a savior. If you are a voter against Trump, and I am, almost anyone will do. The Savior group seems to have a much higher bar to hurdle. I personally think a combined ticket may be the answer. Furthermore we need leadership to carry us into the future and on the workd stage, no less. Someone who's exit strategy is retirement is probably not the best solution. This is another reason a balanced ticket is our best choice.
5
The message from Democratic voters' poor turnout is clear: none of the candidates are acceptable because none of the primary candidates are viable in November. The two proxies who gleaned #1 and #2 are stand-ins for a moderate candidate who can beat Trump: Bloomberg.
15
@LeonardBarnes have you heard Bloomberg speak? Mr. No Charisma. Billions can't buy you love. Let's circle back to 2016. Trump is not viable so why should Clinton bother to campaign. Now Trump is the mean spirited favorite. Don't count out Bernie just yet. His message of bringing an end to corporate socialism is resonant.
36
@LeonardBarnes So far, if you look at turnout, it was the same as 2016, but turnout for 18-29 year olds was up 30% in Iowa. The age group that didn't turn out to vote is the 40-55 age group (mostly Biden supporters) which is why he did so poorly in Iowa.
And regarding Bloomberg, we already tried to run a moderate candidate against Trump already: Hillary! If your theory is that a moderate can win, the experiment already happened and you were proven incorrect.
30
@OrlandoCC Hillary didn't lose because she was moderate. Hillary lost because she was Hillary.
She was seen by a large portion of the electorate to be mendacious, corrupt, untrustworthy, and entitled. She appeared to show disdain for working class Americans and had been despised by millions for decades. She was, in fact, so dislikeable that her popularity ratings were just as low as Trump's.
Democrats should try running a moderate candidate who appears competent and can manage not to be condescending or otherwise despicable. Such a person would do well. A woke, progressive candidate, on the other hand, will make people shrug and vote for Trump.
6
Let's stop doing mental summersaults here & call it for what it is- a race between two candidates: You have a man who for more than half a century has had a consistent record of principled and progressive politics — and then you have Buttigieg who every thirty seconds changes his position depending on the weather and which billionaire offers him more cash — both of them come up neck to neck in Iowa primary — and the fate of this planet hangs in the balance of this banality called “American democracy!”
44
@Michael Sorensen yes go Bernie go. Can you feel the burn coming?
9
@Michael Sorensen
Something very strange about this overly-programmed candidate with no qualifying experience, no clear proposals and too many bundlers and rich donors coming out of nowhere to run. Also, too many unanswered questions about the Iowa caucus "results."
13
@Michael Sorensen Well I wonder what candidate you support... Your views on who the strongest candidates are seems to be exclusively informed by the results of Iowa.
2
Love how James Carville goes on TV to rant and rave about electability while at the same time advocating for a guy who polls at <1%.
26
If you plan on living at least another 30 years, Sanders is the climate candidate.
21
@Ted B
Actually, Klobuchar has a better grasp on the economics and the science. A carbon tax would solve the problem faster and better than any of Bernies random stabs at a plan.
7
IMHO, Democrats need to stop wringing hands about who is somehow magically 'electable.' Stop looking for a savior, who will make all things better. There isn't one. These candidates are not saviors. But we don't need a savior. We need an ordinary person, who, when needed can rise to the level of being extraordinary (something Trump has not, and will not do). Any one of these candidates can 'beat' Trump if we vote for them, which is what this process is about. It's about us, not about finding the savior. We have to get behind whoever comes out as the candidate, whether they are our special savior or not. If we don't, Trump will still be here.
20
@Henry Agreed- at this point, it isn't clear at all who is the most "electable"- Bernie and Buttigieg seem to be playing the best with Dems. Independents are a crap shoot- I think the people who voted for radical change with Trump are more likely to switch to another radical exciting candidate but it seems like the temperature of the country is hard to read. They'll call Sanders a socialist, but they'll also call Bloomberg or Biden or Buttiegieg a socialist
1
@Henry ...Let Trump ride this country to the abyss of hell. They voted for him, the Senate protected him and sometimes you get what you deserve.
While I don't think Biden has a chance, I hope he stays in the mix since he is on Trump's mind and Trump and his minions will spend a lot of effort on Biden and not be distracted by the real candidates.
I think Sanders and Warren would be more effective in the Senate and the country needs them there. Their pitch is being translated to "free everything" and it will be used against them in the general election.
Klobuchar is a good choice but I don't think that the country is mature enough mentally for a woman president yet unfortunately (also goes for Warren).
I think Bloomberg/ Klobuchar or Bloomberg/Buttigieg would be a good ticket for today and for the next 12 years.
2
@Mark The thing is, "free everything", while being a complete smear, is something that is still popular. If you look at the popularity of medicare for all, over 80% of democrats want it, and almost 60% of the entire country wants it. Cancelling student debt also polls extremely high (in the 70s). All across the board, americans don't want moderation.
We already ran the experiment with Hillary to see if people will vote for Trump or a moderate and we know how that went...
People want change and Bloomberg most certainly will not bring that since he was a Republican up until 2 minutes ago. He will implement the same policies as Trump minus the mean tweets. That might sound appealing to upper middle class white people that care about "civility" rather than the millions of people without healthcare or the 40% of people who can't afford a $400 dollar emergency.
3
@Mark
Country not mature enough for a women President?
Republicans would stand in line for a reincarnation of Margaret Thatcher and they're already talking about nominating Niki Haley for President in 2024.
"... given how poorly he’s (Buttigieg) done among voters of color."
Where did that take place? Alaska? Compared to whom? Booker? Harris? Remember them and their people-not-of-color poor performance?
I think we are being served a baseless press cliche. The press has become obsessed with Buttigieg and persons of color. Compare all the candidates by the same standard.
In addition, South Carolina chose Trump by about a 20% margin. South Carolina does not allow people of color to vote twice. Democrats running for president would wisely skip the place.
4
@stewart bolinger Buttigieg has the lowest support among black people of the main 4 candidates, and the least diverse donor base. His numbers are terrible for a party that relies on non-white voters to win in general elections. He would most definitely get crushed by Trump.
We already ran the experiment with Hillary to see if people will vote for Trump or a moderate and we know how that went...
2
Bernie's rally last night at UNH with AOC was incredibly inspiring! The place was packed and the message of Love, hope and togetherness was visceral which was in start contrast to the message of hate spewing from the SNHU center in Manchester NH. Dems need to get on board with Bernie and his extended hand to working class Americans.
Dems did the opposite with Hillary last year and it got us Trump and his Trojan horse of lies. WE CANNOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE in 2020
32
@Frank Prevost
Yes, Frank, Bernie and AOC were ‘on fire’, and Cornel was inspirational, and will hopefully bring Bernie to ‘expose’ and confront Emperor Trump and this Disguised Global Crony Capitalist Empire.
IMHO, it’s all down to sort of a “Moses bringing ‘we the people’ out of the Empire movement” thing.
2
@Frank Prevost
Go Bernie Go!!
2
@Frank Prevost
'Bernie's rally last night at UNH with AOC was incredibly inspiring! '
OMG!
Please stop that, before people start saying ''A vote for Bernie is a vote for AOC!!', and then the people who will never support AOC will stay home.
This is a surefire way to burn his sails and leave him stranded.
1
From the article, referring to Tulsi Gabbard: "She may not drop out after New Hampshire, but it is likely to be the end of her as a meaningful candidate."
Was Tulsi Gabbard *ever* a meaningful candidate?
29
@DNG Yes she has been "meaningful." Her message on American Empire, treatment of military and veterans, the effect on domestic policy and program of obscene military expenditures, the horrific distortion of American culture by the MIC, and the "unintended consequences" internationally of American adventurism has been clear and consistent. No one else in the field comes close to understanding and articulating the sickness and corrosive effects of the neo-conservatism that pervades the foreign/military policy thinking of both parties (not equally, of course).
@DNG
Tulsi Gabbard is the best candidate Democrats could put forward. Extremely effective speaker, military service, rational policies, first woman President and she is highly regarded by many Republican voters. She is the one true gem in your otherwise lackluster and unelectable candidates.
It is absolutely insane that these two are the best that the democrats can come up with. What happened to this party?
3
You need about 1990 delegates to secure the Democratic nomination.
Iowa and New Hampshire combined award a measly 80 delegates.
Sanders has established himself as the clear front-runner so far with good progressive reason.
But now Mike Bloomberg enters the race in the delegate-rich states and he will start accumulating a significant number of delegates from moderate Democrats.
It will be Sanders vs. Bloomberg for the Democratic nomination.
Two accomplished 77/78 year-old Jewish gentlemen mensches competing for the right to duke it out with the country's leading white Christian nativist demagogue.
May the best mensch win the Presidency !
50
@Socrates
May, the pro-democracy and Anti-Empire mensch win — for all our sakes.
4
@Socrates
Sanders / Bloomberg for the Democratic nomination.
That is a ticket I can get behind.
2
@Socrates -- Bloomberg's poll numbers now remind me of Biden's poll numbers BEFORE he announced his candidacy (and Biden's poll numbers in 2016 when he teased us with the possibility he would run). Somehow, people are drawn to someone cast in the role of a savior, but once that savior is scrutinized and found to be a mere human, with flaws and baggage, the bubble bursts.
1
Here's the bottom line democrats if you want to beat Trump.
Put aside your platitudes, beauty contest thoughts and extreme liberal views.
Your number one goal now is to beat Trump. Vote for anybody who consistently beats him in the polls.
Biden- Joe is down but not out. He is still leading against Trump in polling averages especially in swing states. Vote for him unless things change.
Bernie-Neck and neck with Biden. He has to lose the socialist tag and also us vs them, ie big biz vs the people or if could be fatal to him.
Bloomberg-He is the wild card. In a few polls, he is doing better than any democrat candidate against Trump. Vote for him if it continues. HIs biggest fatal mistake that may haunt him is his mantra we are gonna get the gun lobby instead of let's work with responsible gun owners to lower our death toll. It could be fatal to him.
Amy K-moderate, good in swing states. I don't know why she is not doing better.
Mayor P-Unfortunately for him and America, America is not yet read for an out of the closet gay. He would have done better if he ran 20-50 yrs. from now.
Elizabeth Warren- Could not shake the identity label, ie my Indian heritage, I will be one tough woman etc. etc. It was fatal to Hillary.
10
@Paul Strongly disagree with your assessments: guess this is why the primary season will continue on.
6
Looking at the graph it’s easy to see that support for Sanders, Klobuchar and Buttigieg began to rise around the same time that Warren began to drop.
Ideologically left voters went home to Sanders. Liberals who liked Warren but did not like Sanders seem to have gone for Pete. Moderates are divided between Buttigieg and Klobuchar. If this actual voting follows the polls it looks like Bernie wins.
I’m interested to see how Amy Klobuchar does here. She’s one of the candidates on the upswing.
Finally, If Sanders wins he’s going to have to start winning over some older voters and reassuring moderates that he can both defeat Trump and govern the country and improve people’s lives without taking away what people who have achieved some degree of prosperity and stability in their lives have earned.
11
@Brooklyncowgirl I think once older voters realize that Bernie will increase social security, compared to how Trump is gutting it (especially in his new proposed budget) they will come around. Bernie's strength in the general will be getting independents and non-voters to vote for him, compared to the other candidates.
11
@OrlandoCC
I think that Bernie has the room to—not move to the center—that’s not in his DNA but explain how his ideas will work in the real world and how his long, principled stances on issues like social security will be good for the average American worker and small business owner.
4
Dear All Candidates,
At this point if you're not on the way, you're in the way. Job #1 is removing the disaster in the White House on Marine One and the golf course. Job two is undoing the last term. It can be amazing what can be accomplished if it doesn't matter who gets the credit.
I am a disappointed Democrat.
11
@paplo Ditto. All the billionaires should be throwing their money to Flip the Senate or the DNC instead of running vanity campaigns that will do nothing but distract from viable candidates.
Democrats like to eat their young and this campaign is a perfect example. Candidates - If you are polling less than 5% nationally do us all a favor and bow out.
It might be too late for Klobuchar , but if she wants to pick up Biden supporters, all she has to do is bring up the Biden/Ukraine/Burisma issue.
She could prod gently, by asking if it is ok for the VP's child to use his last name to get paid millions.
She could poke a little harder, by following up with a question about Biden stating it wouldn't happen again if he was president.
Or she could throw him under the bus, and ask about the timing of Joe's forced firing of Ukraine prosecutor Victor Shokin, who was investigating Hunter's company.
Most of Biden's supporters will shift to Klobuchar, especially those in South Carolina: an African American explained on the radio why they do not support Pete, and it's not because of policy.
Presidents have to make tough decisions and ask tough questions - does Klobuchar have the meddle to ask about the Biden/Ukraine conflict?
4
@99percent maybe it’s because none of these Trump-fueled conspiracy theories are true? If Klobuchar can’t beat Joe on her merits and platform she should probably drop out, lest he or others bring up her own very angry skeletons steeped in documented and acknowledged staff abuse.
3
Interesting. The metric of coloured / minority support is only used for Mr. Buttigieg in this summary. It is not applied to any other candidate.
Do the rest (not including Mr. Biden) have above average support from the African-Americans and Hispanics?
Why is Mr. Buttigieg the only one subjected to this narrative / framing?
18
@TheOtherSide Because he's the only major candidate with close to 0% support with black people. Over 85% of his support is white (the highest of any other candidate). Some states that vote on Super Tuesday have a majority black democratic base, so it's almost impossible for him to continue after NH.
18
@OrlandoCC
According to the latest Quinnipiac poll Mr. Buttigeig, unknown before this primary, has 4 % African American support. Ms. Warren, a known name, has 8 %. Ms. Klobuchar does not even register in the poll.
I also remember that Mr. Obama was not “black enough” for the African-American community, even after his win in Iowa.
Coloured and minority communities do not get a pass for not doing their homework on the policy proposals of a candidate and how they affect their communities. “Too white” or not “black enough” is just is an emotional response, not a rational one.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/quinnipiac-nearly-half-of-bidens-african-american-supporters-have-abandoned-him/
15
@TheOtherSide Using Warren as an example is bad, because she's just the next person on the list with terrible support from non-white voters. Biden is definitely losing support across the board so that isn't even a given for him either. Meanwhile if we just look at Iowa, guess who won 38% of the non-white vote? Bernie. In California, Bernie is doing great with Latinos and is on track to win the state. If you look at the breakdown of donors by ethnicity, Bernie has the most diverse while Buttigieg does not. In the general, we will need someone with the broadest support possible who also gets new voters and independents. And guess who does best with independents vs Trump? Bernie. Buttigieg only appeals to upper middle class white people who already have healthcare and just don't like Trump.
2
A generation has been indoctrinated to hate America and champion Communism via our education system. Unless the DNC establishment can derail Sanders yet again, we will see a national decision of Communism versus Capitalism in November.
5
@Patriot Patrol we will see that no matter who wins the nomination.
3
@Patriot Patrol - Schools teach the differences between communism, capitalism and socialism. They do not endorse. If they did, they would never hear the end of it. Maybe you were absent when these lessons were taught?
16
@Patriot Patrol What do you call enormous tax cuts for the rich and an absolute windfall for military contractors who's main inpetus is to foment war? Is there anything more disgusting on the face of the earth?
3
Funny, that.
2016: Trump vs.Hillary: "But she won the popular vote!"
2020: Buttigieg vs. Sanders: "But he lost the delegate count!"
23
Trump supporters will be out in force voting for Bernie Sanders. How is that legal? If the other ancient white male billionaire capitalist Bloomberg doesn't get the nomination It's perhaps time to give up this fight and concentrate on 2024.
3
@Charles Segal It's legal because this country is supposed to be a democracy. Also, Bernie does better with independents than any other candidate, including Trump, so it would be stupid to elect Bloomberg who was an actual Republican until 2 years ago.
11
@OrlandoCC Bloomberg is not a party fanatic. He was a lifelong Democrat until 2001, when he switched parties to run for mayor of NYC as a Republican. He never governed as a hard-core Republican. He was noteworthy as a mayor for his pragmatism rather than ideological purity. He abandoned the Republican Party to run for his third term as mayor as an Independent. Interestingly, the timing coincided with the takeover of the Republican Party by the Tea Party, which took an extreme ideological approach. Bloomberg may be a mega billionaire worth many times what Trump is worth, whatever that number is, but Bloomberg has taken The Giving Pledge: the promise to give away at least half of his wealth before he dies. To date, he has given away an estimated $8.2 billion. You know who are among the billionaires who didn't sign The Giving Pledge: the Koch brothers, Sheldon Adelson, Rupert Murdoch, and of course Donald J Trump. Of course, the president did the opposite: he set up a bogus foundation and used it to support his campaign, which was illegal. He now owes his foundation $2 million. My point is that Michael Bloomberg acts like the opposite of a wealthy Republican.
11